How Loyal Are You?

I have to say my view of Belle and Sebastian as a "can do no wrong" band have been slightly tainted by their latest album. They are still my all-time favorite band but some of the magic has been lost. I kind of wish that they would have stopped after TBWAS but at the same time I keep thinking that maybe next album will be magical. If they leave the song writing and singing to stuart it could be. But if it's another "Fold you hands..." I don't what I will do...

Certain artists can Do No Wrong, by which I mean that even if they release a record that's awful, I still have faith that the next one will be fantastic. Artists on this list include Prince, The Cure, The Prodigy, Orbital, Portishead, Lamb, Gus Gus, Outkast, My Life With The Thrill Kill Kult, Mr. Bungle, Meat Beat Manifesto and Tool. I will buy any album by any of the artists on sight without blinking.

Other artists have burned me so many times by following up fantastic tunes with awful ones or performing really duff versions of tunes that I end up loving later that I now won't plunk money down on anything they've done until I've heard it at least 10 times. Like, say, UNDERWORLD, whom I've decided really are a live act almost impossible to pin down in the studio.

Hmmm.... I get the feeling we'll find out pretty soon how loyal fans of the Manics will be after Nicky Wire's latest pronouncements about Napster!!!

Old Fart!!!!

Well, I gave up on Bowie after "Heroes" but have enjoyed a song or two off each of his late 90s albums. Christ, I even bought hours... That must be loyalty!

Oh, Old Fart, poor Old Fart - we already gave up on them Manics after they totally lost their minds, got fat as fuck and started putting out "Magical Mystery Tour" rubbish like their newest single.

So, to answer the question...well, Manics are still my favorite band DESPITE the crap they do these days, the pre-EMG work really is worth it, and I do try very hard to love EMG, so I suppose they fall into that realm but really I suppose I'm just a sad ex-cultist who stopped cutting herself but really, really wishes those days were back. Madonna is another one for me, I really, really TRY to love her no matter what but she makes it hard. I mean, Don't Tell me is a terrible song, but I try to dance to it when it comes on in a club, even though deep down I'm thinking, "What kind of crap club plays this undanceable rubbish?"

In the end, I don't think of myself as being very loyal in general, I'm very willing to point out flaws and crap tracks and really get brutal when an artist I love puts out something godawful. But on the other hand, I keep buying their music, even if I admit in the end they only have a handful of good albums/songs. This is a difficult question for me because I see myself in the middle. Very reasonable and critical and honest - but I won't stop buying. The new Manics album comes out the week before my friend Andy comes to visit, I do believe, and I AM going to ask him to get it for me. Even though I already know I hate it from the MP3s I've heard. It's just the way I am.

In answer to this interesting question, I am just the kind of 'loyal' character you seem to have had in mind: I

>>> never give up, >>> try and see value in everything an artist you think is good does, and I >>> judge music artist-by-artist.

For me, pop music seems to be what you might call a 'tribal' affair - a matter of allegiances and enthusiasms that can't be easily withdrawn, rather than detached judgements that equably vary as one track succeeds another. In other words, it's virtually all about 'loyalty'. I don't feel that I've chosen this mode: perhaps it has chosen me.

I'm one of those foolishly loyal people who will stick by my friends even as they run off and get pregnant at 20... (sorry to that special someone out there. But she don't read this anyway...).

The same with bands.

I really like SM's Solo.

Not at all. If a band I like puts out crap, I won't buy it, and hope that enough people feel the same way to make bad music not commercially viable. Of course what I mean is: Just because I loved the Manics when I was 15 will not make me buy 'This is my truth...', or their next album by the sounds of things. Come on people...

I try and see the crap in everything an artist does, cuz I like selling records, and I don't like listening to crap (despite what Josh says). I try to have favorite bands, but then the Boredoms do something like release a techno EP and I just can't be bothered to care.

Once and artist makes it onto my tops-list, I get every album they have produced, tho not the rarities. This tends to be long lived, prolific ovure artists like Lou Reed, Elvis Costello, who have significant variation in their careers, which aids in contextualizing any individual work. Other than that short-list, I tend to get early works, or perhaps and earlier and later work, from artists I am mildly interested in/enjoy. Generally, I become a "fan" long after the artist is established, so I have a great deal of prior critical drudgework to rely on for judgement aid. I hardly call myself a "fan" of anyone, though, at least in a meaningful long-term sense. My interests are too diverse for my pocketbook to afford collecting too much of any one thing.

But owning vs. liking is a different question. I mean, Lou is a special case because he thinks his shit doesn't stink, and it, unfortunately, doesn't -- or at least it stinks different from all other shit. I find artists who started with something interesting tend to stay interesting for their whole career -- not always good, but at least interesting. And conversely, artists who didn't start interesting hardly ever become interesting. Call it the Auteur (in the film sense, not the band sense) theory of pop, which coexists healthily in my mind with the genre (scenius) theory of pop.

Speaking from a non-pop music fan's perspective, I think Underworld can do no wrong. Rock groups, though, have burned me in the past, & so I am ever-vigilant against bad albums.

What really worries me, though, is when artists go through "changes", as the change is always for the worst. Having to change your music doesn't mean you're evolving, it means you're sick of making it.

I judge music by how I listen to it. Since I usually only listen to complete albums I base my recommendations and opinions on complete albums.

In the case of Outkast. I hate their first album. Love the next two, and think the last one is worth a listen, but too slow in pace and clogged with guest appearances and skits to be a keeper.

When it comes to what I purchase I start with bands that I have liked in the past. One would be stupid not to follow a trend. Since I have liked every Afghan Whigs album, I would be stupid to not at least give their next album a listen.

Oh yeah, their won't be another.

RIP - Afghan Whigs

How about a Afghan Whigs question Tom?

conversely, lou reed is also the man who released "metal machine music". he (and a thousand music critics and/or "avant-garde" fucksticks) can swear up and down that it's a classic of some sorts, but what it really seems to be is a giant middle finger towards not only the mainstream audience he seemed to be pandering to at that stage in his career, but also towards the aforementioned self- aggrandizing fucksticks who swore up and down that it was one of the most important albums of the 70's (nee: the year). case in point: david fricke's liner notes in the reissue hailing him as the "godfather of punk" and swearing that he continues to listen to it 25 years after it was initially released.

which raises quite the astonishing parallel to "kid a".

Mac's post proves pretty well that Lou Reed was doing something good when he put out MMM, if the very *idea* that someone could listen to and enjoy it now riles him so much. So it seems that Lou not only gave the finger to mainstream fucksticks and avant-fucksticks, but play-safe alternative fucksticks too.

Meanwhile I still think it's a good album. I put it on every six months or so and enjoy it. If the joke is on me then at least it's a good joke.

Otis, you wouldn't per chance be talking about Boredoms'"Vision Creation Newsum"? Because that shit is the most mind-blowing music I've heard in years (though harcore fans probably think they're going soft ;) On topic: I used to make the mistake of hanging on to artists too long (as much as 3 crap albums, example: R.E.M.). Those trips to the record-exchange got a bit tiresome so nowadays I try to cut bands off at one crap album, that way I can invest in some new sounds. Of course I'll automatically will buy a new Royal Trux record (when I feel I need it, not on the day it's released) and I can't rest till I have all Miles Davis 70s double-live albums.

Jimmy: "I really like SM's Solo."

Which SM? Steven Morrissey? Stephin Merritt? Stuart Murdoch? SMTV? OK, so you probably mean Stephen Malkmus.

I am allergic to the idea of sticking by artists once they are shit, but other people would probably say I am too forgiving. There's no room in my record buying busget for loyalty. I think aesthetically, I like this approach too - it makes me feel like I'm being discerning. I'm pleased I never bought the last three (?) Wedding Present LPs, for example. Of course some would say I shouldn't have bought the first three, but they'd be heartless s

My main loyalty is to good songs and good albums, wherever they come from. I've been burned too many times by dull follow-ups to great records, and besides, I can't fathom why anyone would listen to dull music over exciting music. Life is too damn short and there's too much great music waiting to be discovered by you. I hate it when people are like "this new Pavement album is pretty cruddy, but it's still Pavement, which makes it better than 98% of what's out there". Bullshit. NO ONE is that good.

BTW, I think Metal Machine Music is a good idea, but not much fun to listen to, but I'm not sure yet if that makes me a mainstream fuckstick or a play-safe alternative fuckstick.

Tom, it's not fair the way this forum always seems to cut off the last few letters of my postings

Alas there is not a "Maximum Nick Dastoor Posting Length" form I have control over backstage. My technical suspicion is that you're using some weirdo browser or something.

Nick-- I figgered that SM was a loaded enough set of initials that we'd all get who I meant, regardless of our suppoused indie cred or lack thereof. I'll be more mindful in the future.

Sterl-- Don't forget that you and I usually go with the earlier stuff because of the street cred, so we can say that we liked the Fall's earlier stuff, but not much of the stuff after Seminal Live (just as an example) and sound like we know what we're talking about. Woops. Just dropped a trade secret.

Omar, the Boredoms record I was talking about was Super Roots 7. Vision Creation Newsun was on my best of 2000 list.

I suppose how you hear the music is an interesting angle. I listen to the radio an awful lot (that may not seem like much of an admission but I wonder how many people round her do too. Infact...)

So I know how good, bad or annoying a record is before I get round to buying it. I would lose an awful lot of faith in an artist if I had shelled out some clams to buy something which was crap. I am a lot more forgiving therefore of bands sometimes being bad.

Oh and Ally, I think the Manics are trying to sound like the Beach Boys. Not a criticism of you if they are doing it badly. But it might answer the question "Why so sad?".

Exceedingly loyal.

I hate all music. I find blast furnaces are the best way of destroying it. Except for those pesky MP3's.

Getting back to the core question -- well, define 'duff.' ;-) There are some records I'll listen to more than others, perhaps...

In terms of how I judge music -- do I like what I hear? If so, viva. If not, oh well. I realize that's ridiculously general, but I don't find myself particularly compartmentalizing when it comes to listening. As a result, I don't think I could answer your question per se.

I'd say two bad records in a row and then a former-favorite band is on notice, & I'll need to be persuaded to buy their next release. This is where Stereolab sits right now, actually. Their next one is not an automatic purchase, though at one time they warented it. Generally, though, I'm not into acquiring whole catalogs these days. More interesting to me to sample something new that I haven't heard.

Otis, I just about fell off my chair to hear you say you don't like Super Root 7. The one with the 17-minute Mekons cover?! That rocks harder than anything they've ever made, in my view, & I'm not sure what you mean calling it a techno record. To each his own, sure, but I'm racking my brain trying to figure out how a hardcore Boredoms fan could not love that release. Honestly, I'm just curious. Carry on.

Agreed, it seems that any more than two crap albums leads to extreme caution because it probably means that they're not going to get much better. The worst is when a really bad record actually taints the previous catalog in your mind. For instance, after hearing the awful new Roni Size record, a quick listen to "New Forms" makes you realize that not only is he terribly uncreative *now*, but that he was never that good to start off with and you've been steadily kidding yourself for three years. Give me my money back, give me my money back, you bitch.

Yes, me. I have to admit I've always been pathetically non- tribalist, never really submitting to adolescent "loyalties" in pop.

The only favourite bands I've ever had are the KLF when I was 11, and the Tindersticks when I was 15. Both for very short periods, it has to be said.

mmm doesn't piss me off. i've never really bothered to listen to any complete albums made by him after the last velvet underground album besides metal machine music. the point i was attempting to make was that he fucked around for a few hours, recorded it, and passed it off as something more substantial than what it was in an attempt to alienate everyone. which is funny. but the point was lost. so whatever.

Yeah sure and point taken, but my point is this: fuck what Lou wanted people to think about the record. He only made the damn thing, he didn't go and buy it or anything.

It's like the oft-quoted story of the journo who got sent the Lennon record to review and two sides of it were blank test pressing and he reviewed it anyway and praised it. Everybody quotes this to tell you that journos are dumb. But what nobody asks is: did those two blank sides sound any good?

Well, the two blank sides sure as hell sounded better than most Lennon records.

Google research suggests the Boredoms record I'm thinking of is Super Roots 8 (and also that it contains a cover of the theme song from the Japanime flick which inspired the Lion King, which suggests I should listen to it again). I guess I've never heard 7. To get back to my point of why I'm not a full-fledged Boredoms fan: I refuse to pay $36 for a nonstop DJ mix by Ken Ishii.