Helm
Maybe on Luna
In a not completely related note, when I first sat down to listen to Bath and Leaving I constantly kept thinking if the stylistically ranged approach to music came natural to the people that wrote the music, or if it was somehow laterally decided that "we're having the instrumental accoustic suite here and the death metal mayhem there and that's how it is and it couldn't be any other way and this is a recursive post-modern statement of some sort. I mean, was it curious music on purpose, or did the people that composed transcend that many genre definitions completely naturally in order to fully express themselves?
This is what November's Paul is saying about being weird for the sake of being weird, basically. You can more easily tell when people mash clashing styles together within the same song for shock value, but MotW had that beautifully arranged instrumental interlude and then doomdeath with a person growling in latin. I found it more difficult to tell in this sort of format if this was some sort of inside-joke, or a honest to god coming naturally type of deal. Something like how Faith No More had a lounge-as-lounge-is song there and then a thrash freakout song there. But no genre hopping in the same song. This game some validity to the distinct compositions as opposed to the (not always successfully) humourous juxtaposition of say, The Pixies.
What I'm trying to say is that if these bands are honestly coming up with this music (and stylistic variations) without laterally 'weirding it out' as an end in itself, then the composers responsible for the music must have very interesting emotion-to-musicl semiotic relations. However somehow Neptune's drummer suddenly saying "Right. That's it. I need a buzzsaw spash cymbal to make this song feel like it should feel" isn't a scenario I find likely.
Obviously whether or not any of the mentioned bands want to be weird or not does not mean someone can not like them, I just personally find myself confused as to the intent, and therefore the context in which I am to approach the band and the music.
Note: A Warr guitar is not a gimmick. And Voivod always seemed to me as a serious band with a clear intention. As do Kayo Dot, interestingly. CotE is a very stylistically concentrated effort, in my oppinion.
This is what November's Paul is saying about being weird for the sake of being weird, basically. You can more easily tell when people mash clashing styles together within the same song for shock value, but MotW had that beautifully arranged instrumental interlude and then doomdeath with a person growling in latin. I found it more difficult to tell in this sort of format if this was some sort of inside-joke, or a honest to god coming naturally type of deal. Something like how Faith No More had a lounge-as-lounge-is song there and then a thrash freakout song there. But no genre hopping in the same song. This game some validity to the distinct compositions as opposed to the (not always successfully) humourous juxtaposition of say, The Pixies.
What I'm trying to say is that if these bands are honestly coming up with this music (and stylistic variations) without laterally 'weirding it out' as an end in itself, then the composers responsible for the music must have very interesting emotion-to-musicl semiotic relations. However somehow Neptune's drummer suddenly saying "Right. That's it. I need a buzzsaw spash cymbal to make this song feel like it should feel" isn't a scenario I find likely.
Obviously whether or not any of the mentioned bands want to be weird or not does not mean someone can not like them, I just personally find myself confused as to the intent, and therefore the context in which I am to approach the band and the music.
Note: A Warr guitar is not a gimmick. And Voivod always seemed to me as a serious band with a clear intention. As do Kayo Dot, interestingly. CotE is a very stylistically concentrated effort, in my oppinion.
