every tame impala thread in history >generation defining album >best psych record ever >best record of modern times >influential masterpiece
If you think this record is culturally important today then you're retarded. the beatles were important. jimmi hendrix was important. pink floyd, the greatful dead, cream, and jefferson airplane were important. do you know why? because they released music in this style FIFTY YEARS AGO. tame impala recreating the psychedelic sound of the 60's with added digital studio effects IS NOT GROUNDBREAKING. tame impala will never inspire any modern bands to make forward-thinking music. if psych bands are looking for inspiration, then they're going to look back to real psych rock, not this soulless revivalism. do you want actual important music from this decade? listen to liturgy, listen to death grips, listen to oneotrix point never, listen to swans. do you know why those artists have been influential? it's because they're doing something NEW. tame impala is not important in the progression of musical ideas. you may like them because they sound catchy, but if you're seriously trying to say that they're important or influential then you need to get your head out of your ass
would you say Animal Collective is progressive senpai? Actually just wondering
Jack Sanchez
that doesn't make me wrong
i would definitely call animal collective progressive. i'm not personally a fan of their music, but they're certainly creative, and pushing new ideas
Michael Richardson
None of the earlier bands you mentioned were progressive, all of them were copying the ideas of other, better bands. Though it's too early to tell, I'm betting most of the modern bands you mentioned took a large portion of ideas from other, more obscure bands as well.
Brayden Fisher
They are hardly influential, but they will probably be looked back upon as one of the better bands of the 2010's.
Innerspeaker is better btw.
Isaac Martinez
>I'm betting most of the modern bands you mentioned took a large portion of ideas from other, more obscure bands as well. that's not an argument, you're making an assumption. either way, that has nothing to do with what i'm trying to say
Isaiah Robinson
>do you want actual important music from this decade? listen to liturgy, listen to death grips, listen to oneotrix point never, listen to swans
omg lol
yeah tame impala sucks tho
James Peterson
>Innerspeaker is better btw i agree
Isaiah Barnes
>listen to liturgy, listen to death grips, listen to oneotrix point never, listen to swans dropped
Ethan Martinez
I get what you're saying but putting death grips on that list makes it lose credibility around here since they're memed hard
John Cook
Well I assumed you would know what I was leading to: your examples aren't forward-thinking, neither is Tame Impala In that respect I can see in some ways as to why people think Tame Impala is like those older examples; inconsequential and middle brow
Adam Nguyen
It's easy to be one "of the better bands" when you're one of the few straightforward rock bands left that isn't making butt rock.
Luis Garcia
they're memes for a reason friends. sure they have a bad reputation here because they get talked about all the time, but there's a reason why they're being talked about. you don't have to like their music, but you have to admit that they're making forward-thinking music, and that they've inspired a lot of other musicians. bowie cited death grips as an inspiration for blackstar ffs
Andrew Diaz
see
Zachary Long
The main point is the ideas brought to the table, if it can influence other musicians that's good and fine but the lines of thinking is what's important.
Ethan Howard
im honestly not sure what youre trying to say here. could you elaborate?
Easton Rodriguez
Like what OP is saying is that his examples did new things, but they were influenced by other bands. These "other bands" will most likely be looked at with praise, not the plain and straightforward influences. On a limited scope or view, you can easily say that those examples are influential, and can bring influences to many musicians in a streamlined way in a sense. As you can see, influence as a concept is ultimately unimportant, and the ideas of the original source, or band in this instance, is the most important form.
Thomas Gutierrez
they're memes because literal 13 and 14 year olds are into them and spam them all the time as babby's first favorite album. you don't seriously think rage comics come about from (armchair) advanced literary theorists, so why would music memes come from (armchair) musicologists?
Liam Morales
fantastic. now tell me what's wrong with the actual music faggot
Chase Ramirez
>faggot off to a good start here in having a level-headed discussion, friend :) but sure, i'll go down the list if you'd like. keep in mind that i have no issue with people liking these, even if they make up a majority, but calling them "forward-thinking" is a very dumb thing to say that I feel is derived from having heard very little actually forward-thinking music (or music in general) so they seem more at the margins than they are.
>swans first of all, most of Swans' schtick is lifted straight from post-rock of years past, which was developing alongside the end of the original band's run. SftB might have some claim to being an imaginative and exploratory rock album (even if most of its big "innovations" had happened in art music DECADES prior), but any of their new stuff is literally taking vintage Swans music, mixing in some ritual ambient and post-rock. that's totally fine - a lot of people like this, and there's certainly very little music coming out these days as big hefty rock double albums. but they're not doing anything new - they're just doing something old and updating it in a way that people enjoy.
>liturgy explaining how dumb liturgy is would require talking to a person who actually listens to metal (and don't flaunt your love for Agalloch, Deathspell Omega, that one second wave black metal album you keep on your hard drive to justify wearing the shirt, and Deafheaven - i'm talking people who actually give a shit about metal music), but i've literally met 0 people who listen to metal consistently and like liturgy, with the rare exception of people who got into metal because of liturgy and have nostalgia for them. combining post-rock with black metal is not a new phenomenon. it's been going on since the late '90s and early '00s, and it's almost exclusively been done to water down the sharper edges of black metal for different audiences after seeing the crossover appeal of Burzum's ambient passages... [cont.]
Ryder Richardson
>that fact that you typed every single one of those words with utmost sincerity
Samuel Green
>liturgy [cont.] Liturgy calling this a "new ideology" for black metal (or transcendent metal or whatever the fuck they're calling it these days) is just a clever way of marketing something fundamentally contrary to what black metal is - a thrash-metal derived genre built on the interplay between blast beats and tremolo guitars, not on sheets of sound placed between them to obscure the dynamics of the instruments interacting.
>death grips the only way you could think these guys were forward-thinking is if you didn't listen to power electronics. it's literally just the incorporation of loud, screaming vocals over the top of power electronics to serve as a narrative and sonic center/hook. DG just make accessible PE and noise, basically. yes, if you look at DG as a hip hop group, they seem to be doing something pretty new with that genre, but 1. dalek did it first and actually kept the lyrical and sonic approach of hip hop rapping involved and 2. DG borrow a lot more from harsh vocals from punk rock scenes while relying on the beat a bit more. DG are the most tomayto tomahto of these four because it requires you accepting my premise that they take more inspiration from PE and punk rock than hip hop, which you might not.
>OPN OPN definitely manages to over-conceptualize his work in interviews enough that it's hard to engage with what he says his music is, but if you just listen to the music as someone who cares at all about electronic music, you can see that his vanguard days are somewhat behind him. sure, there's no denying that he was part of the first wave of those bedroom lo-fi producers like Ferraro and that he had an indelible impact on the formation of vaporwave, but he's rested on his laurels for years and made albums paying homage to old electronic styles - progressive electronic, etc. his most recent album sounds fancy in interviews, but in reality, it was fairly standard plunderphonic fare after John Oswald's work but with a higher budget.
John Gonzalez
I really don't care how influential it ends up being, it's still a fucking incredible album.
Ryan Thomas
>jimmi hendrix >jimmi >double m Stopped reading right there if I'm honest.
Cooper Smith
>they're not doing anything new - they're just doing something old and updating it in a way that people enjoy. that can be said for literally any artist. the seer is unlike any album i've ever heard. to pigeonhole it by saying it takes ideas from post-rock is just being closed-minded. according to your philosophy there is literally no innovative artists in history except for maybe the prehistoric cave painters
>explaining how dumb liturgy is would require talking to a person who actually listens to metal fuck you. that's a completely baseless assumption. metal is one of my favorite genres and i shouldn't have to prove that to you in order to justify my opinion
>combining post-rock with black metal >ambient passages wtf? have you even listened to liturgy?
Ethan Sullivan
lonerism is the sgt pepper of this generation
example: (copy and paste into url, or skip to 0:48)
>this old chestnut about every album building on the old yes, obviously music builds on the old, but it breaks from it too. Schoenberg obviously was rooted in the Teutonic tradition, but he broke from it dramatically by pulling tonality out of his work. Captain Beefheart built on the blues but made it his own dadaist collage. Swans literally have expanded the ensemble size and production value on crescendocore post-rock music. i'm happy for you that this is so novel for you, i really am, but just because you as one newfag who's probably listened to music for less than three years think it's brand new or pushing the boundaries doesn't mean it is senpai.
>i shouldn't have to prove it then justify your opinion by telling me what's new about liturgy. so far, you've made me type a bunch of shit out without providing your own argument.
>have you even listened to liturgy? i listened to Aesthetica, admittedly awhile ago, and i specifically remember being turned off by how it incorporated post-rock crescendos a la Alcest. ambient passages was referring to Burzum's work, you dumb shit. don't take it out of context.
Kevin Jenkins
..you're proving my point
Liam Sanders
>..you are literally proving my point >..you're proving my point
not really, if anything it makes me appreciate lonerism more that it sounds like all of the beatles albums combined, its much better album than the beatles could have put out anyways
Henry Moore
I dont think its a masterpiece but its pretty great. One of the better records of this decade so far for sure
Chase Baker
this seems bait-y but you are not wrong at all
Chase Barnes
who the fuck is tame impala and why should I care?
Caleb Miller
lonerism is the sgt pepper of this generation
example: (copy and paste into url, or skip to 0:48)
one more thing, the guitar solo at 3:48 on Keep On Lying reminds me a lot of david gilmour's guitar noodling on the live version of saucerful of secrets around 1:55
lonerism is the greatest album of the last decade, FACT
lowly dog, bow your head, tame impala is the modern day equivalent to the beatles and the best band of this generation
Eli Flores
>being turned off by how it incorporated post-rock crescendos a la Alcest a crescendo is a compositional tool that has been used since the beginning of music. to imply that any music that has a crescendo that's influenced by post rock is just ignorant.
>justify your opinion by telling me what's new about liturgy the virtuosic drumming, the non-metronomic tempo and tempo shifts, the layering of polyrhythms, the major chord progressions, the focus on motivic repetition and development (listen to generation), the tinny production, and of course, the willingness to deviate from classic black metal ideologies
Liam Anderson
Tame Impala is better than the Beatles ever was senpai
Lincoln Robinson
>lowly dog, bow your head, tame impala is the modern day equivalent to the beatles and the best band of this generation
glad I never bothered listening to them then
William Hernandez
...
Gabriel James
>glad I never bothered listening to them then you're missing out on some of the best music you'll ever hear, but who cares you're a fag
Grayson Price
okay grandpa, the beatles are boring as fuck, especially pauls bass playing
Joshua Scott
you're literally just parroting everything that was disproved in the op. i hope this is bait
Chase Cook
bullshit
Christopher Miller
did you even read the op? i'm not going to repeat myself because everything that you just said is shut down by what the original post said. this has to be bait
Brody Bailey
except he isn't lmao
Joseph Flores
>crescendos a la Alcest again, emphasis on "a la Alcest." they sound very similar. in Fantano terms, "shimmering guitars" and all that. I'm not an idiot, and I know what a crescendo is. this is why you need to learn how to read with context. :)
>virtuosic drumming is new? >non-metronomic tempo and tempo shifts has existed in extreme metal for ages >chord progressions really? this is your silver bullet "new" thing? >motivic repetition and development so in other words, the incorporation of post-rock elements and crescendocore builds. thanks for just spelling out what I'm already saying in the terms you picked up from a band interview >tinny production literally THE hallmark of black metal since time immemorial. this is why I don't believe you like metal music. >deviating from classic black metal ideologies lmao do you even know what this means? you realize that random bands have been selling themselves this way for over a decade now, right?
Christian Jones
shut down? do you not realize the OP is 100% fucking wrong?? do yout not reazlie there is literally no difference between the beatles and tame impala other than decades separating them? its not as if only recently people started imitating past masters sound and style improvuisiong their own to create something unique, the beatles did that, and so is tame impala
tame impala sonically is nothing like the beatles its more like the band Air, which is one of parkers biggest modern influences, at least in Lonerism's sound
why dont you put a gun in your mouth and pull the fucking trigger becasuse you are fucking useless, like a wet towel, just fucking give up, faggot
Henry Perry
>tame impala is great because they copied the beatles that's literally what he's saying
Justin Morales
tame impala sounds like the beatles =/= tame impala copied the beatles
get slaughtered
Liam Bell
you're a moron and i'm not going to waste my time arguing with you anymore. go back to listening to DSO
Samuel Murphy
Look at how mad tame impala fans get when confronted with truth
>There is no difference between the beatles and tame impala besides the fact that one came decades ago and actually innovated and exercised creativity
Tame Impala isn't doing much else beyond "imitating past masters" which is their gimmick. They sound SO RETRO so fanboys like you get into their "super chill throwback sound".
We stand on the shoulders of giants. You're basically saying this "What's the difference between the pioneers and the people who are just half-assedly copying them half a century later? What's the difference between Jimi Hendrix and some douche who can play pentatonics and has a wah pedal?"
Just stop bro. You're delusional and your obsession with this band has blinded you to the truth. Tame Impala was founded on a gimmick. That's why they deliberately produce their music in a way to sound like it's from the past. (Currents may be excluded from this, but they were definitely going for 80s throwback on that)
Brody Brooks
OP was saying what makes them awful is the fact that they copied the beatles
The poster you were quoting was saying they sounded like the beatles and that they were good "the best band of the generation" even, which OP clearly doesn't agree with
Robert Cooper
>there is literally no difference between the beatles and tame impala other than decades separating them ok well i guess i'm gonna go take einstein's theory of relativity to some physicists and grab myself a nobel peace prize. after all, there is no difference between einstein and i other than the decades separating us
you do realize that history progresses right user? human knowledge builds on what has been done in the past. when duchamp submitted a urinal to an art show in 1917 everyone shat their pants because nobody had ever seen anything like that before. if someone did that today, nobody would think twice
also, way to change your argument mid-post. >they sound like the beatles but it's okay >they don't even sound like the beatles, they sound like air
Landon Gonzalez
wow. tame impala fans really are retarded
Jason Thompson
hahahaha you just completely btfo
Jayden Morales
beatles fans are even more retarded, go tip your fedora somewhere else and kys faggot
Colton Campbell
:^) good arguments friend
Grayson Lewis
Could somebody please explain to me what conceptual link "Be Above It" could possibly have with "Sun's Coming Up"? Is there anybody who honestly believes this isn't just a collection of re-recorded B-sides, placed in a random order with a hipster-friendly cover and a nonsensical name? That Tame Impala's addled brains didn't simply run out of creativity around 2 years ago, and after the utter flop of Innerspeaker they've now given up writing truly new music altogether?
Colton Evans
>>motivic repetition and development >so in other words, the incorporation of post-rock elements and crescendocore builds. you obviously know nothing about music so i see no point in arguing with you any further
Eli Bennett
meant for
Christian Reed
Crescendocore music all relies on motives being repeated within the compositions. It is a very simple thing with an obscure name. But since I'm so stupid, why don't you explain the difference between post-rock development relying on repetition and motivic repetition as liturgy uses it? Also I'm laughing hard that you haven't even responded to any of my points about the other bands because you literally can't
Mason Bennett
yeah the post that pointed out the logical flaws in an argument got btfo by the post it was critiquing. makes sense
i can't believe how stupid you are
Joseph Sanchez
Basically, the concept is "the past" and relentlessly mimicking it without any new ideas. "Be above it" means being above making disgusting gimmicky music for money, a message from Kevin to himself that he repeatedly fails to listen to. "Sun's coming up" refers to John Lennon coming back to life, who is Kevin's Jesus.
Brayden Harris
I saying you btfo him silly
Zachary Phillips
Not him but Crescendocore relies on a constantly linear movement, like GY!BE's Moya. Liturgy are nowhere near linear or constant, they shift everywhere and keep changing before they even reach a climax, if there is one.
And reminder that crescendos != crescendocore. There's a reason why EITS and MONO are but GY!BE and Swans aren't.
Logan Scott
oh sorry the order of the quotes confused me. my bad
Jaxson Young
>crescendocore like GYBE >GYBE aren't crescendocore
You definitely sound like you know what you're talking about
Austin Scott
Am I missing something here or is tame impala a meme
The vocals are way too high pitched for most of their songs, doesnt fit the instruments at all. Moreso their best aspect, their guitar riffs, are very quiet and drowned out by all the synth and pop stuff they throw in
this is what i mean by motivic repetition and development.
Evan Morales
There's nothing wrong with Tame Impala. Overall, no one is doing anything that's purely new. Bands that are "pushing the envelope" all borrow from some source, but that's obvious. However, if you look at death grips you can extract a lot of what makes up their sound to different genres and such. You could even compare some of mc ride's stream of consciousness lyricism to that of Aesop Rock. But there's a difference in influence and relevance here. Tame Impala sound like they're from the 60s. Period. Their sound is blatantly psychedelic. You don't need to dissect it to hear it instantly. Whereas if you listen to death grips it's like a mixture of different sounds which ultimately form something that's refreshing and new-ish. It's because of this that I somewhat agree with the OP. If anything, tame impala just added another solid album to an already large genre. But there's nothing that makes you go "wow, this is different". It doesn't go forth and mix things together to make something that's interesting. People just say it's great, because it reminds them of things that were great back then. And given they were great, and in fact this album is great. But ultimately, the only influence it will have is bringing some revivalism of an already accomplished genre.
Caleb Flores
Correct. GY!BE are not a crescendocore group.
Crescendocore refers to a subgenre of post-rock that prefers building and repetitive melodies that come in the form of crescendos over the textural and timbral experiments that previous artists in the genre focused on. The bands and artists in the genre all are influenced to some degree by either GY!BE, Mogwai or both. Examples include EITS, GIAA, MONO and TWDY.
GY!BE's purpose, in the end, is still as a texturally and timbrally focused group. The crescendos are just a part of it. And they don't actually take influence from themselves or Mogwai. Therefore they aren't crescendocore.
Jonathan Howard
i see these shut you up real quick don't post on this board anymore
Cameron Murphy
well said
Chase Russell
you literally said "crescendocore... like GYBE's Moyà"
Dominic Bailey
Yeah, because that's one of the major influences of crescendocore.
In the same way that King Crimson influenced avant-prog without actually ever being avant-prog, if that makes any sense.
Alexander Williams
>greatful dead
Ian Cooper
tame impala is way more rhythmically interesting (compositionally speaking) than either the beatles or jimi hendrix
Cooper Phillips
see >if you listen to death grips it's like a mixture of different sounds which ultimately form something that's refreshing and new-ish
it's not about finding a source for each unique charactarestic of the music. it's about the sum of the parts. find me another band that does all of those things that i just said.
Thomas Martinez
>4/4 and 6/8 time is more interesting than 4/4 and 6/8 time
Dominic Thomas
impalafags btfo
Oliver Torres
are you upset? tame impala is GOAT
Isaiah Long
>Could somebody please explain to me what conceptual link "Be Above It" could possibly have with "Sun's Coming Up"?
at the end of the album 'suns coming up' the singer talks about how he cant get to sleep because hes thinking about his past failed relationship, how he wants to turn his life around, and then the album opens with be above it, saying to shake off people's expectations of you, and follows with endors toi, which translate to "fall asleep"
the album is much like ok computer, not just because of the sequencer or synths and rock format but because the album is a loop, like ok computer ending with the tourist, telling people to slow down, but opening with airbag, saying it saved his life and reinvigorated his sense of purpose
Christopher Miller
good arguement. you should look into freudian defense mechanisms. specifically denial
Jeremiah Allen
>Currents may be excluded from this, but they were definitely going for 80s throwback on that
ahahahaha this is how i know you are full of shit
currents borrows from 90s R&B and early 00s pop barely the 80s at all, you cant even identify your sources pff hahaha
everyone in this thread now knows you are full of shit, its over you lost, tame impala is better than you could ever imagine
Jackson Ortiz
seems like youre on a rampage to discredit a hugely popular band because they are well liked on an image board, and their style doesnt suit your delicate sensisbilities
you're as pathetic as people defending tame impala and you know it, thats whats sad
Brandon Cook
the fact that this thread is nothing but pure hatred for tame impala means the memefags are winning you dolt
Mason Wilson
i don't care if people like them. the whole point of this thread was to quell the ignorant fans who are incessantly trying to say the stuff that i quoted in the op. e.g. >generation defining album >best psych record ever >best record of modern times >influential masterpiece i don't even hate their music. i'm just not disillusioned into thinking that they're anything more than a mediocre psych pop band
Chase Rodriguez
its fine if you dont like them but they're far from mediocre
Liam Taylor
I agree that it's sillly to call any of Tame Impala's music culturally important or genre defining, but that doesn't stop what they make from being enjoyable music imo
Benjamin Howard
whatever. that's a matter of opinion. the fact is that they're not influential or generation-defining
Daniel Long
well from what kevin parker said in a recent interview about perth artists all trying to copy his style and pedal board is pretty influential, even if it was just about perth, who knows how many other worldwide people have tried to adopt a similar tone. in fact rihanna did pretty much an exact cover (just her voice) of one of kevin's songs from currents, and shes one of the best selling artists in the world. what i mean is, people DO listen to them, they ARENT mediocre, in fact they're extremely well received globally
as far as generation defining, that might be opinion as well, but for me personally, i feel lonerism sets the atmosphere for my generation very well like OK Computer did before it but its just my interpretation
Easton Morris
Lol @ OP. tame is fantastic, parker is genius. try to make some of your own music
Justin Adams
this is a copy pasta do not respond
Owen Carter
It's culturally important because it re-introduces this sound to the masses. No one cares about elephant 6 bands, and less people care about AnCo. If you weren't Autismo the wünder-Sperg, you could have figured this out yourself.
Jacob Morgan
there are plenty of other good neo psych bands. also why does the sound need to be re-introduced to the masses? the beatles are the most popular band on the planet. people don't need to be reminded what they sound like
Wyatt Clark
>the beatles are the most popular band on the planet. people don't need to be reminded what they sound like
The Beatles _were_ the most popular band on the planet, they aren't now. Consider the average young person doesn't really know what the Beatles sound like, because they weren't on iTunes/Streaming for ages, and most people don't listen to dadrock radio all day.
>there are plenty of other good neo psych bands. >No one cares about elephant 6 bands, and less people care about AnCo
>also why does the sound need to be re-introduced to the masses?
Why did it need to be introduced the first time around?
Benjamin Wright
>the beatles were important THE FACT THAT
Kevin Carter
I just gotta say Lonerism is probably the best album I've ever heard in my life
Ryder Morales
I think Tame Impala's lonerism is a bit like Strokes Is This It. Both incorporate a lot of older styles of music and make something fresh and interesting.
Camden Lopez
>The Beatles _were_ the most popular band on the planet, they aren't now. Consider the average young person doesn't really know what the Beatles sound like, because they weren't on iTunes/Streaming for ages, and most people don't listen to dadrock radio all day. that's just not true. i dare you to find me one person who hasn't listened to the beatles before
>No one cares about elephant 6 bands, and less people care about AnCo that's also not true. nmh and anco are some of the internet's most worshipped bands.
>
>Why did it need to be introduced the first time around? what kind of question is that? are you implying that the original art has the same value as the art that imitates it years later? see
