Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    Dawes is a new, emerging folk rock band that got launched in 2009.  You might have heard them via a few radio-friendly hits, or on a TV show or two, in the background or accompanying the sentimental closing scenes.  

    Does the world need Dawes?   Do they offer music or vocals that are particularly catchy or special, do their songs have hooks or draw you in unexpectedly?  Perhaps. And perhaps not.  Perhaps they'll just be another folksy rock act that has its own fan base because they were in the right place at the right time.   

    "A Little Bit of Everything" is a nice ballad, and has more than a "little bit" of Jackson Browne in the sound, the lyrics, and oh yeah, the piano.   That's all I can tell you.  If you like Jackson, you might be just as happy to take out one of your old discs.  

    So what good is Dawes in the overall sense?  I'm not sure.  Too derivative?   Is there enough with Mumford and Sons, the Avett Brothers,  and other acts of this ilk?   Is this a trend?   Is it (also) one of the reasons there's such a sleepy attitude about new music in recent years -- because really, there's a tendency to rightfully feel that bands cut out of this cloth all sound the same.   Nothing against Dawes, really, but it would take more than what they're offering to be inspired to invest in their music -- and come to think of it, that's it in a nutshell.   What does it take for acts like this to be inspiring?

    Thoughts, anyone?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    @ Yoga- I saw Dawes at Cochella, and to be honest they did nothing for me. Sort of generic sound. The have some decent songs, and the lead singer does sound a lot like Browne. A real snozzefest.

    And I would love to see LM at a festival soon, but it will never happen. Reviews from Europe have been very positive. My friend saw her in London, and She is doing mostly tunes from TWTSTB, but throwing in Mummers, Mystic and others along the way :)
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    I like them OK...

    Also see: Middle Brother which has some guys from Dawes and a few from Deer Tick, who are cut from much the same cloth.  Personally, I like Avett Bros. better than Mumfords, but it's because I like their songs more.  Style-wise, they're similar.

    These are all part of what I call the "neo-folk" trend of the past couple of years, following in the well-moccasin'd footsteps of Fleet Foxes, Grizzly Bear, Iron & Wine, Bright Eyes, Blitzen Trapper, and so on.

    Recently, it's The Head & The Heart, Alabama Shakes, Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros, etc.

    I'm a sucker for a lot of that s**t, but agreed it can be hard to tell some bands apart.  THATH are standouts for me, as I've stated repeatedly.

    Lately, I've been calling it 'stoner folk', but a friend pointed out the redundancy to me.  :P
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that:
    @ Yoga- I saw Dawes at Cochella, and to be honest they did nothing for me. Sort of generic sound. The have some decent songs, and the lead singer does sound a lot like Browne. Meh.
    Posted by polar123

    Woah, thanks, Polar.  Again, the festivals are such a great way to see a cross-section of bands that you'd never see any other way -- some hits, some Meh.   Interesting.   They seem to have had a few lucky breaks by being backed by some acts with credibility -- they have a niche, sure, but within that niche, there doesn't seem to be much to fuss about.  

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that:
    I like them OK... Also see: Middle Brother which has some guys from Dawes and a few from Deer Tick, who are cut from much the same cloth.  Personally, I similar. These are all part of what I call the "neo-folk" trend of the plike Avett Bros.better than Mumfords, but it's because I like their songs more. Style-wise, they're ast couple of years, following in the well-moccasin'd footsteps of Fleet Foxes, Grizzly Bear, Iron & Wine,Bright Eyes, Blitzen Trapper, and so on. Recently, it's The Head & The Heart, Alabama Shakes, Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros, etc. I'm a sucker for a lot of that s**t, but agreed it can be hard to tell some bands apart.  THATH are standouts for me, as I've stated repeatedly. Lately, I've been calling it 'stoner folk', but a friend pointed out the redundancy to me.  :P
    Posted by MattyScornD


    If you got stoned watching these guys you would fall asleep. Not even in the same weight class as Avett Bros, Blitzen Trapper, Iron and Wine and the Shakes imho. I kept hearing how great these guys are, and how they sounded so unique. There was really nothing all that unique about them. To me they sounded like a bar band.

    But does that make them overrated (hehe)......
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that:
    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that : If you got stoned watching these guys you would fall asleep. Not even in the same weight class as Avett Bros, Blitzen Trapper, Iron and Wine and the Shakes imho. I kept hearing how great these guys are, and how they sounded so unique. There was really nothing all that unique about them. To me they sounded like a bar band. But does that make them overrated (hehe)......
    Posted by polar123


    I was comparing styles, not qualities; I wouldn't call them unique.  Again, I've seen Middle Brother (twice), which features a couple of Dawes members, and they too were good, but not great.  And I have the former's album from last year, but not the latter's. 

    Yoga makes a good point, though, because in a mini-trend like this, some middling bands can blur together as to be indistinct.

    I guess I'll find out, since Dawes are playing saturday at Newport this year along with I&W, Shakes and Deer Tick...!  :P 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that:
    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that : I was comparing styles, not qualities; I wouldn't call them unique.  Again, I've seen Middle Brother (twice), which features a couple of Dawes members, and they too were good, but not great.  And I have the former's album from last year, but not the latter's.  Yoga makes a good point, though, because in a mini-trend like this, some middling bands can blur together as to be indistinct. I guess I'll find out, since Dawes are playing saturday at Newport this year along with I&W, Shakes and Deer Tick...!  :P 
    Posted by MattyScornD


    More (or at least, equally) to the point, Jackson Browne will be headlining on Sunday.  :D

    Yes, it is an undeniable trend (within folk-oriented rock? ...) -- but that, you see, is why I believe the nomenclature, in part, is failing us.  How many types of rock music are there now ...??   Ummmmm.  More on that later. 

    Yes, this trend has been part of the downfall of the genre and one of the (many) reasons so many music fans have become dissenters and dissatisfied with the wasteland that's been out there for 10 plus years and counting.  Yes, this is an overstatement, but why be subtle?   Subtlety is what got the industry into this mess in the first place.   The music all sounds the same, it's not exciting and it's not rock.  There I've said it.  It's does not ROCK.    

    So as much as there are some decent bands out there, how many more need to be accomodated, produced and invited onto your playlist?  No more, IMO.   All they're doing is ruining it for the good bands by turning the entire (sub)genre
     into a snoozefest.  

    ETA:  There's no end to the music that falls under this rubric -- so this must mean I've topped out.  

    Josh Ritter?  Not good, not good.  How about Band of Horses?   Not bad, not bad at all.   It's conflicting, but there's been just as much sub-genre inflation within this type of music and its branding as any of the so-called "pop" music everyone is always complaining about.  It has become formulaic to the extreme.

    Wait a minute.  This is depressing, isn't it?   :P
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that:
      So as much as there are some decent bands out there, how many more need to be accomodated, produced and invited onto your playlist?  No more, IMO.   All they're doing is ruining it for the good bands by turning the entire (sub)genre  into a snoozefest.   ETA:  There's no end to the music that falls under this rubric -- so this must mean I've topped out.   Josh Ritter?  Not good, not good.  How about Band of Horses?   Not bad, not bad at all.   It's conflicting, but there's been just as much sub-genre inflation within this type of music and its branding as any of the so-called "pop" music everyone is always complaining about.  It has become formulaic to the extreme. Wait a minute.  This is depressing, isn't it?   :P
    Posted by yogafriend


    Most of this seems to suggest that there isn't a single genre which cannot be somehow diluted or spread too thin.  I certainly can't think of one...and whether it "rocks", "rolls", or just kinda shows up doesn't seem to matter.

    But the nature of time means that it distorts our perception to where different genres go through these crises at different times.  So, today's bland folk-"rock" bands could maybe be compared to the early 70s and the glut of "singer-songwriters".

    We've had the grunge convo before, too...where we seemed to agree that there were a few choice years and select bands making good work...until the genre became flooded and we couldn't tell our seven mary threes from our candleboxes (just for example).

    Often, we can see it happening before our eyes, as you are with Dawes, et al.  But sometimes, we look back and say, 'well they weren't quite that bad.'  Other times, our first instincts end up being the 'right' ones - we didn't like it then, and we still don't.

    My point is that there's still good music to be made in this or any other genre (or sub-genre), and the least we can do is try to spot it among the flotsam when it washes ashore.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that:
    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that : Most of this seems to suggest that there isn't a single genre which cannot be somehow diluted or spread too thin.  I certainly can't think of one...and whether it "rocks", "rolls", or just kinda shows up doesn't seem to matter. But the nature of time means that it distorts our perception to where different genres go through these crises at different times.  So, today's bland folk-"rock" bands could maybe be compared to the early 70s and the glut of "singer-songwriters". We've had the grunge convo before, too...where we seemed to agree that there were a few choice years and select bands making good work...until the genre became flooded and we couldn't tell our seven mary threes from our candleboxes (just for example). Often, we can see it happening before our eyes, as you are with Dawes, et al.  But sometimes, we look back and say, 'well they weren't quite that bad.'  Other times, our first instincts end up being the 'right' ones - we didn't like it then, and we still don't. My point is that there's still good music to be made in this or any other genre (or sub-genre), and the least we can do is try to spot it among the flotsam when it washes ashore.
    Posted by MattyScornD

    I'll buy it and I agree of course, no genre is immune or exempt from this fate -- depends on how much a trend takes over, your exposure to it (you can also say to me, well, then don't listen to it if you have issues with it ... heh heh) -- although putting the music on "ignore" doesn't make it go away and if you ignore too much of it, you take yourself out of the loop and the potential to get hold of emerging music that is really good.  

    Timing is everything -- and maybe Dawes was just the straw that broke the camel's back for me.   OR the last straw.  :P   

    I've been very content perusing music from the 90s lately, anyhow.   There was a time when many of the threads here focused on grunge (as you said above, we've been around the block on that topic a few times) but in more recent discussions, the feedback on the array of many other 90's rock bands has been refreshing  --  and has brought some fantastic music my way, too.  

    This can't possibly compete with a high quality rant.  I can see the skill it takes to write one -- it's not as easy as it looks (or as easy as Zilla makes it look).  :)

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that:
    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that : I'll buy it and I agree of course, no genre is immune or exempt from this fate -- depends on how much a trend takes over, your exposure to it (you can also say to me, well, then don't listen to it if you have issues with it ... heh heh) -- although putting the music on "ignore" doesn't make it go away and if you ignore too much of it, you take yourself out of the loop and the potential to get hold of emerging music that is really good.   Timing is everything -- and maybe Dawes was just the straw that broke the camel's back for me.   OR the last straw.  :P    I've been very content perusing music from the 90s lately, anyhow.   There was a time when many of the threads here focused on grunge (as you said above, we've been around the block on that topic a few times) but in more recent discussions, the feedback on the array of many other 90's rock bands has been refreshing  --  and has brought some fantastic music my way, too.   This can't possibly compete with a high quality rant.  I can see the skill it takes to write one -- it's not as easy as it looks (or as easy as Zilla makes it look).  :)
    Posted by yogafriend


    Fair enough.

    Judging by this thread, only three of us have even heard of Dawes, so we're a small sample.

    And I'll tie up a loose end by saying, "Time Spent In Los Angeles", as a song, doesn't do much for me, either.  ;)

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    BUMP.

    I am so glad I found this thread.

    @Matty, Polar - You will get a charge out of re-reading what we said last April / May.   

    When I saw Dawes mentioned in the article by James Reed, it reminded me of this thread, and I decided to see if I could locate it.   

    We were all in agreement here, and we've reconvened in the new thread, consistent and on point.    

    I seem to have said in my OP, 9 months ago, what was in James Reed's article last week.   My crystal ball works.   I think we all saw the backlash coming, for that matter.   :P

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

    BUMP.

    I am so glad I found this thread.

    @Matty, Polar - You will get a charge out of re-reading what we said last April / May.   

    When I saw Dawes mentioned in the article by James Reed, it reminded me of this thread, and I decided to see if I could locate it.   

    We were all in agreement here, and we've reconvened in the new thread, consistent and on point.    

    I seem to have said in my OP, 9 months ago, what was in James Reed's article last week.   My crystal ball works.   I think we all saw the backlash coming, for that matter.   :P



    Your skills are invaluable and undeniable.  ;)

    I'm just happy to see that I was fairly consistent from almost a year ago to now.

    Also slightly intriguing is how some of my perceptions were changed or cemented from last summer's concert/festival season.  Bands that were playing the small stages are now getting regular airplay, while a few others have dropped off the proverbial radar.  Newport Folk alone looks a veritable panoply of "next big things".

    Can't wait to see who will turn up this year (and not just cause I'm ready for summer weather).  :))

     

     

     

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In response to RockScully's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    I like them OK...

    Also see: Middle Brother which has some guys from Dawes and a few from Deer Tick, who are cut from much the same cloth.  Personally, I like Avett Bros. better than Mumfords, but it's because I like their songs more.  Style-wise, they're similar.

    These are all part of what I call the "neo-folk" trend of the past couple of years, following in the well-moccasin'd footsteps of Fleet Foxes, Grizzly Bear, Iron & Wine, Bright Eyes, Blitzen Trapper, and so on.

    Recently, it's The Head & The Heart, Alabama Shakes, Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros, etc.

    I'm a sucker for a lot of that s**t, but agreed it can be hard to tell some bands apart.  THATH are standouts for me, as I've stated repeatedly.

    Lately, I've been calling it 'stoner folk', but a friend pointed out the redundancy to me.  :P




    Beachwood Sparks. Saw you mention them. The Mother Hips. Meh.  I am indifferent to it.  It's not bad, it just doesn't swing.

     

    You hear of Bingham?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoFwQnHFeYM



    I like Bingham OK from what I've heard.  Strong voice.

    I've known about Mother Hips from their relationship to the Dead, Panic, Crowes, etc. I saw a few of them last year in Vermont in another incarnation - Nicki Bluhm & The Gramblers - who were pretty damm good.

    Sometimes I'm picky about how far 'country' I'll go, but I'll try anything once.

    I'm also checking out a band called Floating Action, who were name-dropped by Jim James in an interview recently.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

     

    BUMP.

    I am so glad I found this thread.

    @Matty, Polar - You will get a charge out of re-reading what we said last April / May.   

    When I saw Dawes mentioned in the article by James Reed, it reminded me of this thread, and I decided to see if I could locate it.   

    We were all in agreement here, and we've reconvened in the new thread, consistent and on point.    

    I seem to have said in my OP, 9 months ago, what was in James Reed's article last week.   My crystal ball works.   I think we all saw the backlash coming, for that matter.   :P

     Previous comment reconsidered and cancelled.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

     

    BUMP.

    I am so glad I found this thread.

    @Matty, Polar - You will get a charge out of re-reading what we said last April / May.   

    When I saw Dawes mentioned in the article by James Reed, it reminded me of this thread, and I decided to see if I could locate it.   

    We were all in agreement here, and we've reconvened in the new thread, consistent and on point.    

    I seem to have said in my OP, 9 months ago, what was in James Reed's article last week.   My crystal ball works.   I think we all saw the backlash coming, for that matter.   :P

     



    Your skills are invaluable and undeniable.  ;)

     

    I'm just happy to see that I was fairly consistent from almost a year ago to now.

    Also slightly intriguing is how some of my perceptions were changed or cemented from last summer's concert/festival season.  Bands that were playing the small stages are now getting regular airplay, while a few others have dropped off the proverbial radar.  Newport Folk alone looks a veritable panoply of "next big things".

    Can't wait to see who will turn up this year (and not just cause I'm ready for summer weather).  :))



    Thanks.  :)

    Not a bad sanity check, right?    I thought it was darned consistent, too, and spot on; I'll have to highlight something you said earlier, in the original part of the thread, re: diluting a genre ... which also meshes with our recent threads.   

    Some bands have dropped off, or at least haven't gone up a riser, and some, as you say, are on their way.   And I agree that Newport FF appears to be a "showcase" once again, and not just a venue that "stays the course" because nothin's going on.  Since you and Mrs. M. had such a memorable time last year, I don't blame you for looking forward to it with anticipation.

    Recent discussions on the forum have been very rewarding; some of the best in a long time; getting to the root (no pun intended) of the roots / folk / Americana issue combined with the "good / bad" music discussion, has been refreshing, and given my perspective a nice shot in the arm.  

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

     

    BUMP.

    I am so glad I found this thread.

    @Matty, Polar - You will get a charge out of re-reading what we said last April / May.   

    When I saw Dawes mentioned in the article by James Reed, it reminded me of this thread, and I decided to see if I could locate it.   

    We were all in agreement here, and we've reconvened in the new thread, consistent and on point.    

    I seem to have said in my OP, 9 months ago, what was in James Reed's article last week.   My crystal ball works.   I think we all saw the backlash coming, for that matter.   :P

     



    Your skills are invaluable and undeniable.  ;)

     

    I'm just happy to see that I was fairly consistent from almost a year ago to now.

    Also slightly intriguing is how some of my perceptions were changed or cemented from last summer's concert/festival season.  Bands that were playing the small stages are now getting regular airplay, while a few others have dropped off the proverbial radar.  Newport Folk alone looks a veritable panoply of "next big things".

    Can't wait to see who will turn up this year (and not just cause I'm ready for summer weather).  :))

     



    Thanks.  :)

     

    Not a bad sanity check, right?    I thought it was darned consistent, too, and spot on; I'll have to highlight something you said earlier, in the original part of the thread, re: diluting a genre ... which also meshes with our recent threads.   

    Some bands have dropped off, or at least haven't gone up a riser, and some, as you say, are on their way.   And I agree that Newport FF appears to be a "showcase" once again, and not just a venue that "stays the course" because nothin's going on.  Since you and Mrs. M. had such a memorable time last year, I don't blame you for looking forward to it with anticipation.

    Recent discussions on the forum have been very rewarding; some of the best in a long time; getting to the root (no pun intended) of the roots / folk / Americana issue combined with the "good / bad" music discussion, has been refreshing, and given my perspective a nice shot in the arm.  



    And mildly prophetic, as it turns out.

    I just saw today where The Lumineers are one of the first acts announced for Newport '13.

     

    And then we have Life Is Good: a great cause, fun day, and a genuine celebration of musical diversity.  It's already marked on our calendar.  :)

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In response to polar123's comment:

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

     

    BUMP.

    I am so glad I found this thread.

    @Matty, Polar - You will get a charge out of re-reading what we said last April / May.   

    When I saw Dawes mentioned in the article by James Reed, it reminded me of this thread, and I decided to see if I could locate it.   

    We were all in agreement here, and we've reconvened in the new thread, consistent and on point.    

    I seem to have said in my OP, 9 months ago, what was in James Reed's article last week.   My crystal ball works.   I think we all saw the backlash coming, for that matter.   :P

     Previous comment reconsidered and cancelled.

    Didn't get back earlier to comment, and can see you've reconsidered ... okay.  

    I saw your comment, and am not sure why you removed it.   I don't think it's negative at all to have a "meh" feeling and FTR, see you as a straight shooter, not negative in the least.   Very fair-minded.   As far as the other part of the comment of that comment ... only you can decide.   hahahaha.   

    In any event, re: the Dawes example, I, too, don't mind admitting they've grown on me, even though I wouldn't be interested in making a purchase.   More to the point, it's always good to keep an open mind.  :)

    I've said this in other recent threads re: this genre: I am a hard sell.    The artists that make me think twice are few and far between;  that's partly attributable to them, and partly to me standing my ground as per what I stated in the OP.  

    Either way, it was also nice to look back on a comment re: seeing LM, since you made that happen.  I hope the timing is right for me at some point, too.  

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In Response to Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that:

      So as much as there are some decent bands out there, how many more need to be accomodated, produced and invited onto your playlist?  No more, IMO.   All they're doing is ruining it for the good bands by turning the entire (sub)genre  into a snoozefest.   ETA:  There's no end to the music that falls under this rubric -- so this must mean I've topped out.   Josh Ritter?  Not good, not good.  How about Band of Horses?   Not bad, not bad at all.   It's conflicting, but there's been just as much sub-genre inflation within this type of music and its branding as any of the so-called "pop" music everyone is always complaining about.  It has become formulaic to the extreme. Wait a minute.  This is depressing, isn't it?   :P
    Posted by yogafriend



    Most of this seems to suggest that there isn't a single genre which cannot be somehow diluted or spread too thin.  I certainly can't think of one...and whether it "rocks", "rolls", or just kinda shows up doesn't seem to matter.

    But the nature of time means that it distorts our perception to where different genres go through these crises at different times.  So, today's bland folk-"rock" bands could maybe be compared to the early 70s and the glut of "singer-songwriters".

    We've had the grunge convo before, too...where we seemed to agree that there were a few choice years and select bands making good work...until the genre became flooded and we couldn't tell our seven mary threes from our candleboxes (just for example).

    Often, we can see it happening before our eyes, as you are with Dawes, et al.  But sometimes, we look back and say, 'well they weren't quite that bad.'  Other times, our first instincts end up being the 'right' ones - we didn't like it then, and we still don't.

    My point is that there's still good music to be made in this or any other genre (or sub-genre), and the least we can do is try to spot it among the flotsam when it washes ashore.



    This^^^^ (Re: bolded typeface).    

    Thanks again.  Also consistent ... there is plenty of good, new, current, emerging music.   It is so easy to paint with a broad brush, rather than realize the number of genres on the canvas to choose from.  

    And BTW, per my own comment on Band of Horses (not bad, not bad at all) -- I now think they are pretty sweet and they're on my radar for an album.     

    PS LIG festival is a given for me now.   Being there is a gift.   I don't know how they can top DM and TR, but maybe they will.   And BTW, I fully appreciate the affinity and affection that can grow from seeing some of the warm up acts LIVE at the festivals, which are unexpected surprises.   

    Okay, enough of "back to the future" -- POOF!   

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Dawes -- A little bit of this, a little bit of that

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

     

    In response to polar123's comment:

     

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

     

    BUMP.

    I am so glad I found this thread.

    @Matty, Polar - You will get a charge out of re-reading what we said last April / May.   

    When I saw Dawes mentioned in the article by James Reed, it reminded me of this thread, and I decided to see if I could locate it.   

    We were all in agreement here, and we've reconvened in the new thread, consistent and on point.    

    I seem to have said in my OP, 9 months ago, what was in James Reed's article last week.   My crystal ball works.   I think we all saw the backlash coming, for that matter.   :P

     Previous comment reconsidered and cancelled.

     

     

    Didn't get back earlier to comment, and can see you've reconsidered ... okay.  

    I saw your comment, and am not sure why you removed it.   I don't think it's negative at all to have a "meh" feeling and FTR, see you as a straight shooter, not negative in the least.   Very fair-minded.   As far as the other part of the comment of that comment ... only you can decide.   hahahaha.   

    In any event, re: the Dawes example, I, too, don't mind admitting they've grown on me, even though I wouldn't be interested in making a purchase.   More to the point, it's always good to keep an open mind.  :)

    I've said this in other recent threads re: this genre: I am a hard sell.    The artists that make me think twice are few and far between;  that's partly attributable to them, and partly to me standing my ground as per what I stated in the OP.  

    Either way, it was also nice to look back on a comment re: seeing LM, since you made that happen.  I hope the timing is right for me at some point, too.  

     

     

    Thanks Yoga, sometimes I write something and re-think it too much. FWIW, I agree 100% with what you originally wrote about Dawes, and my inital comment as well. i came away from seeing them not all that impressed, but saw them later on TV, and I really liked it. Unlike Mumford imo, they seem pretty genuine.

    As for McKennitt, I hope that happens for you. On this I will go on record and and say, it was the best show I've seen in a while :)

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share