Is this the most formulaic band in the world?

Radiohead

There really isn't. Come on, its not 2011 anymore, you can stop pretending a bnm and being from Seattle somehow makes one better than the other. They are both equally mediocre

>Repetitive drum loop
>Menacing 2 string riff
>Semi-rapped, surreal lyrics with no meaning or content
>Excessive use of Eastern influenced "Aaaahs" and "Ooohs" for backing vocals
>Strange song title which bears no relation to the song itself
>Massive overproduction
>Pretentious video featuring lots of moody staring, mainly from the good looking guitarist with the contrived Keith Richards haircut
>Repeat same formula every 18 months for over a decade

And there you go, you are now literally one of the most popular British bands of the 21st Century

Just don't forget to literally lick the shit out of Noel Gallagher's asshole as often as possible and give contrived interviews where you attack every other band in existence and talk about football a lot

LAD ROCK FOREVER!!!

British indie rock in the 00s was truly trash, think it all came to a head when that band Brother came along who were a band obsessed with and emulated Oasis with little substance when Oasis themselves did that with the wave of pschedelia in the 60s

Imagine being the fat one in Kasabian

Brother was nothing but a vague and cynical attempt to cash in on a predicted Britpop revival. No one ever took them seriously, they made the fucking Ordinary Boys look progressive.

Last I heard Brother turned into some electro pop duo.

As for 00s Brit Rock, bands like Kasabian simply got big on account of there being no one else around to fill the post 90s Oasis vacuum. Millions of fat, parka laden Liam Gallagher wannabes in OCS t-shirts needed their musical fill. Kasabian, The Enemy et al filled the void nicely

Not that guy but no
Helplessness Blues is a top ten album for me

I can bear to listen to MAS if I hear them, but would never search out their music of my own accord.

Saying they're the same quality because they both have folk tendencies is ridiculous.

It's like saying Dream Theater and Yes are on the same level just because they both do a form of progressive rock

Just because you listened to the anthology of American folk music once doesn't make you the authority on all folk influenced music.

There are hardly any similarities between FF and M&S to begin with other than using primarily acoustic instrumentation. M&S uses basic pop song structure while FF likes to work with a bit more amorphous, almost prog folk structures, which makes sense knowing how Robin Pecknold was pretty heavily influenced by Roy Harper, Astral Weeks era Van Morrison and John Fahey. FF's arrangements are also put together way more meticulously than anything M&S does and Robin's sense of melody and harmony is much stronger aswell. Not to mention that their albums as a whole are built to be much more cohesive than the largely singles based collections M&S put together.

Like Jesus Christ you people who ape these horseshit avant teen opinions are so full of shit. You have no idea what you're talking about but you see that a band is mildy popular and assume they must be bad.

>This blog post is implying fleet foxes id anything more than pleasant accoustic pop
>This blog post is implying Mumford and sons, the exact same thing, is somehow worse for no reason in particular
>This blog post is claiming to dislike surface level knowledge like anthology of folk rym core yet then goes on to list Roy Harper as some proof of how pecknold knows fuckall about folk
>This blog post spouts so little but says so much

Nice damage control faggot. It's not a blog post, it just takes a while to get to all the points of how fucking stupid you are.

btw, you condescendingly referring to them as pleasant acoustic pop doesn't make you look any more knowledgeable or cool, it just shows how insufferably ignorant you are. I just told you why they're barely even comparable to M&S and really that should be self evident to anyone with the slightest bit of musical comprehension.

And I never said there was anything wrong with the basics like the Anthology, its just obnoxious as fuck when people get a basic familiarity with american trad folk and use it to dismiss anything else tangentially related to it.

And Stormcock by Roy Harper is a brilliant album. If you want to downplay that album's value then that's a whole different argument, but it does inherently prove how full of shit your main point it is based on how far it deviates the original Mumford and Sons comparisons.

Your shitty non-arguments say so little that I can't even pull anything from them other than the fact that you're an ass.

literally nothing past help is formulaic at all, you're talking shit about one of the most influential and inventive bands of their time period (especially in terms of recording technology) which holds true whether you like them or not

I'm not "with it" anymore. I know that when you're "with it" you want to be cool and knowledgable, and it is very much "cool" to hate Mumford and sons. so you twist and bend logic to continue being "with it". Trouble is just that, you can't like fleet foxes and then dismiss m&s for being "formulaic". There are tons of reasons to dislike them, but formulaic isnt one considering fleet foxes do the same shit. The exact same. Pleasant accoustic pop. They dont just borrow beach boy vocal harmonies they also borrow heavily from the more pop oriented aspects. Not that it becomes bad, I love pop music if its well made, but its utterly retarded and self contradictory to like fleet foxes and dislike m&s for doing the same, considering both sprouted up during the later parts of the 2000 "Indie folk" ""revival""".

Lots of fleet foxes songs are 4 repeating chords, and so are m&s. Both are formulaic and highly unoriginal, but regardless i still enjoy both. I know it's tempting to dislike one to feel like a "real music fan" or whatever reason that's leading you to subconsciously defile logic like thst.

yeah Vampire Weekend are trash Ezra looking chubby there too

You're the ultimate pleb if you think the beatles are unoriginal

I'm not saying they're the same just because of genre fucktard

NMH prove me wrong

Nah, that title belongs to Rage Against The Machine.

>Build up intro
>Explosive EPIC RIFF
>Rap verse
>Chorus that just repeats the song title four times
>Repeat verse and chorus
>Quieter breakdown
>High pitched squealy guitar solo
>Chorus again
>Song ends with EPIC SLOGAN being repeated a few times

Forgot to add that this is literally every single song they have ever written.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

>California
>Los Angeles
>California
>Los Angeles
>repeat

Sex, sex, sex, bow-dika-dika-chickow, I fucked a girl from Cali-fow-nia, sex, sex, chickow!

>Slap bass starts playing

And more condescending non argument horsehit. Great job buddy.

I don't hate Mumford and Sons, I wasn't the original poster who made the unnecessary comparison to begin with. Mumford and Sons are what they are and I'm not going to go out of my way to shit on them, but its just a fact that even if you want to call Fleet Foxes formulaic, its not at all in the same way that Mumford and Sons are. Fleet Foxes don't exclusively use the verse chorus verse pop song structure, they don't use the same overblown dynamic shifts, they don't use the same cliched christian metaphorical imagery, they don't even use the same bluegrass based folk instrumentation other than the occasional mandolin. Fleet Foxes are just from an entirely different spectrum of folk influenced music, I mean shit if anything they're more birthed of the 90's lo-fi folk material making this entire comparison even more off based. But regardless, even considering their more traditional influences, I personally I believe they follow that lineage in a way more sincere manner when compared to Mumford and Sons borderline exploitative use of the image.

Yeah they came out during the same indie folk revival, but their music is worlds apart. Again, you lumping them together like that only shows your own ignorance. Rebelling against pitchfork for the sake of doing so doesn't make your taste any more interesting. There's a reason Fleet Foxes are revered in critical circles while Mumford and Sons aren't.

Yeah that too.

STOP THIS EMBARRASSING DISPLAY OF AUTISM RIGHT NOW

he started it

>they don't use the same overblown dynamic shifts, they don't use the same cliched christian metaphorical imagery
>they don't even use the same bluegrass based folk instrumentation other than the occasional mandolin

Are you real?

>Rebelling against pitchfork for the sake of doing so doesn't make your taste any more interesting.
I see, you can't fathom someone seeing through fleet foxes boring bullshit, so must be doing it just to "rebel"

In five years when le real unique folk :)
Fad finally blows over you'll cringe at remembering what you just said here. I'm honestly shocked how far image will get you and apparantly the defense of your music.

I can't believe we've gone trough this whole autistic discussion without you making one actual argument regarding the music.

The indie folk fad has been done for several years now, everyone who hopped onto it for image has long since abandoned it. And for the record I hated the large majority of music that came out of that trend, but I'll recognize substance when I think I see it and I've always thought Fleet Foxes were one of the few who actually worked within the constraints of the genre in an interesting way.

But sure keep condescending as if I'm some dummy who can't even attempt to be objective within a cultural context.

Seriously the fact that anytime Fleet Foxes comes up on this board it inevitably devolves into some shit flinging contest about "image" is so fucking annoying and just shows how shallow a lot of this place actually is.

Nah I used to be in the same fad a long time ago and it isn't hard to see that his argument was stronger than yours. It's still a stupid petty thing to argue over in the first place, so it doesn't matter much to me

Don't forget

>YEAH

That's correct in this context, because people who think fleet foxes are more special than Mumford and sons are absolutely thinking that way exclusively due those two bands image. I can't process how someone could bend and twist logic so heavily as to think ff are in any way less trite than Mumford. Maybe it's just being extremely uncultured and getting basis of music "knowledge" from pitchfork and fantano, a frightening thought of people like that existing

I have made plenty arguments, you're just ignoring them and for some strange reason pretending your toilet paper thin "reasoning" make any sense.

Both of you are wrong

Samefag

>Inb4 mspaint erased double (you) screenshot

Can't use ms paint on mobile

No this is

I've given several legitimate examples of how they differ and even most of Fleet Foxes detractors are able to realize that they come from very different creative spaces. It has nothing to do with image, it has to do with having to with being able to recognize blatant differences in their music. They both use acoustic guitars and have a vaguely a folk based musical lineage, the comparisons seriously end there.

Thanks for this, I'm pretty sure this argument has made me stupider.

Holy shit, let's get real here. If someone can't distinguish between FF and M&S then they have extremely untrained ears and can't pay attention to anything other than a mandolin and folk revival aesthetics.

Don't even entertain someone thinking FF and M&S are on the same level, it's a waste of fucking time. If they can't hear the difference between the two, they're probably legally deaf and can't hear your reasoning anyway.

Most mainstrean garbage is formulaic.

>British indie rock in the 00s was truly trash,
It really was, wasn't? Sometimes I wonder if I'm just being a hipster about it but it felt like the most fucking boring time music-wise to grow up in the UK.

I'm more musically cultured than you are. I know that's presumptuous amd vain but from what you're saying I'm positive its true. I think it does take a bit of musical inclination to believe fleet foxes are more unique than Mumford but it's a step above to recognise how both are stale equally formulaic trite. Fleet foxes did absolutely nothing besides make pop music with the occasional folksy twang and beach boy harmonies, its the most boring shit on earth. Alternatively Mumford did absolutely nothing new besides recreate more pop oriented British folkrock with terrible nickelback vocals. Get cultured faggot.

since when kasabian is popular

they are literally fifa music

>kasabian
>who??
>you know, that song form fifa
>oh yeah i remember now

holy fucking shit dude

>I'm more musically cultured than you are. I know that's presumptuous amd vain but from what you're saying I'm positive its true.

If you can prove to me that you're more "cultured musically" despite not being able to recognize FF's use of non pop song structures, unorthodox instrumentation, vastly superior vocal harmony complexity, and more introspective lyrics, I'll drop down on my knees right now and suck your dick.

What instruments do you play? Have you ever written a song? Been in a band? Know any music theory?

Please hit me fampai. I don't want to out pretentious you, but you were the first dipshit to call himself "musically cultured" so the ball is in your court. Try me.

your not wrong youre just a autistic tryhard

lol

>im m-more patrician than you, t-that's why I'm right

This is actually kind of hilarious, though I admit I must be pretty dumb for keeping this going so long.

The fact that you keep making the easy comparisons to the Beach Boys as if vocal harmonies haven't been a valid tool in classical and popular music since for fucking ever show's that you're probably not as cultured as you think you are. There's probably an argument that Fleet Foxes are trite or formulaic but you are wholly incapable of articulating it, so I highly doubt you're able to recognize it if it does actually exist.

Thanks for the ride friendo.

I know you like being a contrarian retard just like everyone else on this board but do you have to be THIS retarded?

So pretty much every top 40 tier rock/alt rock/folk bands then?

>67909155
>Non pop structures
youtu.be/L5dUsZ4Djd0
>unorthodox instrumentation
As if whacky instruments makes music higher quality, but whatever
youtu.be/9yAxIdkF2Qo
Wow yet more guitar pop but this time with a weak ass whacky free jazz insertion, how unorthodox!!
>Vocal complexity
See the handful of posts about how its just knockoff beach boys
>'''''""""introspective lyrics""""""

>So now I am older than my mother and father
when they had their daughter
>now what does that say about me

Wow. This band is exactly for faux "artsy" people with an inferiority complex that want to look cultured or knowledgable but can't bear to tread past top 40 quality. [Not that im implying popular music is inherently bad, it just generally is]

>67909185
>Agreeing fleet foxes are unoriginal somehow proves they are in fact original

>>Non pop structures

>one song

>now every song FF ever made sticks to pop song structure

Good one.

>As if whacky instruments makes music higher quality, but whatever
>Wow yet more guitar pop but this time with a weak ass whacky free jazz insertion, how unorthodox!!

>I don't like thing so even though it's a blatant difference between band a and band b it doesn't actually matter, haha I'm right!

Good one.

>See the handful of posts about how its just knockoff beach boys

>I don't like thing so even though it's a blatant difference between band a and band b it doesn't actually matter, haha I'm right!

Good one.

>Wow. This band is exactly for faux "artsy" people with an inferiority complex that want to look cultured or knowledgable but can't bear to tread past top 40 quality. [Not that im implying popular music is inherently bad, it just generally is]

>I don't like thing so even though it's a blatant difference between band a and band b it doesn't actually matter, haha I'm right!

Good one.

This is pretty sad, I was hoping for a LITTLE more effort. You didn't even properly quote me OR the other user. I'd suspect this is a shitpost by this point, but in the back of my mind I find it reasonably believable that you fucked up something as simple as quoting simply because you're shaking with rage and accidentally hit backspace a bunch.

Either way, responding to this banal low effort trash you're spewing turned out to be an even bigger waste of time than I initially suspected so good on you for that.

Please go back to /lit/ and never come back again

>Ironic, edgy sarcasm replaces valid responses
>Complains about low effort

I think fantano just uploaded a new video, you should go watch it.

If I was this overly analytic and incapable of enjoying things I would kill myself so I suggest you do too

This thread is hilarious, keep it coming guys
Btw, now that the dust has settled, we can all agree the fleet foxes defense force is objectively in the right here, albeit a tad overzealous.

Dude, what the fuck do you expect me to say? You literally spent that entire post admitting that there are identifiable differences between the two bands, then dismissed the differences as being insignificant because you say so.

There's LITERALLY nothing for me to argue against in your post. I said these differences exist, you conceded that they exist and acknowledged their existence, then just said you didn't like them and acted like this makes you correct.

Come the fuck on, dude.

>he himself uses
>"le wacky"
>"le faux artsy"
>>Ironic, edgy sarcasm replaces valid responses
from someone refreshing fantano's channel every five minutes, i wouldn't expect any less

I'd hate to be so new to music that the fragmental differences between m&s and ff seem large enough to think these are unique from one another.

Told you to stop, this is so fucking embarassing

God dammit I thought we were done here.

>youtu.be/L5dUsZ4Djd0

Opening on nearly a cappella harmonies using relatively unconventional intervals for pop music (which is pretty prevalent in FF, they generally don't stick the basic 3rd and 5th triad stuff.) The song then transitions into a couple verses which are never returned to, moves to the pre chorus/bridge, but rather than transitioning into an expected chorus it more acts as an entire new section for the song which persists for two minutes, eventually returning to the opening progression but not tacking on another verse and ending in a mysteriously unexpected, but not necessarily unsatisfying way.

yeah totally bubblegum pop structure.

>youtu.be/9yAxIdkF2Qo

I wasn't the guy claiming they use unorthodox instrumentation, I don't agree with that, I think their genius lies in what they can do with fairly traditional sounds. And that song is hardly guitar pop at all. Unconventional chord shapes, meandering melodies and the non-travis picking (which is what Robin usually does when fingerpicking) all make it distinct from even Fleet Foxes own conventions. And of course the song shows their prog folk influences I mentioned a while back with its three distinct movements.

>See the handful of posts about how its just knockoff beach boys
again, the beach boys aren't the only fucking band to use harmonies, get "cultured" faggot

>Wow. This band is exactly for faux "artsy" people with an inferiority complex that want to look cultured or knowledgable but can't bear to tread past top 40 quality

And finally more bullshit projection which has been the main point of your argument to begin with. Obviously lyrics are going to be the most subjective aspect of the music and its fine if you don't like them, but I think it's a poignant line about the anxieties of aging as a young adult and acts as a good introduction for the themes that are explored through the rest of the album.

go jump down a well

>I'm more musically cultured than you are

most entertaining thread today desu

Didn't know this level of autism was possible.

still better than Radiohead

This gets my vote

B-b-b-b-b-b-Burbank

G-g-g-g-g-g-Glendale

>music is legitimately discussed for the first time ITT
>retard stops arguing
kek, this thread is gold

Threads like this is why I come to moo

this man has made the exact same record at least 3 times in his career

...

...

> these autism levels

even the velvet underground (john cale and lou reed) have admitted that the Beatles had an enormous amount of influence on TVU&N, and that's only in addition to all the innovations they made in popular music (using sampled feedback in a song, automatic double tracking, backwards tape recordings, and actual indian sitar in a popular music recording).

strawberry fields forever preceeded every velvet underground recording, every pink floyd single/album, and pretty much any other psychedelic pop record/single that you can think of that isn't Pet Sounds

Dude, I wasn't calling what you said bait, it is obvious that the beatles are extremely influential. The comment you replied to, claiming they were not, was bait.

Pet Sounds isn't very psych imo

i'd say "SFF preceded every psych pop single you can think of that isn't Good Vibrations" and even that is questionable

Excluding the first album every track sounds the same.

so this thread finally means we can get over the "fleet foxes r bad" meme, right?

I mean when the proponents of it are guys like then there's gotta be a problem.

Lmao your post is honestly pathetic and the reason this board is garbage

You still aren't proving anything

...

Other dude's largely correct. FF's use more intricate and creative instrumentation, structures, tonality, etc. You're the one who lacks the knowledge to recognize the differences, and are equating the two with superficial, reductive non observations and deflecting with sarcasm.

> makes sense knowing how Robin Pecknold was pretty heavily influenced

> I assume is borne out by, because someone told me

> Astral Weeks era Van Morrison

When I see stuff like this I know no good can come of it. 'Influenced by' 'one particular album'. Why do I want to hear pastiches? Oh yeah, I don't.

I just meant that in the sense he has said on record he was influenced by those longer freeform almost progressive folk musicians, which is why I listed those other two examples. It's not just a pastiche of that one album you silly fag.