As longtime readers well know, Idolator has an unrivaled commitment to what’s new in indie rock, which is why I’m here today discussing a two-year-old Grizzly Bear video. I don’t much care for the much-blogged-about band, although for much of 2006 I was convinced Yellow House was a grower and I needed to give it more time to let my appreciation of the album as a whole match that of just Ed Droste’s voice. (What else could explain all the acclaim?) But I adore the above video of the band’s a cappella performance of their single “Knife” on the streets of Paris, mainly because it strips “Knife” down and reveals that it’s in actuality a really great doo-wop song.
Why do good pop songwriters hide their hooks behind baroque instrumentation? This is something Fluxblogger and Idolator guestblogger Matthew Perpetua has asked numerous times in the past, largely about noisier bands who embrace a self-consciously lo-fi aesthetic (No Age, Times New Viking). But the question holds just as true for the hyper-orchestrated music of bands like Grizzly Bear.
I’m not speaking as a mere poptimist strawman–for three months this winter one of my most-played records was Sonny Sharrock’s Black Woman!–but I wonder why so many musicians needlessly decorate their songs in this way, and why indie rock kids who would never listen to doo-wop fall all over themselves praising Grizzly Bear.
Maybe indie rock kids just hate fun, which is the other element of the Blogotheque video that’s missing from the recorded version; on record, “Knife” treats itself like it’s the most important thing in the world. But the band’s impromptu performance is positively joyful, with the band members smiling and snapping their fingers in such a way that the song turns leisurely instead of plodding.
(A moment for a coda: I do not enjoy Zach Condon’s similarly stripped-down Blogotheque cover of “Knife,” because the last thing the song needs is showoffy vocal runs from a sometime songwriting talent who is at his best with a trumpet to his mouth.)
Grizzly Bear - The Knife [YouTube]
Well heya Nick!
Born Ruffians cover the song in total doo wop style. I love how the do it, but personally don’t care for the Grizzly Bear or any other version of the song.
You should seek it out, it’s pretty good. I had actually heard their version first, and when I heard the original, I was let down.
Also…the whole “consciously lo-fi” thing bugs me. I don’t know if people like stuff like TNV or No Age because of the songs or because it sounds like something so secretive and special, or underground. If you can record cleanly, then do it!! Your songs will only benefit!
“Maybe indie rock kids just hate fun”
no maybe needed
Grizzly Bear isn’t bad, I guess. But I just don’t see how anyone can get excited about this kind of music. I don’t see how anyone has any reaction besides, “ehh that’s not bad” and than getting on with their day.
So much of the indie/blog-rock world is people who like posing about music more than they like music.
I find it annoying when people talk about how all music needs to be “fun” as if something that’s carefully orchestrated and layered is thusly a drag and uninteresting.
I don’t get it.
I think yellow house is a modern classic and is generally seen by a lot of people that way. I believe most of you haven’t really listened to it much on headphones, or just prefer a band like the hold steady or art brut both of which I guess are “fun” but I can’t stand
I like CSS though, they are fun aren’t they?
also this post is so late and confusing, is it because they are on tour with radiohead?
Eric Wareheim recently said: “There’s nothing less funny than someone who looks cool. There’s nothing more unappealing.” (Dan Fogler, not withstanding).
I think the corollary to that law is that “there nothing less fun than music made by cool people.”
@brownham: maybe sometimes some of us think that giving a once-over to things that are sorta-old but talked about a lot, like incessantly, like inexplicably so, is worth doing?
@brownham:
I find it annoying when people talk about how all music needs to be “fun” as if something that’s carefully orchestrated and layered is thusly a drag and uninteresting.
I don’t think it’s inherently so; one of my favorite records of the year is Shearwater’s Rook. But so many songwriters take good songs and embellish them with unnecessary trappings. Jonathan Meiburg’s songs can’t be distilled in the way that “Knife” was above, which is why I actually appreciate Shearwater’s layering.
Also I don’t know whether you are being sarcastic or serious about CSS but I don’t care for them either.
@brownham: He’s just saying that a song like this, stripped down to the pop that it is, is good enough, if not great. But Grizzly Bear take the hooks and sweet lyrics and put so much behind it that it almost loses the simple core. I agree with this because to me, whether its music i’m listening to or trying to write, I think less is more.
Seriously, I think the original starts out cool, but after the first verse, I always wonder why they decide to start throwing on layer after layer. Also, it should be a three minute song, not almost six.
find it annoying when people talk about how all music needs to be “fun” as if something that’s carefully orchestrated and layered is thusly a drag and uninteresting
I have to agree, I once had someone tell me that sad songs say so much
i don’t think that being fun is really the whole picture. just for example, i love Spiritualized, but “fun” is generally not the first word that comes to mind with his music.
i’ve also kinda struggled with Grizzly Bear. friends whose opinions I generally trust seem to love them, but i never quite got it. i’ve even tried to see them perform a couple times, cause apparently their live show is the shit. and for the record, i do recognize their talents, i just think it’… well… boring.
then again, i don’t like BSS or Fleet Foxes too much either, so maybe i’m missing some sort of gene that makes this music more enjoyable.
Well, the recorded version of Knife is vocals, drums, guitar, bass and some barely noticeable saxophone chords. There’s actually not much that’s ornate about it at all. And even on record the song has a doo-wop, 1960’s prom band feel to it. I think what’s more striking is the fact that the recorded version is more serious minded than the Take Away video. And the fact that the studio version of a song is more serious minded than an impromptu, walking-down-the-street doowop version of a song is…not surprising.
Serious vs. not serious. Different strokes I guess, but I think on that issue Grizzly Bear would probably at least partially agree with you. Look at the song they did on Letterman. It’s pretty “up” and pretty great.
Re: song gilding. Some people use baroque (I assume we’re talking “ornate” here, rather than “harpsichords and flutes”) arrangement to cover up shoddy songwriting. But it’s no better or worse than naked shoddy songwriting. As for bands that write good songs, and choose to layer and orchestrate them: to ask why is like asking stripped-down bands why they DON’T use . It’s an aesthetic decision. Not every record can/should be Plastic Ono Band. And sometimes arrangements and orchestrations can be pretty damn cool. I would miss the strings on “A Change is Gonna Come.”
@dafstar: “then again, i don’t like BSS or Fleet Foxes too much either, so maybe i’m missing some sort of gene that makes this music more enjoyable.”
Naw, you’re fine.
Slow down “Why Do Fools Fall In Love” to about 20 RPM’s. I don’t have the record to demonstrate with, but it probably isn’t as good. Who wants to hear a serious and non-whimsical Frankie Lymon?
+ “orchestrations” after “…DON’T use”
yes X10000 to gregcoff
if you don’t like grizzly bear fine. Don’t “struggle” to like it
for me it’s incredibly beautiful and honest and has infinite playability
for you it’s boring.
oh well
@Maura Johnston: I’d say the once-over is warranted if insight is added or unexpected facets revealed, which is not the case here.
All anti-”cool” / pro-”fun” sentiments aside, I’m kinda flummoxed as to how anyone who interacts w/ music regularly and/or professionally could miss the doo-wop structure of this song in the first place (even moreso if listened to repeatedly to give it a chance to “grow”). Doesn’t really seem like they were trying to hide it at all…
That said, the cover version by Atlas Sound from Grizzly Bear’s Friend EP is my favorite by far.
grizzly bear is going to pull a deerhunter in the sense that their new record will be a more straightforward pop (i use the term loosely and relatively) gem instead of being weighed down by dissonance and experimentation.
@PeterBjorn&Yawn: Actually, it was a new insight to me. I’ve been wondering what the big deal is about both Grizzly Bear and Fleet Foxes lately, since so many of the blogs in my RSS reader have spent much of this summer collectively spooging over both bands. And the only way I’d ever heard “Knife” before was the way that every writeup of it I read described it, i.e. being reminded that there were tons of Beach Boys-y “shimmering harmonies” and “gorgeous orchestrations.” (I’ve said this before, but “Knife” was the first time in a long time I listened to a song and it sounded *exactly the way everyone who wrote about it described it.*) Those writeups, you may not be surprised to learn, had zero allusions to doo-wop. Anyway, after I asked a few people what the deal was, Nick showed me the above video, and I said, “Hey! Write about it! Maybe others who are as flummoxed by the band’s popularity as I am will understand what’s going on here.”
Anyhoo, perhaps that’s another topic for another day — how much does reading about a song or record before you hear it influence what you ultimately hear?
(Also, what is up with everyone being so grouchy lately? It’s only going to get worse as August drags on, isn’t it?)
@Maura Johnston: I’ve been wondering what the big deal is about both Grizzly Bear and Fleet Foxes lately
Can I cosign this please kthxbye.
how much does reading about a song or record before you hear it influence what you ultimately hear?
All too much, which is why I try to avoid press releases as muttered elsewhere on here. Bad enough that talk of any sort can caused preconceived listening notions, now imagine having to write about it as well…
It’s only going to get worse as August drags on, isn’t it?
Welcome to the dog days. Can I go to sleep now? (Add in THE ENDLESS ELECTION CYCLE and right now = argh.)
grizzly bear and fleet foxes are just really good bands
I guess that’s why people are spooging over it
@brownham: and yet, the idea of what makes a ‘good band’ is sort of subjective! which is what i’m trying to suss out. sorry if i like to, you know, think about things.
@brownham: You need a sense of humor, dude.
@Maura Johnston: Yeah, I mean it’s natural to react against the overzealous blog hype for those two bands. Especially because I think there’s a nagging feeling in the heart of every pop-loving indie fan/critic that Grizzly Bear/Fleet Foxes get oodles of love for things that are at best unworthy of praise in themselves and at worst pretentious. I speak of vocal harmonies, unconventional song structures, woodsy lyrics, flute arrangements, and beards.
That being said, I love pop music and I love both of those bands. I’m hard-pressed to name a prettier little song than “White Winter Hymnal” that came out this year, and I think Grizzly Bear is at heart a pop band (some of the more drawn-out moments of Yellow House aside).
@Maura Johnston: I think I’ll be less grouchy as August wears on…summer in SF begins in September so I’ve got that to look forward to. Mostly I’m just glad we both got to use the word “flummoxed” today. +2
@PeterBjorn&Yawn: It’s a great word, right? I dream of someday playing it on Scrabble.
“doo-wop fall all over themselves praising Grizzly Bear.”
Well, most Grizzly Bear songs aren’t doo-wop at all. They’re kind of odd, Paul Simon-y folk stuff. Only produced in an interesting (to me) way, and held together by what I would say are some pretty stunning vocal arrangements. Maybe those people respond to those elements less than the doo-wop elements in “Knife”?
I’m not sure. I really liked the album right away (”Horn of Plenty” has its moments, and the live rearrangements of those songs are all stellar), but wasn’t smitten with the band until I’d seen them in person.
Unrelated:
The people who find the band too over-arranged/over-produced on record might actually find them enjoyable live, where it’s just 4 guys with a fairly modest amount of gear considering how lush “Yellow House.” is.
(”Horn of Plenty” doesn’t really deserve mention in this discussion simply because it was the product of Ed Droste on his own and wasn’t a group effort like “Yellow House” and future records are/will be).
@Maura Johnston: Ha. You like to think about things. ;)
Yes, it’s going to get worse as far as grouchiness. Someone on here already mentioned “the dog days” above, as well as someone in my office earlier today. I feel like i’m in a Luann comic strip.
Where can I read a good article on the tendency of the bloghouse/indie bands latching on to one influence, then another, and so forth? Like earlier this decade it was VU-type sounds. Then somewhere along the lines, The Band was on a lot of bands minds. Now it’s the Beach Boys…or anything that will permit them to label themselves “psych”. Obviously someone has had a good write up about this subject. I’d be curious to see opinions on this.
I only bring it up because Maura mentions reading about comparisons of Grizzly Bear to Beach Boys, and I read similar stuff, but it always seems like it’s just what they want to hear in the music…because I rarely agree. Maybe it’s just me.
how much does reading about a song or record before you hear it influence what you ultimately hear?
Immensely, for me, which I think is why I and people like myself like hearing leaks/listening to albums before the professional reviews hit.
Incidentally, whenever I try to visualize music it always ends up being pretty similar to the album/single art. Maybe I am an empty vessel?