<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Track Marks: How Annuals Became This Week's Biggest Band In The World - Idolator Comments]]></title>
		
	    	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:37:07 EDT</lastBuildDate>
	    	<pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:37:07 EDT</pubDate>
		<link>http://idolator.com/tunes/track-marks/track-marks-how-annuals-became-this-weeks-biggest-band-in-the-world-198585.php</link>
		<description></description>
		<item>
		    <title><![CDATA[Track Marks: How Annuals Became This Week's Biggest Band In The World]]></title>
		    <link>http://idolator.com/tunes/track-marks/track-marks-how-annuals-became-this-weeks-biggest-band-in-the-world-198585.php#c434242</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[<p>
They certainly have a "thick" sound, which has its own appeal. I can see that they generate interest in their tracks by varying the texture a lot. First three voices, then one.  First guitars, then a short bout with strings. This makes the structure very dynamic.</p>
<p>
Still, I think I would more enjoy listening tracks that have less elements, but with more variation and development in each of those elements.  At least then I wouldn't feel like I have ADHD just listening to it (although we all like to be easily distracted every now and then)</p> <p>gregsabo</p>]]></description>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[gregsabo]]></dc:creator>
		    <guid isPermaLink="false">33:198585:c434242</guid>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:37:07 EDT</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
		    <title><![CDATA[Track Marks: How Annuals Became This Week's Biggest Band In The World]]></title>
		    <link>http://idolator.com/tunes/track-marks/track-marks-how-annuals-became-this-weeks-biggest-band-in-the-world-198585.php#c433702</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[<p>
i think the animal collective tag is a bit misplaced. these are kids that cut their teeth on pop punk and emo and alt.rock, only to flip their shit when a buddy introduced 'em to mike patton -- really, the result is fun and strange and interesting. dry clothes is more NEW MUSIC, spawn of zorn stuff than freaky animal collective vine swinging. plus, AC would never use something as obvious as a phaser. listen to the construction of melodies and the crunch on tracks like that pitchfork biggie. it's more guitar center than thrift store. oh, and look at their first band: <a href="http://www.myspace.com/timothysweekend.">http://www.myspace.com/timothysweekend.</a>  </p> <p>MackBeStarving</p>]]></description>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[MackBeStarving]]></dc:creator>
		    <guid isPermaLink="false">33:198585:c433702</guid>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 18:55:39 EDT</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
		    <title><![CDATA[Track Marks: How Annuals Became This Week's Biggest Band In The World]]></title>
		    <link>http://idolator.com/tunes/track-marks/track-marks-how-annuals-became-this-weeks-biggest-band-in-the-world-198585.php#c431673</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[<p>
<I>"some fantasy hybrid of Animal Collective, the Arcade Fire, and Broken Social Scene."<br />
</I></p>
<p>
About that adjective.</p> <p><a href="http://www.myspace.com/nedraggett">Ned Raggett</a></p>]]></description>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ned Raggett]]></dc:creator>
		    <guid isPermaLink="false">33:198585:c431673</guid>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:05:56 EDT</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>