Wednesday, October 22, 2008

A Really Quick, Secret Post From Work Re: Of Montreal and Brackets

Ok, so last things first. Voting has closed for Round 1G. Thank you so much to everyone who voted! I'll be posting the final sub-round of the first round of match-ups and then I think I will be doing the 2nd round in its entirety in one (or possibly two) posts. So look out for that.

Now on to the real reason I called you here today. So, Of Montreal is getting bigger and bigger, right? Why don't I have anything from them past 2000, when, by all accounts, they really started to hone the craft in around 2001. I got a couple of their albums from my friend Kasey in college and, while I enjoy listening to the cute, Beatle-y tunes when they come up on shuffle, I never really considered them a "real" band.

But I was reading the cover story in the new Paste magazine and I was realizing that I hadn't heard the main work that probably got Kasey into them in the first place. I would compare it to only listening to Nirvana's Bleach album and writing them off as not your cup of tea. It may be that I listen to the newer Of Montreal stuff and they're STILL not my cup of tea, but I didn't even realize that I might be missing something!

Has this happened to anyone else? With any band?

2 comments:

Natsthename said...

Yeah, it happened to me, too. I tried the new one, and it's still not my thang. That's just me, though.
And while you're on the Paste subject, I've been reading that mag since issue 4,and I'm disappointed in the changes they've made. I used to love reading every article, but now there are fewer of those and more silly list-like features. I don't like the new number rating scale on the cds, either. There was always a focus of music and culture, and I was happy with that, but video games? Aren't there gamer mags for that? (Or heck, buy Blender!)

James! said...

Let me start by saying that the issue I'm talkingn about is only the third I've ever gotten, so I really don't have anything to compare, but I can see what you're talking about. When I read an issue, I'll look through it, then read the articles, then go through the review section and read about anything over an 80. I tend to prefer quantified reviews like that, but I think it's a little silly to have like "56" or "63" because honestly what seperates the two? You know?

It's always cool to hear from you Nat. I just wish you wouldn't be so shy about your opinions. ;-)