Acts >= AC

edited October 2012 in Audible
Reserved space for bands you think are as good or better than the Animal Band. Personally, Zaireeka/The Soft Bulletin by the Flaming Lips is as special to me as the best work of Animal Collective.
«1

Comments

  • BLASPHEMY!!!
  • yeah nothing comes close really. Sufjan comes close i guess.. and Radiohead based solely off of Kid A (ive listened to their other albums, but kid a is kid a amirite.) i have specific songs that are as important to me as say brother sport, visiting friends, april and the phantom, grass etc.
  • edited October 2012
    Better: the Dead, Pat Metheny, John Coltrane, Neil Young, Doc Watson, Thelonius Monk, Frank Zappa, Bela Fleck, Jimi Hendrix, Television, Bach, Brahms, Stravinsky. As Good: the Clash, Jeff Beck, Sigur Ros, Radiohead, the Beatles, Ted Greene, the Funk Brothers, Jim Hall, Wes Montgomery, Buddy Holly, the Who, A Tribe Called Quest, Alison Krauss, Deerhunter, Devo, the Doors, Goodie Mob, Led Zeppelin, Ry Cooder, Charlie Parker, Miles Davis, Muddy Waters, Parliament/Funkadelic, Bob Marley, Ornette Coleman, Jaco Pastorius, Reverend Gary Davis, Bob Dylan, Charles Mingus, Chuck Berry.
  • edited October 2012
    I agree with ticon
  • There's a lot of good music out there.
  • Well then of the music ive been exposed to, there are maybe 4 or 5 other bands/artists whose music i enjoy as much as or more than Animal Collective's music.
  • the golden trio for me is always forever now RH, SFA & THE AC! close but not quite there would be Cloud Cult, Mark Mallman, Men Without Hats, R.E.M. Bowie!
  • GANG GANG DANCE XIU XIU!
  • edited October 2012
    [quote]Well then of the music ive been exposed to[/quote] You could always listen to more music! There's a lot of good stuff out there. After all, Animal Collective must have found music that moved them at least as much as you're moved by their music for them to avidly pursue professional musicianship. And that stuff existed before their stuff or Sufjan Stevens or Radiohead. Well, maybe Radiohead was around, but I mean [i]great[/i] Radiohead (like anyone's favorite is Pablo Honey).
  • And if there wasn't a great generation of musicians making incredible music before each other great generation of musicians, people might've just stopped loving music. I mean, there's Beethoven, there's Mahler, there's Brahms, there's Villalobos, there's Bach. All incredible composers, all people who made beautiful, magical music. I feel like only being willing to listen to music in one idiom is [i]super boring![/i] Only listening to new stuff is as lame as only listening to classical stuff which is as lame as only listening to Golden Oldies. If you listen deeply, you can say "fuck the superficial nonsense" and get to the magical core of the music. There is [i]so much good music out there.[/i]
  • [quote=Dave]There is so much good music out there.[/quote] Dude I believe you. But there's only so much music that one can hear. Man I could've listened to all of the bands listed in this thread and there would still be tons and tons of more great music that I haven't heard. But this thread is ultimately about bands that we think are better than or as good as AC. There is no objective measurement of that. It is just our based on our opinions, which are subject to the limitations of our musical exposure. Taken literally, this thread is completely bullshit. So are definitive statements like "nothing really comes close". All bullshit. But this thread is just for fun. We're just listing bands that are important to us. Trust me, I've listened to the Dead, the Beatles (obv), Led Zeppelin, frickin Bob Marley, Bob Dylan, etc. Maybe a quarter of the bands you listed. I am in no way denying their greatness, nor am i denying that someone can enjoy them as much as or more than they enjoy AC. That would be soo ignorant. [i][b][u]I[/u][/b][/i] just don't enjoy them as much as I enjoy Animal Collective's music. Or Sufjan Steven's music. Or Radiohead's music. I'm still willing to listen to music that came before Radiohead! And I'm looking forward to checking out the bands that you listed that I haven't heard.
  • edited October 2012
    double post
  • I would put Bob Dylan in the better catgory but to say better is difficult because the context of times is different. It's almost not relative. It's easy to day "I like the dead better then Jefferson Airplane" but I can't say "MGMT is better then jefferson airplane" because idk. Also as far as classical goes Mozart is my favorite, Beetovan comes in second and Bach used to be my favorite but I got sick of him hovering around one note. I cannot get into Brahms, he can't hold onto a theme for more then thirty seconds and I fall alseep.
  • edited October 2012
    [quote=vesufius]"But this thread is ultimately about bands that we think are better than or as good as AC. There is no objective measurement of that. It is just our based on our opinions... Trust me, I've listened to the Dead, the Beatles (obv), Led Zeppelin, frickin Bob Marley, Bob Dylan, etc. Maybe a quarter of the bands you listed. I am in no way denying their greatness, nor am i denying that someone can enjoy them as much as or more than they enjoy AC. That would be soo ignorant. I just don't enjoy them as much as I enjoy Animal Collective's music.[/quote] Don't miss the positive core of what I wrote for the superficiality of self-based characteristics. The core of what I was saying is: it's good to be open to new experiences. I wanted to encourage you to listen to other music and to listen deeply. That's all. (Incidentally, you oughta try listening to the Dead's shows if you've only heard their studio stuff on the radio -- the studio recordings aren't what people loved them for.) That's funny man, Mozart drives me crazy! He's so staccato all the time, it makes my nerves go "no, no more!" But it's beautiful music, one of his clarinet concertos that I learned a long time ago was one of my favorite things to play. As far as comparing someone super influential like Dylan to people now goes, I agree that's another category of lists entirely. Ever heard the Firebird Suite? It's exceptionally beautiful and very intense. You may enjoy it. It's one of my favorites, and is definitively unlike the Romantic-era salad days "we're unable to pick a theme we like" aesthetic (with the exception of Tchaikovsky who, it could be argued, took that too far in the other direction). In any case, Firebird is great, and the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra version of it is the best I know. I don't like the one Stravinsky directed, it feels too fast and doesn't "breathe" the same way as the A.S.O. one.
  • dave, im surprised that you think a tribe called quest is as good as AC
  • edited October 2012
    Well, like what Vesufius is saying, this is just a gauge of what we enjoy. Mine is simply a roughly-tiered collection of levels of enjoyment. I love their beats, their flow is awesome and their lyrics are intelligent. I didn't put Outkast on there but I like them as much, too. I find both groups' music very moving.
  • is a DOG! AC > all classical music!
  • Actually it's more like all classical music > swing > bop > rock 'n roll > psychedelic rock > drums > space > hard rock > grunge > AC
  • I actually really hope youre joking
  • I think this is really neat and AC-esque
  • [quote=Ticonderoga]I actually really hope youre joking[/quote] Yeah, it was a joke. Though it's not expressly [i]wrong[/i] in terms of chronology. It's just that huge chunks are missing and the causality is faulty, if that's what you're thinking. Did you know that the use of ">" is often used to describe jammed-into songs in live recordings? Fireworks>Essplode, for instance. That was what the joke was: reading "all classical music > AC" as "all classical music lead to the AC." Filling in the blanks in order to imply the alternate meaning.
  • [quote=Dave]avidly pursue professional musicianship[/quote] [quote=Dave]only being willing to listen to music in one idiom[/quote] [quote=Dave]Don't miss the positive core of what I wrote for the superficiality of self-based characteristics.[/quote] [quote=Dave]it's not expressly wrong in terms of chronology[/quote] [quote=Dave]the causality is faulty[/quote] [quote=Dave]Filling in the blanks in order to imply the alternate meaning.[/quote]
  • Is there, like, a pattern that I'm just not seeing... I think there is :( Can you explain it to me, please?
  • It's just faux brody.
  • In terms of capacity for aesthetic gratification.. in my book, AC is far and away the best. Only one band really is in the same ballpark.
  • and that band is Cream!
  • edited October 2012
    Sigh. [size=12][b]DAN'T C'MPUR MEHSIC! DAN'T DEW IT! DAN'T![/b][/size] I mean, with all due respect, how can you compare Sebastian Bach to Jimi Hendrix? How does that even work? WHAT ARE THE CRITERION :(|) :(|) :(|) :(|) :(|) That said, comparing music is fun. And I do, many times, put other bands and stuff on AnCo's level and compare them. But, overall, it's so no comparison, and this is because OPONIONS! IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THE OPONIONS! OH-PUN-IONS! PUNCEPTION!
  • edited October 2012
    [quote=Mzrokkks]I mean, with all due respect, how can you compare Sebastian Bach to Jimi Hendrix? How does that even work? WHAT ARE THE CRITERION :(|) :(|) :(|) :(|) :(|)[/quote] [quote=Dave]Well, like what Vesufius is saying, this is just a gauge of what we enjoy. Mine is simply a roughly-tiered collection of levels of enjoyment.[/quote] And beyond that, I sure [i]can[/i] compare Bach to Hendrix, though I wasn't before. They both worked tirelessly on their music. They both let whatever power music has flow through them. They both made inspiring music that elevates people. Bach wrote compositions, Jimi improvised live. Jimi took acid, Bach did not. Bach wore clothes appropriate to the 16th century, Jimi wore paisley. Are these differences greater than the inspiration their music still passed on to other people or the days of hours and hours of devotion to making art with sound? Their differences shaped the superficial forms of their work. Their similarities shaped the deep, joyous emotional things that their music caused. Also, I dislike Sebastian Bach's music (I like him in Trailer Park Boys). I [i]do[/i] like Johann Sebastian Bach's music.
  • [quote=Dave]simply a roughly-tiered collection of levels of enjoyment.[/quote] [quote=Dave]Their similarities shaped the deep, joyous emotional things that their music caused.[/quote]
  • Found poetry? Are you a found poet, Mr. Brody?
  • that's seriously tripping me out man
  • the ac is the best band since 2000
  • Well AC are my favorite band but I'd say Ween and XTC come close for me. They all seem to have massive discographies that are both consistently good quality and vary a lot in style, and i really like that in a band but nothing really matches Animal Collective at the moment.
  • [quote=Purplesage]the ac is the best band since 2000[/quote] I think most people here would have to agree with this.
  • ive said of all time as a personal opinion but who really knows
  • [quote=Purplesage]the ac is the best band since 2000[/quote] I really think this is true. they are one of the (,if not THE,) defining band of our era.
  • I think that kind of thing can really only be said in retrospect, because part of being a "defining" band means having a great influence. AC's influence thus far has been basically limited to the underground/indie scene. In that sphere, it's been vast, but only time will tell what kind of influence they have in years to come. After all, they're not done yet!
  • Yeah, I agree Dave. In my mind though the underground/indie scene IS really where the music truly is because many times manufactured music can not be redefined by a band but by a record label. Thus, the band themselves are not the ones who redefine or create a genre. Essentially, AC is the most important band of their genre or scene because many bands have tried (and failed tbh) to recreate their style. On another note, I think only Radiohead can be on the same plain of greatness as AC, if referring to recent times.
  • For sure, but maybe 90% of music listeners (that estimate is 92% accurate) have never heard of Animal Collective and have their musical lives, if you will, shaped by other stuff. It'd be very cool if that changed (in the direction of more people liking AC). Radiohead was the other one that came to mind for me, too. Can't deny Sigur Ros' influence in shaping their sound, though. Untitled is almost like proto-Radiohead, and I feel like Sigur Ros kind of influenced everyone else through Radiohead, just because Radiohead seemed to get a lot of that super-atmospheric sound that a lot of other bands have used now, too, from Sigur Ros.
  • Its hard for me to see AC as a band no one has heard of because they are SO prevalent in my life that I sometimes overestimate their popularity. Although, I do still believe that their are many bands that have been infuenced by their sound.
  • There are! They're just even more unknown than the AC. The AC has a fanbase that runs narrow and deep, as opposed to wide and shallow (read: Lady Gaga, Justin Beebur). Merriweather, their biggest album to date, is certified Silver in Britain -- it's sold between 60,000 and 100,000 copies. None of their other albums have hit 60,000 so far, and none have gone Silver (the lowest tier of acknowledgement of lots of record sales) in the U.S. or anywhere else. Lady Gaga, on the other hand, had her first album go triple platinum (3,000,000) and her second go double platinum (2,000,000). Of course, this is a measure of quantity over quality (clearly), but the fact remains that Animal Collective's music simply reaches nowhere near the amount of people that other popular recording artists' music reaches. They're probably more popular now than ever, but they remain somewhat of a cult following and seem to influence groups that are either less well-known than them or not much more well-known than them, with the exceptions of Vampire Weekend and MGMT, both of which are major contenders in terms of sales in way Animal Collective is not, even though they still don't approach the most popular artists' album sales.
  • Dave, did you know those facts offhand? But yeah, I agree. AC has fans where it matters: people who strive to make music and people who appreciate music. Also, I think AC is one of the bands modern bands should strive to be. AC effortlessly doesn't fit into a mold (imo) and doesn't conform to whatever is the music of the times. Also, they treat everything they make as art. They make albums in mind of seemingly abstract concepts, thus blending the senses together. Everything AC makes has a synesthetic quality, which is why they are SO different from other bands and are constanting helping to define and redefine indie music of this era. (I wonder is anyone in AC has synesthesia?)
  • edited October 2012
    Wow id say a lot more than 90% of music listeners havent heard of Animal Collective (i know it was an estimate, Dave) Because technically, EVERYONE is a music listener. And in my experience, ive yet to meet a single person who's heard of the AC, before ive enthusiastically introduced them to it. And not a lot of them like it :( and a few even fail to appreciate it as music. They think its a joke or something? But im in 12th grade. Hopefully things change for me next year.
  • edited October 2012
    Yeah, same for me Ves, but I live in the lamest town in the universe so I don't expect much to begin with.
  • But also, i have to say, ive met a ton of people who tell me they're into indie music, and then proceed to show me their list of preferred bands ranging from Arctic Monkeys to Shins and the xx. And NONE of them have heard of AC! I always get excited and think, maybe just maybe this time, but they always tell me theyve never heard of it and theyll check it out later And they come back a week later and tell me that AC is just ok. Translated from: Merriweather is too poppy, everythin else is too fucking wierd. College better be better!
  • Oh also: I live in MISSISSAUGA, one of the most populated cities in Canada, part of the Greater TORONTO Area So this isnt some small town or anythin I do feel for you narnia :(
Sign In or Register to comment.