[Dead-Air]

Originally Posted by swa(y)

shit, i dont even really, when it comes down to it, even think of wolf eyes as "noise", i think theyre more "noisy" (alot of the time, anyways). esp. considering their better album (which i think really defines what "they do/are good at)...burned mind. i really think of em more as a thrashy/noisy/sorta industrial rock outfit with obvious hardcore ethics (they do have a pretty serious DIY ethic...and when i saw em, between songs theyed be blasting these sorta lo-fi 80's hardcore songs and jokingly playing/syncin' along to 'em).

their straight ahead noise shit though, in my opinion, really sux. least most of the shit ive heard (they gotta have like ten million records out there)

fun sterff.

So far in this thread, people, myself included, have mentioned 3 different albums as "the one Wolf Eyes record I really like, and it's not really noise". Kind of funny.

[Dead-Air]

Originally Posted by swa(y)

yeah, it really is. esp. considering the fact that they seem to be, in many circles, the "definative" noise band. its funny, indeed.

I think they're considered the "definitive" noise band because they are easier to grasp by large audiences than say Cock ESP. They're essentially a rock group, though a very noisy noise rock band. Still, it makes them more palatable to people who don't understand anything that isn't in a familiar rock context. Sub Pop wouldn't be rushing forward to sign Con-Dom or The Nihilist Spasm Band.

[atsonicpark]

Cock ESP is definitinely THE noise band in my eyes. They're at least the most ridiculous, and that counts for a lot. What other band drove 1500 miles to play a 13 second set and then left and didn't even ask for gas money or try to sell any merch or anything?

[noisereductions]

I'm actually starting to lose interest in my own thread. There's a lot of waxing philosophical, but the original question was basically "what do you personally like to hear in noise?" but instead there's a lot of "let's define noise" talk.

[atsonicpark]

I like to hear something interesting, whether it be interesting noises, textures, production, atmospherics, structures, etc. That goes for all music I guess. Except without melodies in most noise. There, back on track. I seem to prefer droney, multilayered, dark noise over the "noise walls"... and definitely hate the directionless, wandering stuff. But I dunno. I can probably find something good to say about anything..........

[Derek]

What about the Mars Volta? Aren't they your FAVOURITE band?

I don't know what I like to hear in noise. I just like the sounds.

[noisereductions]

Originally Posted by atsonicpark

There, back on track.

Thanks. I think "the drone" is one of my favorite musical devices (of any sort of music, actually). Like what we were talking about with the opening of LEAVES TURN INSIDE YOU, I could listen to that drone for the whole record. It's beautiful.

[Dead-Air]

Originally Posted by swa(y)

im still curious as to why sub pop wanted to sign em, really, to begin with though. i understand, like you were saying, why they signed them as oppsed to some crazier, harsher, less easy to digest for most ears outfits, but what triggered them wanting to sign a band like wolf eyes to begin with.

according to john olsen it was because sub pop lost a bet in some card game, iim not sure if i actually believe that.

i just find it interesting. considering all the more "experiemental" (even though stilll very "rockin'") outfits they were signing in the late 80's early 90's, compared to the more, well, more "radio friendly" pseudo-indie pop/folk stuff they tend to sign more of these days. maybe it was an experimental move, just to see if it was something that would indeed "sale".

i dont know.

I think they had to be looking at the huge numbers of young kids all over the world who are reacting to the noise scene the way that kids in the '80s reacted to hardcore - forming their own bands, zines, shows, labels, the works, all completely outside the mainstream. The people who work at sub pop may be somewhat burnt out, but they still grew up aware of that hardcore scene, and many of them active in it. They want to capture this next wave, and signing one of the bigger known and most accessible bands is the easiest way to get their feet wet.

There is plenty about the vitality of the noise scene that's exciting in the same ways the hardcore scene was too. It's just that the same problem arises that the scene reinforces it's own stereotypes which eventually stifles originality and creates a genericism we've all noted. Just like with hardcore, most of the music is really pretty shitty, but the best is amazing, and the best artists tend to rise above (alliterate pun intended) the cliches that their audience wants from them.

[atsonicpark]

Sub Pop signed Wolf Eyes the same reason any label signs bands: they thought they'd sell a lot of albums. Obvious but needs to be said. I highly doubt they did that though -- sorry, no doubts, I KNOW they didn't do that. Which may explain why Wolf Eyes doesn't seem to be releasing any more albums through them. There's no way they'd sign them in 2008, assuming they hadn't signed them all those years ago. Either way, it was cool/crazy to see a Wolf Eyes cd in a local record store here (that usually doesn't carry anything even remotely resembling that type of music).

But yeah if you remember to a few years back, noise was supposedly some new, cool thing, with misinformed SPIN articles (which mentioned the Mars Volta amongst Hair Police, Lightning Bolt, and Wolf Eyes; eh?), Lollapalooza touring that never happened, and of course opening for Sonic Youth and shit. I heard Wolf Eyes got $100,000 for signing with 'em. That's amazing. Shrug.

[Everyneurotic]

wolf eyes got a penthouse suite when they played here in mexico last year.

no, i'm not kidding, mike connelly told me.

[Dead-Air]

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

wolf eyes got a penthouse suite when they played here in mexico last year.

no, i'm not kidding, mike connelly told me.

Did they stay a Sammy Hagar's place in Cabo?

[Rob Instigator]

Good Noise
Bad Noise
You know I've had my share
well my woman left home with my wolf eyes lathe
and I still don't seem to care

[Everyneurotic]

Originally Posted by Dead-Air

Did they stay a Sammy Hagar's place in Cabo?

cabo wabo!!!

 

"wolf eyes sure know how to party, eh people?!! and now, they promised to release my next album on an ultra limited edition of 7 hand cranked cylinders...american tapes is great!"

[Dead-Air]

Originally Posted by hypertonic

Hahaha oh shit Rob.

I simply need & like to hear diversity in noise(y) music. Seems like a lot of noise artists don't change their approaches quickly enough. I like Merzbow, but mainly just because there are layers of texture, not just one texture or a couple at a time, but several moving fields, and interweaving pieces (from what I've heard) and lots of different approaches to each album. As far as Wolf Eyes, I do dig Human Animal, Burned Mind, and a couple more CDr's. I think that the aura, mood, atmosphere of noise is important as well, not just composition, which I guess has to do with the approach to listening & composing/imporov. Just seems it a 20 minute thrust most of the time. I mean why not tape slices, slammed up against walls of sound, against fucked up pedals & samplers? Just don't rely on a single trick, or even the techniques alone. All of this needs to be combined. Why rule anything out? Personally I like using traditional nice electronic instruments (Voyager malfunctions?), used in a noise(y) fashion, along with cheap stuff...

A good critical point about Merzbow. Taken at a whole, his massive discography shows a diverse array of noises, but if you listen to a 2 or 3 albums in a row it does seem like he's retreading the same ideas over and over. He makes shifts in approaches but they aren't exactly swift, and his palette doesn't usually seem to broaden as he often slowly moves to a different limited set of variables.

Aesthetically, I agree with your choice of approaches as a musician. I too enjoy making music that is noisy more than "noise music".

[Dead-Air]

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

cabo wabo!!!

 

"wolf eyes sure know how to party, eh people?!! and now, they promised to release my next album on an ultra limited edition of 7 hand cranked cylinders...american tapes is great!"

So who's going to photoshop Wolf Eyes into that?

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by Dead-Air

A good critical point about Merzbow. Taken at a whole, his massive discography shows a diverse array of noises, but if you listen to a 2 or 3 albums in a row it does seem like he's retreading the same ideas over and over.

that totally depends on which 2 or 3 records you were to listen to, if you were to listen to aquanecromancer, followed by 1930, followed by rainbow electronics you'd listen to three totally different sounding records that don't touch at all on his ultra harsh noise stuff (e.g. pulse demon) his digital rythmic stuff (e.g. merzbeat) or the animal sampling stuff, the any random sounds thrown together style of his early records, the stuff he did wth a vocalist... etc.



one thing that struck me recently was listening to noise records from the 80s and realising how they are far more conceptually driven and more varied in their approaches than the majority of new stuff which tends to be more focus on atmospherics and making as much noise with a few pedals as possible

[atsonicpark]

Hmm hmm.

[Dead-Air]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

one thing that struck me recently was listening to noise records from the 80s and realising how they are far more conceptually driven and more varied in their approaches than the majority of new stuff which tends to be more focus on atmospherics and making as much noise with a few pedals as possible

There's some truth to that, but then a lot of it stems from the hugely increased volume (pun intended) of people making that type of music now than then. Whenever a genre becomes more popular, it seems the number of original artists stays about the same, while the number of people copying a small handful of defining techniques and not much else skyrockets exponentially.

[Rob Instigator]

Laaathhhhheeeee

Originally Posted by Dead-Air

There's some truth to that, but then a lot of it stems from the hugely increased volume (pun intended) of people making that type of music now than then. Whenever a genre becomes more popular, it seems the number of original artists stays about the same, while the number of people copying a small handful of defining techniques and not much else skyrockets exponentially.

I'm not sure about that. I think that with more bands making music the number of good ones increases too, even if they are overshadowed by the sheer amount of crap ones.