[Deleted User Account]

http://pitchfork.com...ck-single-chew/

What does everyone else think?

[Deleted User Account]

The lead over the last chorus is very indebted to Nagroc.

[EasyCake]

Definitely sounds like the Pumpkins + Sonic Youth. The opening riff is very similar to Plume and the chorus sounds more like a Sonic Youth song.

[Bountiful_Wasteland]

I can definitely here the influence, but I still think it's a really great song http://www.smashingpumpkins.com/board_new/public/style_emoticons/default/happy.gif

[Deleted User Account]

Bountiful_Wasteland, on 12 April 2012 - 08:26 AM, said:

I can definitely here the influence, but I still think it's a really great song http://www.smashingpumpkins.com/board_new/public/style_emoticons/default/happy.gif

But? Being influenced is fine, no band is an island. I really like the song, too.

[HypnoRaygun]

wow... Billy should contact his lawyer's. :jackyl:/> It is an intersting song, I've heard their live shows are not good though.. Not from just one person, from many reviews. I believe their best work is in the studio. I love this 90's fuzzy fat guitar tone.

[Deleted User Account]

HypnoRaygun, on 12 April 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

wow... Billy should contact his lawyer's. :jackyl:/> It is an intersting song, I've heard their live shows are not good though.. Not from just one person, from many reviews. I believe their best work is in the studio. I love this 90's fuzzy fat guitar tone.

I liked them when I saw them, for what it's worth.

[pastup]

The few times I've heard that band on spotify I thought they were reminiscent of early Dinosaur Jr. The artwork is very dinosaur jr too.

This single sounds like "Plume" to me.

[HypnoRaygun]

ArticulateEric, on 12 April 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

I liked them when I saw them, for what it's worth.

Right on! That's good to hear. I would like to see them. They came here (St Louis) and I couldn't make it to the show, then I read the reviews and I didn't feel too bad. But I know everyone has their own ideas and its good to hear they do not always disappoint.

[Deleted User Account]

Another Pumpkins esque single, this one from last year... another Plume-esque tune. Damn, Billy's going to be pissed his tunes with Iha seem to be influencing the contemp's.

HypnoRaygun, on 12 April 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

Right on! That's good to hear. I would like to see them. They came here (St Louis) and I couldn't make it to the show, then I read the reviews and I didn't feel too bad. But I know everyone has their own ideas and its good to hear they do not always disappoint.

They're kind of a true shoegaze throwback. Mostly standing still, a little swaying, loud guitars... I'm not sure what the criticism was, but I can see people not jiving with their stage presentation if they wee looking for something more high energy. If you're motivated, definitely check them out next time they swing round.

[HypnoRaygun]

ArticulateEric, on 12 April 2012 - 08:43 AM, said:

I'm not sure what the criticism was, but I can see people not jiving with their stage presentation if they wee looking for something more high energy. If you're motivated, definitely check them out next time they swing round.

I don't take this as gospel, but I heard some other reviews before I read this one..
River Front Times

[Fernando]

Plume? And I can sing the verse "Hey, Blue, all your love is strange" over that riff.

I really don't like Yuck. They are trying hard to sound like a original 90's band, but they sound more as a generic 90's band. There's no personality in the band - and personality was what made the 90's band so big.

[astralweeks]

This band's great.

the new song's amazing.. sounds even better than the stuff off their debut(which i loved too.) there's definatley a huge Pumpkins influence here. the guitar tone at 3:30 sounds a bit like the end of "Karma Police" as well.

ArticulateEric, on 12 April 2012 - 08:43 AM, said:

Another Pumpkins esque single, this one from last year... another Plume-esque tune. Damn, Billy's going to be pissed his tunes with Iha seem to be influencing the contemp's.

I don't think that would bother him. It's kind of interesting that Yuck seem to be equally influenced by Pavement and the Pumpkins. I do wonder what Corgan would think about that..

[Deleted User Account]

astralweeks, on 12 April 2012 - 10:27 AM, said:

This band's great.

the new song's amazing.. sounds even better than the stuff off their debut(which i loved too.) there's definatley a huge Pumpkins influence here. the guitar tone at 3:30 sounds a bit like the end of "Karma Police" as well.

Is Chew going to be on an upcoming album? Standalone single? Bside?

[awsmsc]

I like it, but it sounds like an imitation of old SP (not just Plume). :|

[AlienCloak]

It's sounds like Plume and only Plume

[snail33]

slight similarity to plume and blue...besides that, there are lots other 90s touchpoints--mbv, sy, teenage fanclub, hum, etc.

it sucks.

"revivalists" my ass. i hate that term. they're just ripping off a sound from an era, without any real soul or connection to that era. like how interpol "revived" joy division with NONE of the emotion or scars or warts of the original, all suits and cigarettes and cool poses and ridiculous songs.

and the name sucks, too. a band called "yuck" would have to be pretty awesome for me to listen to them.

[Deleted User Account]

Ah yes, the old fogeys and the young fanboys. I've created a monster.

Yuck is kind of spot the influence, but I don't hate then when the end product is something I enjoy. I don't think their lifts are underhanded or sneaky-- they're unabashed 90's fanboys and it shows. Yes, they are kind of personality-less which will stop them from reaching mass adoration. They're just kids who have cool record collections and know what to do with them.

I would also agree with snail that it's a slight similarity- I meant influence more broadly. I don't think Chew is derivative of SP.

[CZR]

It's plume, Wtf

[astralweeks]

ArticulateEric, on 12 April 2012 - 02:48 PM, said:

Yuck is kind of spot the influence, but I don't hate then when the end product is something I enjoy. I don't think their lifts are underhanded or sneaky-- they're unabashed 90's fanboys and it shows. Yes, they are kind of personality-less which will stop them from reaching mass adoration. They're just kids who have cool record collections and know what to do with them.

agree with all of this. I remember the lead singer being only about 20 yrs old or so when the first album came out..

they're not some contrived "90's revival" band. it's college age kids paying homage to the music that most likely influenced them in their formative yrs. that's what most good rock bands start out as early in their career. it completely works because that guy writes really good melodies...

and yes they sound like Teenage Fanclub ("Big Star ripoffs" circa 91), Pavement ("The Fall ripoffs" circa 92), MBV ("Byrds/JAMC ripoffs" circa 86), Yo La Tengo ("VU ripoffs" circa 1990), Built to Spill ("Dinosaur Jr. ripoffs" circa 95), Weezer ("Pixies ripoffs" circa 94).. name drop your favorite 90's band here... etc..

but i'll never become too jaded as a music fan to enjoy a good pop tune.

to be fair i'll also admit that if they're still sounding like this in 3 yrs they didn't live up to the legacy of their idols.

[Fernando]

snail33, on 12 April 2012 - 02:17 PM, said:

slight similarity to plume and blue...besides that, there are lots other 90s touchpoints--mbv, sy, teenage fanclub, hum, etc.

it sucks.

"revivalists" my ass. i hate that term. they're just ripping off a sound from an era, without any real soul or connection to that era. like how interpol "revived" joy division with NONE of the emotion or scars or warts of the original, all suits and cigarettes and cool poses and ridiculous songs.

and the name sucks, too. a band called "yuck" would have to be pretty awesome for me to listen to them.

MY. THOUGHTS. EXACTLY.

All that "revival" scene sucks. First, it was the 80's revival: Interpol, Editors, She Wants Revenge ripping iff the same bands, trying to sound as they were part of that "movement" and emulating a sound without adding nothing significantly new. Now it's time to revival the 90's, Yuck is the perfect example of the same kind of revival...

[Deleted User Account]

Yuck aren't going to be the 10's Strokes or Nirvana (at least not until album 2 or 3 ;-), but they're lubing us up for them. They're a comin'. In the meantime, enjoy Yuck or don't. Personally, I'll be enjoying them.

astralweeks, on 12 April 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

it completely works because that guy writes really good melodies...

and yes they sound like Teenage Fanclub ("Big Star ripoffs" circa 91), Pavement ("The Fall ripoffs" circa 92), MBV ("Byrds/JAMC ripoffs" circa 86), Yo La Tengo ("VU ripoffs" circa 1990), Built to Spill ("Dinosaur Jr. ripoffs" circa 95), Weezer ("Pixies ripoffs" circa 94).. name drop your favorite 90's band here... etc..

Nice.

[Fernando]

Personally, I'll keep listening to the original bands/albums.

[snail33]

astralweeks, on 12 April 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

agree with all of this. I remember the lead singer being only about 20 yrs old or so when the first album came out..

they're not some contrived "90's revival" band. it's college age kids paying homage to the music that most likely influenced them in their formative yrs. that's what most good rock bands start out as early in their career. it completely works because that guy writes really good melodies...

and yes they sound like Teenage Fanclub ("Big Star ripoffs" circa 91), Pavement ("The Fall ripoffs" circa 92), MBV ("Byrds/JAMC ripoffs" circa 86), Yo La Tengo ("VU ripoffs" circa 1990), Built to Spill ("Dinosaur Jr. ripoffs" circa 95), Weezer ("Pixies ripoffs" circa 94).. name drop your favorite 90's band here... etc..

but i'll never become too jaded as a music fan to enjoy a good pop tune.

to be fair i'll also admit that if they're still sounding like this in 3 yrs they didn't live up to the legacy of their idols.

i will always enjoy a good pop tune as well. i think mr. brightside is one of the most brilliant singles of the past 15 years, despite the killers being tools. but there was a new flair, a tweak somehow that they brought to that cure/new order homage. this isn't a great pop tune to me, it's just ok. not enough to forgive the lack of originality. lenny kravitz' first two records could not have been more derivative, but they were pulled off damn well (after that, well...fuck lenny kravitz).

and i HATE pavement, and weezer, and the pixies, and yo la tengo...all the too-cool 90s indie shit i can't stand. the bands i like from that era (SP, jane's addiction, radiohead, the sundays, the primitives, ride, lush, björk, pearl jam, soundgarden, live, grant lee buffalo, shudder to think, jeff buckley, galaxie 500, the posies, faith no more, quicksand, etc) all managed to interpret their influnces in a way that retained originality. when i listen to siamese dream or superunknown or nothing's shocking or vs., at no point am i thinking "MAN this sounds a lot like these OTHER, BETTER bands who did it years before." so any new band should be able to do the same--if they want to be considered a good, credible band. and it wasn't only 90s bands i liked who could do this, it's any band i love. i reject emphatically your argument that "most good rock bands" rip off their forbears, even early in their careers. gish was fresh and original sounding, even as the hendrix and floyd and zep markers were apparent. "ten" didn't sound like a ripoff of neil young, the who or the clash, though you could hear those echoes and even some arena rock damage (as you could on SD as well).

and by the way: billy was only 22-23 when he made gish. kurt was 23 when he wrote nevermind. robert smith was 19 when he wrote boys don't cry. sinéad o'connor's first record came out when she was 20. prince was 24 when he did 1999, 25 when he made the purple rain album and film. steve winwood was fucking EIGHTEEN when he sang--and co-wrote--gimme some lovin'.

so being 20 is not an excuse.

Fernando, on 12 April 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

MY. THOUGHTS. EXACTLY.

All that "revival" scene sucks. First, it was the 80's revival: Interpol, Editors, She Wants Revenge ripping iff the same bands, trying to sound as they were part of that "movement" and emulating a sound without adding nothing significantly new. Now it's time to revival the 90's, Yuck is the perfect example of the same kind of revival...

yep. sorry, but the cure and joy division and the smiths and REM and jane's and SP and PJ and nirvana and radiohead are too fucking good to ripoff effectively.

[Deleted User Account]

You hate Weezer? Unforgivable. Please listen to Falling For You.

[astralweeks]

snail33, on 12 April 2012 - 06:19 PM, said:

i will always enjoy a good pop tune as well. i think mr. brightside is one of the most brilliant singles of the past 15 years, despite the killers being tools. but there was a new flair, a tweak somehow that they brought to that cure/new order homage. this isn't a great pop tune to me, it's just ok. not enough to forgive the lack of originality. lenny kravitz' first two records could not have been more derivative, but they were pulled off damn well (after that, well...fuck lenny kravitz).

and i HATE pavement, and weezer, and the pixies, and yo la tengo...all the too-cool 90s indie shit i can't stand. the bands i like from that era (SP, jane's addiction, radiohead, the sundays, the primitives, ride, lush, björk, pearl jam, soundgarden, live, grant lee buffalo, shudder to think, jeff buckley, galaxie 500, the posies, faith no more, quicksand, etc) all managed to interpret their influnces in a way that retained originality. when i listen to siamese dream or superunknown or nothing's shocking or vs., at no point am i thinking "MAN this sounds a lot like these OTHER, BETTER bands who did it years before." so any new band should be able to do the same--if they want to be considered a good, credible band. and it wasn't only 90s bands i liked who could do this, it's any band i love. i reject emphatically your argument that "most good rock bands" rip off their forbears, even early in their careers. gish was fresh and original sounding, even as the hendrix and floyd and zep markers were apparent. "ten" didn't sound like a ripoff of neil young, the who or the clash, though you could hear those echoes and even some arena rock damage (as you could on SD as well).




yep. sorry, but the cure and joy division and the smiths and REM and jane's and SP and PJ and nirvana and radiohead are too fucking good to ripoff effectively.

A couple of points..

first I know you hate most "hipster" (whatever people want to call it YLT, Pavement etc) Indie rock (from the 80's and beyond) so it makes sense that you're not going to be into Yuck.

next we'll use Radiohead as an example because they're one band (other than the Pumpkins) who overlaps as a favorite. "Karma Police" sounds like "Sexy Sadie." Listen to "The National Anthem", then listen to "Oh Yeah" by Can. Listen to the atmospheric guitar work in "Lucky" (that's straight up Floyd at times). Listen to "Optimistic" then listen to "Loomer" by MBV. "No Suprises" then "Sunday Morning" by VU. "I Might Be Wrong" then (last few minutes of) "Desire" by Talk Talk. "Creep" is Nirvan/Pixies. Hell even listen to Thom Yorke's vocals on The Bends album after listening to Grace... these are just off the top of my head

And Radiohead are generally regarded as one of the most original major rock bands of the era. they're an amazing band. they have obvious influences imo. theirs just happen to be more varied and esoteric than Yuck's..

I don't think Yuck belong in the same category with Radiohead or classic Pumpkins right now. but for me it's sort of that cliche about good artists borrowing while great artist steal. Yuck are still borrowing at this point. I think that's how you're misrepresenting my point. I never said "most good bands ripoff their forebears." I said most good, young bands tend to where their influences more prominently on their sleeve. Even the goldtsar Pop Genius Brian Wilson was trying to be Phil Spector when he was Yuck's age.


about the whole "revivals suck" argument people are making in this thread... this isn't a record company exec stroking his beard because he just found a Christian Rock band who sound like Pearl Jam.. this is sincere, legit homage. I have no problem with it.

[Elphenor]

Yeah, that intro is so Plume.

I like the song except his voice is really lame...

[MachinesOfLight]

ArticulateEric, on 12 April 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

I liked them when I saw them, for what it's worth.

same.

[snail33]

ArticulateEric, on 12 April 2012 - 06:21 PM, said:

You hate Weezer? Unforgivable. Please listen to Falling For You.

i just did, and i hated it.

[Deleted User Account]

snail33, on 12 April 2012 - 09:32 PM, said:

i just did, and i hated it.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eQAPZBmwBpk/T0CsTmU6pWI/AAAAAAAAAM4/vgKVhpqhPhc/s1600/mother-god-meme.jpg

The key-change(s), the hilariously sincere adolescent lyrics, the dissonance, the tight but jammy Zep dynamic, Beatles meets Wilson meets Pixies... there's nothing more for us to discuss.

snail, your last hope is Across The Sea. Though I can't imagine you taking the time at this point.

[snail33]

astralweeks, on 12 April 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

A couple of points..

first I know you hate most "hipster" (whatever people want to call it YLT, Pavement etc) Indie rock (from the 80's and beyond) so it makes sense that you're not going to be into Yuck.

next we'll use Radiohead as an example because they're one band (other than the Pumpkins) who overlaps as a favorite. "Karma Police" sounds like "Sexy Sadie." Listen to "The National Anthem", then listen to "Oh Yeah" by Can. Listen to the atmospheric guitar work in "Lucky" (that's straight up Floyd at times). Listen to "Optimistic" then listen to "Loomer" by MBV. "No Suprises" then "Sunday Morning" by VU. "I Might Be Wrong" then (last few minutes of) "Desire" by Talk Talk. "Creep" is Nirvan/Pixies. Hell even listen to Thom Yorke's vocals on The Bends album after listening to Grace... these are just off the top of my head

And Radiohead are generally regarded as one of the most original major rock bands of the era. they're an amazing band. they have obvious influences imo. theirs just happen to be more varied and esoteric than Yuck's..

I don't think Yuck belong in the same category with Radiohead or classic Pumpkins right now. but for me it's sort of that cliche about good artists borrowing while great artist steal. Yuck are still borrowing at this point. I think that's how you're misrepresenting my point. I never said "most good bands ripoff their forebears." I said most good, young bands tend to where their influences more prominently on their sleeve. Even the goldtsar Pop Genius Brian Wilson was trying to be Phil Spector when he was Yuck's age.


about the whole "revivals suck" argument people are making in this thread... this isn't a record company exec stroking his beard because he just found a Christian Rock band who sound like Pearl Jam.. this is sincere, legit homage. I have no problem with it.

-i did get that you spoke of young bands in their infancy. that's why i made points about gish, ten, etc. specifically and how i don't find those records to be nakedly derivative of any other bands.

-EVERY great band cribs pieces here and there from songs they love. it's just inevitable. i have done it myself and felt sheepish about it, but when i realize, as you said, that bands as "trailblazing" as radiohead have done it routinely, it makes it seem not so bad.

-the bends was recorded just as grace was being released. i find it dubious to imagine that they heard that record and immediately aped it.

-i've never grasped the whole idea that the pixies' sound influences bands like nirvana, radiohead, etc. and i never will. not because i hate the pixies, just because i don't hear it at all. (for what it's worth, i hate sonic youth, too, but i hear their influence on some of the shoegazers i like.)

-i don't hear "loomer" in "optimistic."

ArticulateEric, on 12 April 2012 - 09:47 PM, said:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eQAPZBmwBpk/T0CsTmU6pWI/AAAAAAAAAM4/vgKVhpqhPhc/s1600/mother-god-meme.jpg

The key-change(s), the hilariously sincere adolescent lyrics, the dissonance, the tight but jammy Zep dynamic, Beatles meets Wilson meets Pixies... there's nothing more for us to discuss.

snail, your last hope is Across The Sea. Though I can't imagine you taking the time at this point.

the key change is...a key change. i hate his lyrics, his voice, his delivery, his whole faux-nerdy shtick. and i hate the pixies...maybe that's the problem.

sorry this bugs you...maybe you think i am being contrary purposely; i assure you i simply, truly cannot stomach weezer.

[nasalscarecrow]

Shall check this out when my Internet isn't playing up. Good live act though, saw them twice at Bestival.

[astralweeks]

snail33, on 12 April 2012 - 10:36 PM, said:

-i did get that you spoke of young bands in their infancy. that's why i made points about gish, ten, etc. specifically and how i don't find those records to be nakedly derivative of any other bands.

-EVERY great band cribs pieces here and there from songs they love. it's just inevitable. i have done it myself and felt sheepish about it, but when i realize, as you said, that bands as "trailblazing" as radiohead have done it routinely, it makes it seem not so bad.

-the bends was recorded just as grace was being released. i find it dubious to imagine that they heard that record and immediately aped it.

-i've never grasped the whole idea that the pixies' sound influences bands like nirvana, radiohead, etc. and i never will. not because i hate the pixies, just because i don't hear it at all. (for what it's worth, i hate sonic youth, too, but i hear their influence on some of the shoegazers i like.)

-i don't hear "loomer" in "optimistic."

- I'll give you Ten. while not sounding particularly unique, it is difficult to spot any major influence. Gish on the otherhand definatley sounds like dream pop, Hendrix, Navarro, "Stranglehold", etc at various points. the fact that their influences are eclectic does make the sound more interesting than Yuck imo

- About the Buckley/Radiohead point, I don't want to laundry list examples on another topics.. but there are tons of instances of rock artists being strongly influenced by their contemporaries

-The Pixies obviously set the template for a bunch of 90's radio hits with the soft verse/loud chorus formula. I always thought the Nirvana/Pixies similiarties were overstated until my college roomate (who wasn't rock music savvy in any way) asked if I was listening to Nirvana when I was playing "Levitate Me" in our dorm room. He was shocked it wasn't Nirvana when I told him. no sure exactly what's proved by that anecdote, but he definatley wasn't parroting some Indie fanbody critique. that was just what he heard as an honest reaction to the music.

[Parksey]

I do like Yuck a lot, but damn that riff is very similar to Plume.

[EasyCake]

The Pumpkins will always be my favorite band but El Scorcho might be the greatest song ever written.

[MrRed]

I straight up don't give a fuck who they sound like, sounds like some damn good fuzzy/spacy guitars to me. They're definitely not "ripping off" anyone, I'd say they're paying homage if anything.

They seem like they wear the influence of the bands they love on their sleeve and what's wrong with that? If I made a band it would have my Pumpkins/Shoegaze love written all over it.

Maybe in a few years they will arrive at a truly original sound.

[Deleted User Account]

snail33, on 12 April 2012 - 10:36 PM, said:

the key change is...a key change. i hate his lyrics, his voice, his delivery, his whole faux-nerdy shtick. and i hate the pixies...maybe that's the problem.

sorry this bugs you...maybe you think i am being contrary purposely; i assure you i simply, truly cannot stomach weezer.

It doesn't bug me. I was being hyperbolic because when am I not hyperbolic. This is how I parlay. This is hows I does it. But if you can't get behind that key change...

Also I think Rivers is a true nerd, in that he has autism or aspergers or something close and otherwise identifiable with nerds in popular culture.

[frednirv632]

ArticulateEric, on 13 April 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

Also I think Rivers is a true nerd, in that he has autism or aspergers or something close and otherwise identifiable with nerds in popular culture.

:rofl:/>

[snail33]

astralweeks, on 13 April 2012 - 03:53 AM, said:

- I'll give you Ten. while not sounding particularly unique, it is difficult to spot any major influence. Gish on the otherhand definatley sounds like dream pop, Hendrix, Navarro, "Stranglehold", etc at various points. the fact that their influences are eclectic does make the sound more interesting than Yuck imo

- About the Buckley/Radiohead point, I don't want to laundry list examples on another topics.. but there are tons of instances of rock artists being strongly influenced by their contemporaries

-The Pixies obviously set the template for a bunch of 90's radio hits with the soft verse/loud chorus formula. I always thought the Nirvana/Pixies similiarties were overstated until my college roomate (who wasn't rock music savvy in any way) asked if I was listening to Nirvana when I was playing "Levitate Me" in our dorm room. He was shocked it wasn't Nirvana when I told him. no sure exactly what's proved by that anecdote, but he definatley wasn't parroting some Indie fanbody critique. that was just what he heard as an honest reaction to the music.

again, i have already allowed that gish has major hendrix influence, along with some floyd, some zep, some jane's, some cure. but there's never more than a moment here or riff there when you listen to gish and feel like you're listening to obvious homage or ripoff. the album is still more than the sum of its parts, a transmogrification of its influences into something fresh. that "yuck" song doesn't feel fresh or vital or necessary to me.

[TwoHeadedBoy]

Music doesn't have to be necessary. Sometimes you just want to listen to a decent tune, and this one delivers.

[Parksey]

Why do people always have to break down music to the enth degree? If it sounds good, like it.

[pastup]

influence aside...I don't really like it. I like some of their stuff but am not feeling this one. Sounds too 90's radio to me.

[Lunatic]

I hear Dinosaur + Silversun.

[snail33]

TwoHeadedBoy, on 13 April 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

Music doesn't have to be necessary. Sometimes you just want to listen to a decent tune, and this one delivers.

if it's not necessary, it's got to be REALLY catchy and enjoyable to me. this isn't.

Parksey, on 13 April 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

Why do people always have to break down music to the enth degree? If it sounds good, like it.

"nth." like a variable 'n'.