2010 report

The Modernist

2010 report

Postby The Modernist » 06 Feb 2010, 10:02

On the state of play so far, I'd make the following observations:

- More adventurous, eclectic lists are generally suffering, people are going for the familiar this year (always true to a degree but it's certainly more pronounced this year).
Lists featuring mainly UK artists from the 70's and 80's are doing particularly well, this may be a reflection of the current voting demographic. For this reason it may be difficult for an American to win it this year. Match 54 is a good summary of this trend.
-Popular artists this year have been Love, Curtis Mayfield/The Impressions, Scott Walker, Brian Eno, Massive Attack and Miles Davis. The Beatles have appeared a little more than usual, "Hey Bulldog" being a particular popular choice; Led Zep have also been picked more this year. Dylan and The Stones being picked far less than usual.
-Other popular songs have been "Lloyd, I'm Ready To Be Heartbroken", "Fathers Name is Dad", "Unfinished Sympathy" but we haven't seen anything of the ubiquity of "I Forgot to be your Lover" from last year. Fleet Foxes were all over the lists on day one but haven't appeared much since.
Last edited by The Modernist on 06 Feb 2010, 10:14, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Vic Snazell-Sprey
Utter Cad
Posts: 50712
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: 2010 report

Postby Vic Snazell-Sprey » 06 Feb 2010, 10:05

El Modernisto wrote: Fleet Foxes were all over the lists on day one but haven't appeared much since.


I hasten to add, nobody has PMd me amending lists to remove Fleet Foxes!
Little Jim was no-one's fool - he owned the town's only jam butty mine.

Hugh
Posts: 15546
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:43

Re: 2010 report

Postby Hugh » 06 Feb 2010, 10:23

As a new player it's very interesting to see how many big hitters and perceived tastemakers have bitten the dust in the first round. I think there is a strong chance that when this is over the received wisdom will be that this is the year that mediocrity and safe-play overthrew good taste and innovation. The winner's victory could quickly turn to ashes.

Not that it makes any difference to me : My list is going to get completely humped in the second round.

User avatar
Vic Snazell-Sprey
Utter Cad
Posts: 50712
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: 2010 report

Postby Vic Snazell-Sprey » 06 Feb 2010, 10:49

Put simply, the newer competitors are often less bound by the need to be tactical (i.e. avoid accusations of obviousness) and less esoteric, as it were. In one sense, it could be argued, they are more honest lists. In another sense, they can be seen as less interesting. I doubt there's much cynicism in the more 'obvious' lists though. Quite the opposite, in fact.

It's an interesting Cup this year.
Little Jim was no-one's fool - he owned the town's only jam butty mine.

User avatar
PENK
Midnight to Six Man
Posts: 34187
Joined: 07 Aug 2004, 20:12
Location: Stockholm

Re: 2010 report

Postby PENK » 06 Feb 2010, 11:13

El Modernisto wrote:-Popular artists this year have been Love, Curtis Mayfield/The Impressions, Scott Walker, Brian Eno, Massive Attack and Miles Davis.


You forgot Elvis Costello, who, by my calculations, has appeared in 278% of lists so far.

Fear of a Giraffe Planet wrote:Put simply, the newer competitors are often less bound by the need to be tactical (i.e. avoid accusations of obviousness) and less esoteric, as it were. In one sense, it could be argued, they are more honest lists. In another sense, they can be seen as less interesting. I doubt there's much cynicism in the more 'obvious' lists though. Quite the opposite, in fact.


Probably true, but I still don't understand the trend of voting for the safer, more familiar lists. If anyone on the board could have put the list together, what makes it stand out against a list with more personality and individuality?
I still find the proud refusals of some to check out anything they don't know rather irritating, too. However, it's refreshing to see that, despite this, a lot of lists have gone down the route of links and a lot of people are discovering new stuff: it's a great feeling when someone finds a track on your own list that really gets them going.

Fear of a Giraffe Planet wrote:It's an interesting Cup this year.


Sure is. The larger number of entrants may have made for a slightly drawn-out first round, but it also makes for more debate and discussion, which is a good thing. Whatever else you think about it, the Cup does inject life into BCB every year.
Copehead wrote:I have met Gruff Rhys - although he claimed he wasn't and that he couldn't speak Welsh, as I spoke to him in Welsh, but it was him lying bastard.

User avatar
The Prof
Composing a revolutionary symphony
Posts: 44979
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: 2010 report

Postby The Prof » 06 Feb 2010, 11:22

Fear of a Giraffe Planet wrote:
El Modernisto wrote: Fleet Foxes were all over the lists on day one but haven't appeared much since.


I hasten to add, nobody has PMd me amending lists to remove Fleet Foxes!


That would be cheating though, wouldn't it?

Amending a list into the contest to capitalise on the way the voting was going.

User avatar
Jeff K
The Original K
Posts: 32690
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 23:08
Location: Pennsylvania USA
Contact:

Re: 2010 report

Postby Jeff K » 06 Feb 2010, 14:07

I think it's been a good cup so far. There were a lot of lists I hated voting against because they had some good stuff on it but unfortunately went up against a list that I preferred better. Many lists had their own distinctive personality which is always a good thing to see. I'm also glad to see some new faces advance even at my own expense and it will be interesting how they'll build their lists as they progress. Will they become more conservative or will they follow their own path and take chances?
the science eel experiment wrote:Jesus Christ can't save BCB, i believe i can.

User avatar
sloopjohnc
Posts: 61917
Joined: 03 Jun 2004, 20:12
Location: One quake away from beachfront property
Contact:

Re: 2010 report

Postby sloopjohnc » 06 Feb 2010, 15:14

Hugh wrote:As a new player it's very interesting to see how many big hitters and perceived tastemakers have bitten the dust in the first round.


Why do you think they're so pissed off?

And then they blame the voters, weirdly giving some the rationalization that they're even more special.

Special loo-zahhhhs. I say.

But it is an interesting elitism around here. It's okay to like the music you'd dig up in WaxPoetics and Ugly Things, but it's not "approved" to put a current hip hop or neo-soul artist on your list. No one would know who the hell someone is who's making music now vs. someone who pushed the boundaries 40 FUCKING years ago.

But you gotta play the voters' tastes a little bit, while maintaining self-integrity.

I sorta jest, but to be serious, every year, there seems to be a few songs that crop up on lists. It's interesting seeing the collective musical consciousness of this place at work.
WG Kaspar wrote:I'm a happy bunny.

User avatar
kath
Groovy Queen of the Cosmos
Posts: 34181
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 15:20
Location: bama via new orleans

Re: 2010 report

Postby kath » 06 Feb 2010, 15:22

p€nk wrote:...a lot of lists have gone down the route of links and a lot of people are discovering new stuff: it's a great feeling when someone finds a track on your own list that really gets them going.


i think i've hit more links and heard more new songs i've liked in this one cup than i've done in four years of clicking youtube vids on this board.

just another reminder, neuro euros: americans can't spotify, for fucque's sake.

User avatar
Matty Red Sox
Shameless Canonist
Posts: 8179
Joined: 02 Nov 2003, 16:57
Location: from NYC and happy to be in Hiroshima, hated Jakarta

Re: 2010 report

Postby Matty Red Sox » 06 Feb 2010, 15:26

This has been a very good, but very long cup so far. Well run as always (thanks Griff), lots of new blood, there is some backlash from last year where it appeared that if your list wasn't lined with willfully obscure tunes, you weren't going anywhere - too canonistic. This year there is a mix of the canon and the new. It's refreshing.... the second round should be quite interesting.... let's see what the new patterns will bring.
the Eagles suck.

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52556
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: 2010 report

Postby Snarfyguy » 06 Feb 2010, 18:33

Matty Red Sox wrote:This has been a very good, but very long cup so far. Well run as always (thanks Griff), lots of new blood, there is some backlash from last year where it appeared that if your list wasn't lined with willfully obscure tunes, you weren't going anywhere - too canonistic. This year there is a mix of the canon and the new. It's refreshing.... the second round should be quite interesting.... let's see what the new patterns will bring.

It's hard to even think of songs that aren't either too canonist or too obscurantist. You get punished for going either way, it seems. The middle ground, tactically, is the place to shoot for, but where is it?

It's like solving a puzzle.
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.

User avatar
LeBaron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 42508
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: 2010 report

Postby LeBaron » 06 Feb 2010, 19:27

Snarfyguy wrote:It's hard to even think of songs that aren't either too canonist or too obscurantist. You get punished for going either way, it seems. The middle ground, tactically, is the place to shoot for, but where is it?

It's like solving a puzzle.


Yes, and it's like that every year. People have short memories.
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52556
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: 2010 report

Postby Snarfyguy » 06 Feb 2010, 19:42

Hon. Baron O'Boogie wrote:
Snarfyguy wrote:It's hard to even think of songs that aren't either too canonist or too obscurantist. You get punished for going either way, it seems. The middle ground, tactically, is the place to shoot for, but where is it?

It's like solving a puzzle.


Yes, and it's like that every year. People have short memories.

I didn't do it last year because I was on vacation. Plus, my memory sucks anyway.
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.

User avatar
Matty Red Sox
Shameless Canonist
Posts: 8179
Joined: 02 Nov 2003, 16:57
Location: from NYC and happy to be in Hiroshima, hated Jakarta

Re: 2010 report

Postby Matty Red Sox » 06 Feb 2010, 19:42

Snarfyguy wrote:
Matty Red Sox wrote:This has been a very good, but very long cup so far. Well run as always (thanks Griff), lots of new blood, there is some backlash from last year where it appeared that if your list wasn't lined with willfully obscure tunes, you weren't going anywhere - too canonistic. This year there is a mix of the canon and the new. It's refreshing.... the second round should be quite interesting.... let's see what the new patterns will bring.

It's hard to even think of songs that aren't either too canonist or too obscurantist. You get punished for going either way, it seems. The middle ground, tactically, is the place to shoot for, but where is it?

It's like solving a puzzle.


Exactly, Chris. There may have been an element of luck to it, but since Mike Boom has proved that he could do it twice in a row (possibly three?!?), there is absolutely a pattern. I have somewhat of an idea, but sometimes either my heart or my head rules the list and I wind up knocking myself out. Still my lists are like micro versions of my DJ sets where I have to keep a bunch of 20 somethings with MP3 tastes happy as well as pleasing myself (DJ masturbation?!) and others who want something a bit further afield.

I was only partially kidding in the sign-up sheets that this is a "genome project of BCB"... I would be honored to make it to the end of this, not because as Feeb puts it that I would be a master of the generic, but because I'd be able to DJ a party that the majority of BCB would be okay with... of course I have my personal favorites that I would almost never play while out when DJ'ing.

To me, DJ'ing and the BCB cup are not ways to show off my musical taste - I don't need validation there, I like what I like - but to please other people, to stretch their comfort zones without frightening them off, boring them, or pissing them off. I think that that's the trick to the cup.
the Eagles suck.

User avatar
sloopjohnc
Posts: 61917
Joined: 03 Jun 2004, 20:12
Location: One quake away from beachfront property
Contact:

Re: 2010 report

Postby sloopjohnc » 06 Feb 2010, 19:52

sloopjohnc wrote:But it is an interesting elitism around here. It's okay to like the music you'd dig up in WaxPoetics and Ugly Things, but it's not "approved" to put a current hip hop or neo-soul artist on your list. No one would know who the hell someone is who's making music now vs. someone who pushed the boundaries 40 FUCKING years ago.


I just looked at my list, looked at my post, looked at my list again, looked at my post, and thought to myself, "Doctor, heal thy fucking self."
WG Kaspar wrote:I'm a happy bunny.

User avatar
never/ever
Posts: 22086
Joined: 27 Jun 2008, 14:21
Location: Journeying through a burning brain

Re: 2010 report

Postby never/ever » 06 Feb 2010, 23:36

kath wrote:just another reminder, neuro euros: americans can't spotify, for fucque's sake.



Thank you Kath! Something I wanted to mention for some time. This goes for us Antipodeans too.


I think to make a list that pushes every single button with every single poster is a near-impossibility. I usually find a couple of tracks that I dig, a few I really like (those lists I tip most of the time) and a lot I particularly don't care about. I tended to vote against the more obscure lists not because of things being unknown (and a fair bit it was) but because what people consider to be an absolute underground classic in their book isn't sometimes in mine. I find it amusing that people surmise that more well-thought (obscurantist) lists are being voted out because of the unknown-factor rather than on the fact (some) people may think the list really is worse than their opposition.
Ever notice that anyone going slower than you is an idiot, but anyone going faster is a maniac?."

George Carlin

The Modernist

Re: 2010 report

Postby The Modernist » 07 Feb 2010, 01:23

Snarfyguy wrote:
Matty Red Sox wrote:This has been a very good, but very long cup so far. Well run as always (thanks Griff), lots of new blood, there is some backlash from last year where it appeared that if your list wasn't lined with willfully obscure tunes, you weren't going anywhere - too canonistic. This year there is a mix of the canon and the new. It's refreshing.... the second round should be quite interesting.... let's see what the new patterns will bring.

It's hard to even think of songs that aren't either too canonist or too obscurantist. You get punished for going either way, it seems. The middle ground, tactically, is the place to shoot for, but where is it?
.


Except so far that's not really true. The lists that have stuck to a recognisable BCB mainstream, a "canon" if you like, have been the ones getting through. For every "it seems very safe" type comment you will get three " it picks songs I like and know, and that's what I want" type comment, as well as loads of votes from the one letter on the keyboard brigade. Of course these kind of lists may struggle when they come up against the ones balancing classic picks with more astute personal choices. We shall have to see.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23299
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: 2010 report

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 07 Feb 2010, 01:57

Whee! The lament for the passing of all of the adventurous lists is an end of Round 1 tradition. Nice to see we are keeping it alive.

Here is the bottom line: Your eclectic, personal and entirely more noble than thou list was simply not as immediately inviting to the voters than the one you lost to. Sucks, but there it is. But in the end the winning list will be eclectic, personal and a hell of a lot more appealing than yours. Or not - but even so nobody will care.

Deal with it.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

Bungo the Mungo

Re: 2010 report

Postby Bungo the Mungo » 07 Feb 2010, 01:59

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Whee! The lament for the passing of all of the adventurous lists is an end of Round 1 tradition. Nice to see we are keeping it alive.

Here is the bottom line: Your eclectic, personal and entirely more noble than thou list was simply not as immediately inviting to the voters than the one you lost to. Sucks, but there it is. But in the end the winning list will be eclectic, personal and a hell of a lot more appealing than yours. Or not - but even so nobody will care.

Deal with it.


Whatever happens to your list, you've nothing whatsoever to be proud of. Right? :lol:

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23299
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: 2010 report

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 07 Feb 2010, 02:20

Sir John Coan wrote:
Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Whee! The lament for the passing of all of the adventurous lists is an end of Round 1 tradition. Nice to see we are keeping it alive.

Here is the bottom line: Your eclectic, personal and entirely more noble than thou list was simply not as immediately inviting to the voters than the one you lost to. Sucks, but there it is. But in the end the winning list will be eclectic, personal and a hell of a lot more appealing than yours. Or not - but even so nobody will care.

Deal with it.


Whatever happens to your list, you've nothing whatsoever to be proud of. Right? :lol:


Right. And eventually comes death.

Hope this has helped.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image