Vampire Weekend

Originally Posted by unpainted huffheinz

Click to expand...

You think a band built out of a third rate Mark E Smith impression is the best of a decade?

Have you heard Pavement's music?

Originally Posted by unpainted huffheinz

Click to expand...

You think a band built out of a third rate Mark E Smith impression is the best of a decade?

Originally Posted by shoreman1782

Click to expand...

Could Modest Mouse could be considered the band of the 00s? At least if you're a rockist. Three solid albums, a commercial breakout, positive critical reception, etc. You can even chart the metamorphosis of 00s cultural marker Pitchfork in the reviews of the three albums, from adulatory and self-deprecating, to trying really hard and saying nothing much, to being too cool for anything.
I think so, but I think it also starts wandering into gray area between the 90s and 00s. A lot of their merit depends on their work from the 90s. If they had come out with the albums that they did in the 00s as a brand new band, I think they would have been considered just another indie rock band. Radiohead could just as easily be considered a contender in that respect. The White Stripes could be in the running. They unleashed a fury of retro and consistently put out innovative, accessible albums.

Originally Posted by Dedalus

Click to expand...

The White Stripes

Bingo.

Originally Posted by Roy Biggins

Click to expand...

I'm interested in knowing who you would consider to be the band of the 1990s.
Radiohead. OK Computer (album of the 90s) and The Bends are the two great albums that I couldn't think of for this decade, and Pablo Honey was the warm up act. They haven't come close since. There are other mentions (REM, U2, Nirvana, Pumpkins, Oasis...) but I don't think anyone else really competes. Nirvana was indirectly responsible for most of the terrible music that flooded 1995-2005.

I think we all might have some slightly different concept of what "band of the decade" means. For the 1990s, love them, hate them, or don't really care about them, I think Nirvana has to be on any short list for this title. They will probably be deemed the definitive band of the 1990s, 30 years from now.

Personally, I think there were better representations of that particular movement, but hard to deny the impact on general culture.

^Yeah but that's "definitive" in the same sense Kanye is "definitive" now. The 90s were a very different decade though.

Originally Posted by JD_May

Click to expand...

^Yeah but that's "definitive" in the same sense Kanye is "definitive" now. The 90s were a very different decade though.

I agree, it was a very different decade. The Wings knew how to win the Cup back then.

Well they won 2 cups in the 90s, and 2 cups in the 00s... and only one other team has won 2 cups in this decade (Devils, thank you Marty)... so I cast doubt on your recollections, sir.

I second the motion to listen to the Discovery album.

"Orange Shirt" is definately the summer joint...


BTW, "band of the decade" is too subjective to even try rationalizing.

Originally Posted by JD_May

Click to expand...

^Yeah but that's "definitive" in the same sense Kanye is "definitive" now. The 90s were a very different decade though.

I don't know about this. Kanye is a master hitmaker, but I don't think his music is going to hold up.

I can see radio stations playing U2, Radiohead, and Coldplay in 30 years. I don't see them playing Kanye unless it's some kind of throwback program on Friday nights, like much of the 80s pop you rarely hear today unless it's couched within some kind of conscious camp. I mean, shoot, "Stronger" even sounds dated already.

Originally Posted by shoreman1782

Click to expand...

The most sensible thing you've ever said. Although Nirvana is probably right, despite it being the consensus. You can blame most rock since then on Nirvana, no? Nickelback is Nirvana's marsupialed Canadian nephew.

Could Modest Mouse could be considered the band of the 00s? At least if you're a rockist. Three solid albums, a commercial breakout, positive critical reception, etc. You can even chart the metamorphosis of 00s cultural marker Pitchfork in the reviews of the three albums, from adulatory and self-deprecating, to trying really hard and saying nothing much, to being too cool for anything.

I'll have to concede that few bands ever have been as definitive as Nirvana. Had they done more, I'd say hands down they would win.

Don't want to sound cliched here but Modest Mouse was good--until they sold out (which I don't say pejoratively). That album (which I can't remember the name of) was merely OK. By Modest Mouse standards it was awful.

Originally Posted by JD_May

Click to expand...

Radiohead. OK Computer (album of the 90s) and The Bends are the two great albums that I couldn't think of for this decade, and Pablo Honey was the warm up act. They haven't come close since. There are other mentions (REM, U2, Nirvana, Pumpkins, Oasis...) but I don't think anyone else really competes.

Nirvana was indirectly responsible for most of the terrible music that flooded 1995-2005.

Radiohead is a good name.

Originally Posted by JesseJB

Click to expand...

BTW, "band of the decade" is too subjective to even try rationalizing.

I think you take my inebriated prognostications too seriously.

Really I'm surprised to see such an asinine thread go on for so long. Although I shouldn't be, I've seen mafoofan's impact on SF.

Originally Posted by edinatlanta

Click to expand...

Don't want to sound cliched here but Modest Mouse was good--until they sold out (which I don't say pejoratively). That album (which I can't remember the name of) was merely OK. By Modest Mouse standards it was awful.


I don't mean to make this about Modest Mouse, who probably aren't even in my personal top 10. Dedalus has a good point that if MM hadn't had Interstate 8 etc. in the 90s, snobs like us probably wouldn't count them among the greats now. Which album are you talking about? Although I whined about selling out when Moon and Antarctica came out, it's probably the MM album I listen to the most. Even Good News is a pretty strong record.

BTW I like this thread and I'm listening to Cape Cod Kwassa Kwassa right now, and it's annoying the **** out of me that I love it.

Originally Posted by JD_May

Click to expand...

Well they won 2 cups in the 90s, and 2 cups in the 00s... and only one other team has won 2 cups in this decade (Devils, thank you Marty)... so I cast doubt on your recollections, sir.
You should doubt my recollections, as my memory is short. All I care about is this year! And I was there for the 1990's wins, so those are the only ones that count. And FWIW, I don't think U2 can be talked about as a 1990s band. They were the band of the decade for the 1980s.

Originally Posted by JD_May

Click to expand...

Radiohead. OK Computer (album of the 90s) and The Bends are the two great albums that I couldn't think of for this decade, and Pablo Honey was the warm up act. They haven't come close since. There are other mentions (REM, U2, Nirvana, Pumpkins, Oasis...) but I don't think anyone else really competes. Nirvana was indirectly responsible for most of the terrible music that flooded 1995-2005.
Radiohead are responsible for a large chunk of awful music as well. At least Nirvana clones are entertaining to watch. I think all of the excitement over Radiohead mostly came from people who had never heard of anything outside of basic rock music; and I always thought that was really annoying. The type of people who were probably really, really into things like Oasis, and were completely oblivious to the existence of things like Autechre, or even rock-ish bands like Stereolab who were actually expanding on rock music (which is what the big deal was over Radiohead). Although Radiohead were fun to listen to at the time, I think it has aged very poorly, unlike Nirvana. In Utero or a live Nirvana show in the year 2009 are still as mind blowing as they were when Nirvana actually existed. With that being said, I think the White Stripes, or Jack White in general, is the only thing that has been able to pick up where Nirvana left off. Trail of Dead really could, and should have blown up in a big way (and At the Drive-In), but people no longer cared about them after they stopped writing Sonic Youth songs; and the way music was being consumed at the time was changing so rapidly that it made everything so different.