Panda Bear – Tomboy

                    Ah yes, the moment we’ve all been waiting for has finally arrived. Tomboy dropped today. What did the critics think? Usually questions such as that one are tossed aside as people claim “Hey, just enjoy the music”. Due to Panda Bear’s heavy critical darling status, it is basically impossible to judge it without considering his previous success with Animal Collective and on his own album “Person Pitch”.  I was curious as to how critics would react to his new, considerably less sprawling soundscapes or ‘songs’ as they are popularly known.  

                Panda Bear teased us with this album for roughly the past nine months. Countless cities were visited, with him allegedly tweaking the songs over and over again. EPs got released during this period to build up interest and anticipation. Though he said a lot of these songs were worked over again and again before becoming the album versions, I don’t personally hear a lot of difference between these versions and the EP versions. As I listen to it, it reminds me of the slight disappointment I felt when Real Estate released their album which was a collection of EPs rather than an album in the proper sense of the term. Familiarity with the EPs will dull one’s senses to the full impact of the album. If you’re reading this anyway, you’ve probably listened to these songs in EP form already. 

                TheNeedleDrops panned this album, giving in a ‘light 5’. Pitchfork gave it an ‘8.5’ below Panda Bear’s magnum opus “Person Pitch”, though most didn’t expect him to really beat the ‘9.4’ unless the album versions were extremely massive re-working. Most of these songs aren’t, excluding some additional reverb and sound effects. A few songs even sound weaker in their fully polished form than they did on the EPs. “Alsatian Darn” possibly my favorite song off of all the EPs, sounds weaker with this mix, as the song doesn’t hit as strongly as it did before now that excess sonic junk has been added. 

                What makes this a harder thing to love is the more ambient direction of a lot of the songs. “Person Pitch” had ornate structures, epic lengths, and multiple hypnotic sections. “Tomboy” feels awkward in comparison. On one hand, the lengths suggest a greater pop sense. Yet the songs are too spaced out to be considered accessible. By keeping the lengths short, Panda Bear avoids diving deep into sound like he did for “Person Pitch”. In many ways, the album appears to be a compromise between experimental and accessible, without being close enough to either side to be fully satisfying. Nothing is striking on this; the experimentation comes across more as leftover ideas than anything fully fleshed out.

               

                Expectations ran extremely high for this release. Unlike Avey Tare, who most people didn’t bother paying attention to, Panda Bear had something of a reputation as having the most active musical life outside of Animal Collective. No doubt this release will be held up not only to Panda Bear’s previous expectations, but Animal Collective’s “Merriweather Post Pavilion”. Such comparisons, while somewhat unreasonable, are unavoidable. Since they are otherwise so close-lipped about what they do, people need to read into each release they have as guidance for what may come next.

                I don’t know what is next for Panda Bear. This album had raised hopes for a great deal of people. Even while it is a good album, it is not a great album. Unfortunately people will interpret ‘good’ in this instance with the term ‘not great’ rather than accepting it as a fairly decent addition to Panda Bear’s discography. Panda Bear didn’t help things with constantly resetting the release date and killing off a great deal of buzz and goodwill of various music reviewers. Personally, I’d say listen to it yourself and form your own opinion. Reviews of this are too scatter-shot to summarize, but just don’t expect another Person Pitch.

How to Calculate Buzz

Your buzz may look a little different

                I cover a lot of bands on here. Some of them get a lot of buzz, some of them don’t. The ones that don’t I feel sad about, like most people just ‘don’t get it’. But as I dive ever deeper into this sea of sound, I’ve noticed a few things. Call them foreshadowing, call them a set-up, but they should be called something.

                Various reviewers start interviews with a said band, you can tell from the interview how enthusiastic the interviewer is about the album. Does ‘looking forward to’ get factored into to the equation. Is there even an equation in the mathematics of buzz?

                After consulting with an unemployed twenty something college-level math professor currently dating a 46 year old Vietnamese physical therapist, he helped me out. Here’s what we have as major components:

1.       Does it show improvement from their last album? If their last album was amazing, then subtract a point before it was released. Most artists don’t have an upward trajectory from amazing to amazing, there’s bound to be disappointments.  Did the last album suck? How hard did it suck? Did it suck so hard that they are in need of a revision for their next album (see Of Montreal for examples of both, via “Hissing Fauna”, “Skeletal Lamping” and “False Priest” for the full life of this)

2.       Have they done anything worthy of attention, either good or bad? Were there public breakdowns, like a ‘WAVVES’ style hissy fit in Spain? If the breakdown occurs overseas, ignore it. If it occurs within the United States, subtract 1 point (see Salem). If you created a viral video add a point (see Dan Deacon with that Cups stuff).

3.       What is the level of blogger anticipation? Did various blogs bitch about how you pushed back the release date? Anger towards various levels of teasing, subtract one point (see potentially Panda Bear). If they are thrilled about that one track you posted up, add a point (see: Twin Shadow). 

4.       Be honest: when did you first receive the leak? The larger this number is (say 3 weeks instead of 1) shows how many people were gunning to get it as soon as possible. Usually you add about 1-2 points on a (1-10) scale for this. 

5.       Any sex: If the artist is in some relationship, figure out what kind of relationship: sweet relationship add one, just recovered from a bad breakup add two, had a child add three, is single add one, got divorced minus one (see Avey Tare), is addicted to sex and seeking treatment minus one, leaked nudes add four (see Kanye West).

6.       Is the genre really hot right now: Getting on the right boat is important! No one cares about Post-Rock as much anymore, I’m sorry, it hurts me to say this, but it is true. If you’re in a hip genre add 2, unhip genre minus 1, if you’re in a genre that is about to experience a backlash in popularity minus 3. Math hurts.

7.       Where are you from: This matter a lot more than anyone’s going to tell you! But I’ll tell you. Coming from a place uniformly disliked around the country (like Las Vegas, Florida, Long Island) take away a point. Do you come from some totally random, never heard of place where no one could have an opinion, like Judith Gap, Montana or South Carolina? If so, add two points. You managed to overcome that uncool location. Cities are tricky, but generally speaking if you’re on a coastal city, add a point. From a city in the Midwest? I’m sorry, but the people who write many music reviews are from the coasts. Please remove one point from your score.

8.       How old are you: Being cool lasts only so long. If you are in your teens, add a point. If you are in your twenties, add two points. Here’s where things get interesting. Are you in your 30s? I’m sorry, but you lose a point. Getting into the middle of your life? In your 40s, minus 2 points. In your 50s, minus 3 points. But if you’re in your 60s, you usually enjoy some late career revival, whether or not it is deserved. For even making your music that late in life, add four points. Add 5 points if you’re in your 70s, but by then your music is probably really shitty and you’ll get a ‘5 point something’ for at least showing up. Think of it as winning a ‘best attendance’ award, like Max Fisher in Rushmore. 

9.       Are you related to something, someone: Related to someone lame (like Alan Thicke) remove a point. Being related to someone cool (like you roomed with Richard D. James) adds a point. Having been in another medium (either as a film maker, etc.) adds a point. Doing this ‘not for the money’ and in your spare time because you love the music, subtract a point. 

10.   Define your music: If you make experimental music, subtract two points. If you make accessible experimental music (like soothing guitar drones) add two points. You use quirky instruments: add three points.

11.   Who interviews you: A random blogger means no change. Nobody cares about random bloggers. If the New York Times interviews you, minus two points. If Pitchfork interviews you, add three points (see Toro Y Moi). If TinyMixTapes interviews you, add one point (see Sun Araw). If no one bothers interviewing you before your album comes out, minus one point.

Obviously these will help you decide how you want to brand yourself, your band and your sound before you make subjective music stuff. Keep these in mind as you hone your craft. Maybe you’ll need to move or lie about your age. Do you know anyone who could start cool rumors about you before you release a thing? Keep all things in mind as you work on your sound. I hope I’ve helped guide your band towards fame and relevancy. 

                Part two (out tomorrow) explores the actual numerical scores as offered by Pitchfork, a site for which is one half hate, one half love.