|
|
|
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 11:29 pm 
Their integrity. As far as I can see and know, which is by all means incredibly limited, they write and play the music that they want to play and sing. Their lyrics, whilst more image heavy than any other band I can think of - certainly more than in any other artist in my collection - have a realism and honesty about them that may be there in other parts of my collection, but not to the same extent. This may be in part down to their faith, and I believe it may be (of course, one reason certain classic songs are so big is because of this very thing, for example, Fairy-tale of New York - and i bet you anything our Shane aint a practicing Christian). Eisley's music itself is too wonderful for me to even attempt to put into words, for example the harmonies mixed with the keys on Brightly Wound, and I think that's partly because, especially prior to Room Noises, they really were doing what came naturally do them. Instrumentation may change, but as long as that sibling and cousin combo love each other and do the thing they want to and should do, Eisley will remain Eisley. _________________ She is handsome, she is pretty, she is the girl from Belfast City, she is courtin' one two three, please won't you tell me who is she? TheClassicRomance wrote: Facebook is a dirty skank blog! |
|
|
Joined: 03 Mar 2005 | Posts: 7598 | Location: Dundee, scotland
|
|
    |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:45 pm
***** 1) I have this impending sense that Eisley are gonna weigh in on that question quite definitively in the near future; F09 if the clip is to be believed; unless they loose some control on the final mixing- I hope they hand in the final mix on a single track and throw the masters in the lake somewhere- tell WB cleo ate -em. ******* remainder optional... 2) Not what is represented by most of combinations, thank goodness!!! 3) There is a (multi stranded) core essence of Eisley's music, which has been at the center of the best of their output for the duration, and has grown and matured, and there are things they have experimented with, in terms of music and identity, or maybe did in response to pressures (not explicit, necessarily) that maybe didn't workout so well and maybe wasn't really infused with their core essence. Their artistic essence as it appears to me from afar, is characterized by depth, complexity, an identifiable aesthetic sensibility, and a very deep and real spirituality (yes, they are also religious, but thats not what I'm talking about, necessarily, before the anti-religious crowd flames all over me- sometimes the to go together, sometimes not). 4) I suggest resisting the temptation to attribute the core sound to a given member or small subset of a band; it is usually somewhat composite, and influenced through interpretation strongly by members that might not have writing credit. Even through lineup changes, former members styles influence subsequent members- the first thing a newcomer has to do is study his predecessor's work. Obviously the voices are a big part of it- but other bands have ethereal harmonies, and they don't sound like Eisley; and the guitar sound is absolutely core; Chauntelle's characteristic, subtle riffing and sense of beautiful noise is all her own (although she would be horrified to know that I hear a hint of Robert Smith in some of her licks- I think they like one or two of the same scales). And don't underestimate the influence of the rhythm section on a band; I think Weston makes more of an impression, stylistically, than is recognized. Look at Steven Morris. All that said, I would stick my neck out and guess that the most singular, identifiable contributer to the aesthetic is Stacy. I have always gotten the sense that she is a very rare and original talent. A prodigious genius, really; no overstatement. What she was doing at 13 was so far beyond what so many (good) bands have produced by 25 or 30 in development, maturity, etc. But I would stick my neck out even further to suggest that Jonathan Wilson probably had an extremely influential and permanent impact on what became the core Eisley aesthetic. I don't have any evidence, you can just tell. But without a lot more info about the subtleties of their creative process, its really speculative to guess who's contributing exactly what. 5) I think part of Eisley's problem so far has been the penchant of the press and the PR crowd for trying to define their essence in some trite and pithy way, in terms of other things; in logical/metaphysical terms, though, like all great artists, the essence of their work is an identity, not a formula. It is what it is; it isn't defined in terms of other things. Comparable to other things (a novel combination of them), of course- like everything. None of the attempts to render the essence of Eisley in formulaic terms have done them any service; They've been abetting that tendency somewhat naively by being a bit overly forthcoming in interviews. Several of the greatest bands have found power in the tactic of mystique and anti-image. Eisley got sucked along in the current marketing fashion in music to over market an image and being perhaps over enthusiastically self revelatory, especially after they got signed. Understandable; they wanted to do their best- to prove they could do what was expected of them; and I think openness is probably a part of their (especially sherries) manner. That works for crumby bands; Great bands (like Eisley) though, I think usually do better by cultivating a somewhat taciturn and laconic disposition- and letting the music speak for itself. Over-explaining songs (in ways that either weren't meant to be taken seriously or were misunderstood/overinterpreted) has been a habitual pitfall for Eisley, which has gotten them stuck with detrimental characterizations by journalists that no-one would ever have arrived at by listening to the music. I've posted several times at length about what I think the essence of Eisley's music (at its best) is most comparable to, so I won't bore you all further by repeating it again here.. And I think based on what we've heard so far (and hope) come F09, their music will speak for itself (for change) in a big way. /ramble. OK- off the the picnic! PS. I agree about the integrity... Add perseverance and grit!! PPS. How they must laugh if they read any of this tripe that we all post on the board! |
|
|
Joined: 06 Jan 2008 | Posts: 1759 | Location: Dallas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:46 pm
Pantheon4 wrote: It's funny everyone seems to love RN these days considering that when the album came out damn near everyone tore it pieces. FLIP-FLOPPERS! I NAME YOU ALL! 
However, I'm inclined to agree with boone, Hannah, and Tyler (this is no conspiracy), the used of magic, either creepy or 'My Little Pony' gave something to the music that 'If You're Wondering' couldn't lyrically. Maybe it's because I got into them before Room Noises and Combinations, so songs like "Sea King", "Tree Tops", and "Over the Mountains" have a special place in my heart. Well, I didn't even know about the forum back then (and wouldn't have thought to look)- but I had seen Eisley like once some time before RN came out (I think it was just before they signed), and I wouldn't say I was a fan (wasn't paying enough attention to music to be a fan of anything) but I REALLY like it- It was beautiful and gritty. Then I hear RN, and it didn't represent what I'd heard and liked well. Poppy, slick and a bit generic by comparison, and the track selection wasn't totally representative of the sound I'd liked the most... But I'd heard them ONCE... in a dark club in deep Elum... After several drinks... Serendipitously... on an outing that wasn't even my idea. So what did I know. But it has several really really good songs on it that moronic production values just couldn't kill. And compared to Combinations it really does stand out as the official, studio record, for better or for worse, of SOME of Eisley's legitimately great work. So fans have come to love it- even if it wasn't the best version of some of the songs, or always the most faithful representation of what live fans loved about Eisley. Thats my take, anyway. So yeah. Flip Flop. 'Cause everything is relative. |
|
|
Joined: 06 Jan 2008 | Posts: 1759 | Location: Dallas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:18 pm
PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE.... lay off Combinations. It may not be the one you like the most, but that does not make it a bad record. It's a different record, and I know I am not alone in really liking it alot. People seem to be disowning it pretty vocally, and I just want to stand up and say I really like it, and I have been a fan since Marvelous Things EP so I am neither Vet or Noob, but I've heard the range of what they can do. From what I can tell by the clips, the early 50% of the new record is even more immediate and direct than Combinations, more grounded in reality, more raw and cathartic. If that is true, some of you guys are gonna have to change your tune to keep yourselves from throwing Eisley under the bus for abandoning your preferred sensibilities. Everybody's got their own taste, and I just want to say, for people who's tastes leans towards Combinations it's another AWESOME record by Eisley, just a different kind of record, different does not equate to inferior. _________________ yup, that's my name. FOR YOUR RATING PLEASURE: 4 LIKE Buttons, 1 NEUTRAL, 1 VEXED, 5 DISLIKE buttons. LC > FB           
 = personal fave  = Eisley fans should dig it
|
|
|
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 | Posts: 9641 | Location: Greater St. Louis Area
Last edited by wilsmith on Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:23 pm
wilsmith wrote: PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE.... lay off Combinations. It may not be the one you like the most, but that does not make it a bad record. It's a different record, and I know I am not alone in really liking it alot. People seem to be disowning it pretty vocally, and I just want to stand up and say I really like it, and I have been a fan since Marvelous Things EP so I am neither Vet or Noob, but I've heard the range of what they can do. From what I can tell by the clips, the early 50% of the new record is even more immediate and direct that Combinations, more grounded in reality, more raw and cathartic.
If that is true, some of you guys are gonna either have to change your tune to keep yourselves from throwing Eisley under the bus for abandoning your preferred sensibilities. Everybody's got their own taste, and I just want to say, for people who's tastes leans towards Combinations it's another AWESOME record by Eisley, just a different kind of record, different does not equate to inferior. A-freakin'-men. _________________ My photography:www.jamiemphoto.com You can't spell awesome without emo...backwards! -Julie definingawesome (11:44:11 PM): Eisley shivers our timbers |
|
|
Joined: 15 Aug 2003 | Posts: 25184 | Location: East Texas
|
|
 |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 4:01 pm
wilsmith wrote: PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE.... lay off Combinations. It may not be the one you like the most, but that does not make it a bad record. It's a different record, and I know I am not alone in really liking it alot. People seem to be disowning it pretty vocally, and I just want to stand up and say I really like it, and I have been a fan since Marvelous Things EP so I am neither Vet or Noob, but I've heard the range of what they can do. From what I can tell by the clips, the early 50% of the new record is even more immediate and direct than Combinations, more grounded in reality, more raw and cathartic.
If that is true, some of you guys are gonna have to change your tune to keep yourselves from throwing Eisley under the bus for abandoning your preferred sensibilities. Everybody's got their own taste, and I just want to say, for people who's tastes leans towards Combinations it's another AWESOME record by Eisley, just a different kind of record, different does not equate to inferior. ...but the threads not about whether a record is good or bad, its about what represents the core essence of Eisley. I think, whether they like the record or not, not everyone here seems convinced that as much of that core essence comes through in the material from Combinations. Stylistically, the musical direction they took on the tour, and some of the subsequent EP work, seems to evidence that Combinations was more of a detour than a direction or evolution. The stuff we've heard from the upcoming album seems to confirm it... It sounds much more of an evolution of and successor to the best of their earlier stuff than combinations does, to me. Combinations was written very differently, as I understand it, than most of the stuff that came before and after; mostly in a very short period, very quickly, at their producers house in California; frankly, in the bosom of the industry, and with an immediate concern for getting a salable record out, with the clock (and budget) running. Thats not, perhaps, where Eisley's best music has usually come from. Maybe it was that they felt like they had to demonstrate that they were pros now and could produce on demand, I don't know, but the writing just didn't seem to have the fastidious attention to detail that I think shows up in a lot of their best work- it just didn't have the same kind of man-hours in it. I think your fears about fans throwing Eisley under the bus are unfounded. Everyone including my acerbic, cynical self seems to be ecstatic about everything they've heard so far. Combinations isn't awful. It has a couple of songs I like on it, even after a lot of listens. 10c even sounds like Eisley (in vaguely the Golly Sandra tradition). Its a truly great song. Should have been pushed hard, IMHO. ICBTFY holds up pretty well too. Invasion sounds like Eisley, simplified and formularized to produce a single for top 40 radio. I liked it the first five or six times I heard it, then got bored. It (like most of the LP) wasn't offensive, and evidenced the talent that we all know as Eisley. It just didn't have the depth and development we've come to expect. And that was kind of the story of the album. Come Clean's only real flaw is that it is simpler and more structurally predictable than it might have been, and becomes repetitive very quickly. With more development, it could have grown into a great song. Just like Smarter went from pretty good to masterful between the Waco clip I saw and the Brewtones clip, by way of some further elaboration. Its no indictment of the band to suggest that they've done and can do, much better work. It would be worse, I think, to suggest otherwise. No one is going to think it damming that there are Eisley fans that aren't as ecstatic about combinations. Its a sophomore album. Thats par for the course. We all still believe in Eisley, or we wouldn't be here, anxiously awaiting their next release. I didn't think much of Neon Bible either- I have much less use for it than combinations, but I'm still convinced AF can tap the talent that gave rise to Funeral again. It didn't go away. Because Funeral was an absolutely outstanding piece of work. |
|
|
Joined: 06 Jan 2008 | Posts: 1759 | Location: Dallas
Last edited by inorbit on Sat Jul 04, 2009 4:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 4:38 pm
So what if you're wrong, that the thread you draw back to RM on LP3 takes you instead to the very detour you have no use for? I just say that, cause Combinations was a more "Rock" record, regardless of how it was made, and this record is really rocking from what I hear, and I like that, and to me that points back to Combinations and not Room Noises. As far as the essence of Eisley, some people have gone out of their way to say Combinations didn't represent it. As far as LP's go, it's a little premature to define their essence by disqualifying one LP 2 albums and a few EPs into their output, particularly in a band with multiple songwriters. And to toss out a sophomore slump reference, well, argh... maybe I'm alone, but it was not a slump to my ear, it was a breath of fresh air. Don't know why I'm so contentious tonight, but I guess I am really getting a sense that these songs are GREAT, and we are all hearing what we want to hear in the bits that are out there. So when they are out there and reality sinks in, our presumptions will be founded or squashed. So, you hear one thing in these new songs, I hear another. Maybe they've found a sound that is so good we'll all just delude ourselves into thinking there's no way it sounds like something we don't like? _________________ yup, that's my name. FOR YOUR RATING PLEASURE: 4 LIKE Buttons, 1 NEUTRAL, 1 VEXED, 5 DISLIKE buttons. LC > FB
= personal fave = Eisley fans should dig it
|
|
|
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 | Posts: 9641 | Location: Greater St. Louis Area
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:19 am
Eisley's essence for me is something I find in everything they do. Just in being themselves. Being a family. I think is very noticeable in their music. Someone mentioned it in this thread - that they are so good at synchronizing everything, making a unified sound filled with all of their individual sounds. I don't think it lies in one particular person's influence. Sure, some songs are mainly Sherriish, some more Stacyish, but Eisley is the five of them together. Even if it's one person playing and singing the whole song. When you think of it as the part of a whole album you get the sense that this is the band's song, not the person's song. Part of Eisley's beauty is the different voices weaved with the instruments. There are other artists that do similar things with vocals, especially in bands with more than one singer, but the way Eisley does is unique for me. Also because of the way they are all equal, important. I think that's the point in which they are similar to Fleetwood Mac. No frontman, leader or anything. Each of them with their thing and they all together, as a band should be. Imagery in lyrics and unique melodies are also a great part of Eisley's essence but these things evolve. I don't really think they lost that quality of their lyrics in Combinations. Many Funerals, for example, has always made me see things very vividly in my head. Or compare the melodies and guitar parts from A Sight to Behold and Over the Mountains... very different but still Eisley. Each era has it's own distinct sound. Of course it won't stay the same. Not a single person stays the same and does what they do the same way. They are different, but looking back I think you can say that there isn't any other way in which they could have grown that makes sense. Sort of like a child grows. At least I see myself that way. I'm not at all the same I was as a younger kid, but what I am is the only sensible way in which I could have turned out. It was not clear then, but it is now. But this topic is not about me, hah. What I meant is, Eisley has grown. They can't stay the same. But they are still themselves. |
|
|
Joined: 06 Dec 2007 | Posts: 623 | Location: Bulgaria
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 11:18 am
Everything eisley has done is their essence. Being a small band on a major lablel, touring with coldplay, this forum, the fact that they are all related. I loved combinations, I think it was a major part of eisley's essence. It may not have been as dreamy barbie rock as Room Noises, but it didn't lack imagination at all. After watching the last studio clip, I am very happy with where eisley is going. _________________ http://www.flickr.com/photos/karatherecluse http://www.rosewhiteboyhood.tumblr.com |
|
|
Joined: 31 Mar 2007 | Posts: 419 | Location: Illinois
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:24 pm
The girls' voices most obviously distinguish Eisley's music from other music. But, like others said, the imaginative imagery found in Room Noises sets them apart as well. I love both albums, but I discovered Eisley after Combinations was out for awhile, and Room Noises was what got me hooked. Also, the down-to-earth vibe I get from the band is refreshing... Most importantly, though, they're from Texas!
|
|
|
Joined: 30 May 2008 | Posts: 309 | Location: above the tree tops
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 11:08 am
wilsmith wrote: cause Combinations was a more "Rock" record, regardless of how it was made, and this record is really rocking from what I hear, and I like that, and to me that points back to Combinations and not Room Noises I would probably never choose the word "rock" to describe Combinations. Just because Room Noises is as far from Rock as you can get doesn't make Combinations a rock album. Now, Over the Mountains, Dream For Me and Head Against the Sky could certainly receive that label. I'd even say Mr. Pine has a bit of rocking at a couple points in the song. (This is why I love the pre-Room Noises stuff; that plus the spookiness of Blackened Crown and The Escaping Song.) I honestly think some of the songs that attempted to be rockier on Combinations fell ultimately flat. I think it may have had a bit to do with the attempt at rock vocals, which (in my humble opinion) the band should stay away from altogether. For those reasons, I do not care for Many Funerals or A Sight to Behold. Go Away had a bit of a rock feel in the chorus that actually worked because the vocals didn't turn into, well, screeching. The mellower/lower vocals + rock guitars + the Rhodes + eerie stories/feel = the magic formula for Eisley (to me). The rawness of pre-RN, the vocals/charm of RN, and the maturity/skill of Combinations, I suppose. Sorry, that was all kind of a big jumble of thoughts. _________________ 
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2005 | Posts: 5051 | Location: TX/NYC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 11:49 am
I tend to ramble, so I'll make a list of what I love First and foremost, the vocal play between Stacy and Sherri in songs like Brightly Wound and Taking Control, not only in singing different parts all together but in their creative harmonies. Stacy's songwriting. From what i've gathered/ascertained from forum talk and from talking to the girls, Stacy's songwriting tends to be more ambiguous and "poetic," while Sherri's is usually more straight forward. [size=7]Cases in point: Aristicats, The Mainframe. There is a place for both in Eisley's music, certainly...do not start calling me a Sherri-hater or something equally ridiculous. 
The piano/keyboard/Rhodes compositions. I love them to death, (and it seems like they get buried underneath all the other instrumentation in live performance sometimes.) I could really go for 2 or 3 absolutely keys-centric songs on LP3. And, of course, eisley could not EVER be Eisley without Chauntelle going all "hairbrush karaoke" on stage. I want to *hear* her infectious attitude soon. On the Eiswood video, when she busts out singing? I need that feeling on a CD
|
|
|
Joined: 12 Sep 2005 | Posts: 1182 | Location: Houston
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 11:56 am
vivalaspopie wrote: I would probably never choose the word "rock" to describe Combinations. Just because Room Noises is as far from Rock as you can get doesn't make Combinations a rock album. I think I may have a broader definition of "Rock". I mean songs that aren't ballads, upbeat, and with driving rhythms. It's like how the Talking Heads were a Rock band, in a "subgenre" called New Wave, but it was still Rock. It's all relative. I could consider all the songs save for Come Clean, Combinations, and If Your Wondering, Rock songs. Just not Rock in the most contemporary sense. People are Retro-fitting labels on artist. Early Elvis get's labeled Rockabilly now, when to many it was just Rock and Roll back in the day. Chuck Berry gets labeled Rhythm and Blues, when Back then He was just Rock and Roll. Now, they seldom call any music Rock and Roll. We call stuff "Rock" Soft Rock Hard Rock Alternative Rock Indie Rock Modern Rock College Rock Art Rock Punk Rock Southern Rock Country Rock (the 70's version) Blues Rock Pop Rock Folk Rock Arena Rock and so on and so on and so on... So, for me, Combinations is 70% some kind of "Rock", and to me Room Noises was 50% of some kind of "Rock". I enjoy driving places fast on the highway to it. I get that vibe more from Combinations. To each their own. I just wanted to clarify. _________________ yup, that's my name. FOR YOUR RATING PLEASURE: 4 LIKE Buttons, 1 NEUTRAL, 1 VEXED, 5 DISLIKE buttons. LC > FB
= personal fave = Eisley fans should dig it
|
|
|
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 | Posts: 9641 | Location: Greater St. Louis Area
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 12:25 pm
wilsmith wrote: vivalaspopie wrote: I would probably never choose the word "rock" to describe Combinations. Just because Room Noises is as far from Rock as you can get doesn't make Combinations a rock album. I think I may have a broader definition of "Rock". I mean songs that aren't ballads, upbeat, and with driving rhythms. It's like how the Talking Heads were a Rock band, in a "subgenre" called New Wave, but it was still Rock. It's all relative. I could consider all the songs save for Come Clean, Combinations, and If Your Wondering, Rock songs. Just not Rock in the most contemporary sense. People are Retro-fitting labels on artist. Early Elvis get's labeled Rockabilly now, when to many it was just Rock and Roll back in the day. Chuck Berry gets labeled Rhythm and Blues, when Back then He was just Rock and Roll. Now, they seldom call any music Rock and Roll. We call stuff "Rock" Soft Rock Hard Rock Alternative Rock Indie Rock Modern Rock College Rock Art Rock Punk Rock Southern Rock Country Rock (the 70's version) Blues Rock Pop Rock Folk Rock Arena Rock and so on and so on and so on... So, for me, Combinations is 70% some kind of "Rock", and to me Room Noises was 50% of some kind of "Rock". I enjoy driving places fast on the highway to it. I get that vibe more from Combinations. To each their own. I just wanted to clarify. I would just say it's pop music. Pop rock at most. They don't fit into any of those other categories. It's much more vocal and melody driven and thusly I would deem it pop. _________________
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2005 | Posts: 5051 | Location: TX/NYC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 12:45 pm
^ Yeah, I guess I'm just more "Liberal" with my use of the term "Rock". For the Record, Itunes files Room Noises under "Rock" and Combinations under "Alternative" _________________ yup, that's my name. FOR YOUR RATING PLEASURE: 4 LIKE Buttons, 1 NEUTRAL, 1 VEXED, 5 DISLIKE buttons. LC > FB
= personal fave = Eisley fans should dig it
|
|
|
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 | Posts: 9641 | Location: Greater St. Louis Area
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laughing City Forum Index -> eisleyBlog -> What's the true essence of "Eisley"?
Page 2 of 9 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
|
|
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
|
|
