Low - 'Drums & Guns' (March, 2007)

soundslike1981

Well-known member
Doubtful whether Low is a concern Dissensians follow, but in case anyone felt like giving them a chance--this new record may be the time to do so.

As far as "indie rock" acts go, they've always seemed pretty unique to me, flying in the face of the flacid laziness I associate with the revival-laden, ennui-loaded genre (post-'85 or so). They were focused like a laser beam, careful and studied when they began. Over the years they thawed in interesting ways, covering a lot of territory without giving up their core aesthetic of spartan simplicity and generally quiet sounds.

This new record is a wonderful step forward for a musical (and literal) marriage in its tenth year, as the band has discovered a a darker, sharper edge, eschewing for the most part the flirtation with bombast of their last record ('The Great Destroyer'). In my opinion, they came into their own about five years into their run (with the 'Songs for a Dead Pilot' EP), and have maintained a very high level since. The album is mixed in a very unusual fashion, lots of sounds panned hard right (esp. vocals) or left that would usually be placed in the middle of the soundstage, to excellent effect in my opinion. Without trying to cop a late-90s Warp Records futurism (a la, say, Thom Yorke) most of the tracks revolve around simple samples/loops, lots of space in the mix, most elements recorded close and dry, with with vague hints of dubby/reverbed space lurking low in the mix. The vocals have that vibretto-less plaintiveness/earnestness they've always had, Mimi the ice queen/nurturing church mother sound; but Alan has added some subtly darker tones that may reflect his recent mental health battles. There is almost no "rock" guitar on the album, very little "live" drumming, and some great basslines.

Anyway, to cite a closest point of comparison, it is closest to the collaborative EP the band released with Spring Heeled Jack a few years back, which I liked very much at the time, but perhaps a little more spare/aggressive.

I'd be curious indeed what people here would find in the album, if anything. I honsestly can't imagine what response will be from various sectors--it could be embraced by surprising circles, or rejected by longstanding fans, or ignored by everyone entirely (it's not an album that screams for attention). My only complaint is that the album is a little front-heavy and seems to lose some focus after the first side. But on the whole, I'm quite impressed.
 
Last edited:

turtles

in the sea
This part,
most of the tracks revolve around simple samples/loops,
and this part,
There is almost no "rock" guitar on the album, very little "live" drumming, and some great basslines.

makes this sound really intriguing. Low is actually one of the few indie acts that I consistently have time for; I agree with you, soundslike, that they seem to have their own take on things and have stuck to it with little regard of outside trends. So I'd be very interested in hearing them change their style to a less rock-oriented format. You've got me excited, at least!
 

turtles

in the sea
wow.

i feel kind of vindicated for my continued support of low given that they could put out a record like this so long into their careers. On first listen i'm really digging it, it's still feels like low, but it sounds quite different from their previous work, exactly as you've described. Maybe this is a silly way of putting it, but it kind of feels like they've moved away from small town minnesota into a big, industrial city or something. It really is an "update" of their sound, as in, bringing it up to date, to our modern, mechanized, messed-up world. Any album where the first lines are "all the soldiers, they're all are gonna die"...

yeah, really quite blown away. don't know what to say...thanks! :)
 

mistersloane

heavy heavy monster sound
Thanks for the pointer to this, I would never had checked it out, haven't enjoyed Low's output to date so far, but this is really very good indeed. A very nice surprise, and perfect for the weather here in London at the moment.

I love it when people who don't do drugs make druggy music, it's always much weirder than music made by people on drugs.
 

mos dan

fact music
Doubtful whether Low is a concern Dissensians follow

i am listening to Things We Lost in the Fire as i type.. and not just cos i saw this thread and was reminded of them, either - pure coincidence :)

"They were focused like a laser beam" - nice reference lol

thanks so much for the upload, will share my thoughts when i've had a listen.

i thought The Great Destroyer was disappointing, but Trust and TWLITF are constants in my life, pretty much the only indie i still return to regularly..

i saw them perform at The Union Chapel on the evening of the 2million-strong anti-war march in London (March 03?) - that was an extraordinary day/night - so exhausted from the march, then soothed/saddened/inspired in equal measure in this glorious former church in north ldn...
 

tate

Brown Sugar
Soundslike, I want to thank you for taking the time to share the record. I downloaded it last night as soon as it appeared on your post and listened to it twice, and again today, repeatedly.

It is an impressive record, I agree. Minimal but lush in its own way, beautiful on headphones. The balance of electronic and organic comes off as holistic, confident, and utterly convincing, not thrown together as so many indie acts with token digital nods often come off.

1:50 into "Belarus" and I am quite pleased. "Breaker" is one of the more appealing melodies I've heard from an indie record recently, though I could do without the backwards guitar near the end (which is a bit too obvious for my taste, and sort of screams out, 'we flipped the tape, whoa'). "Dragonfly" is lovely, though I would have mixed her voice louder than his. "Sandinista" is a beautiful example of a melody in the phyrgian mode, with the minor second in the descending line on the word 'sandanista,' which gives the song its distinctive identity (elsewhere in the song there are melodies on the major second, of course). Lots of hard panning right and left, as you mention. Part of the magic of the percussion on "Always Fade" derives from the panning.

The second half of the record is slightly less striking (again, this is after four listens). Found "dust on the window" a bit forgettable, and "hatchet" with its chorus about the beatles and the stones, it was a bit too cute for me. Things picked back up with "Take Your Time," which is gooooorgeous! The juxaposition of the background vocals, the piano, and the casio-lite percussion sounds is somehow utterly singular. The light distortion on the vocals during the second chorus, the ever present choral texture . . . very distinctive. And the way she/he almost begins to swing the piano chords during the last 30 seconds of the song, after playing it quite straight til then. "Your Poison" is okay, but "Your Silence" will no doubt find fans, b/c it's quite catchy and not a little bombastic. "Murderer" is very memorable, and eerie. The main melody to "Vioent Past" is a bit too reminiscent of a Rainer Maria song for my taste, but that's probably neither here nor there. A very promising record indeed.

HOWEVER, there are a few more things to say about Low.

First of all, they've been around longer than ten years. I bought my first Low album in '95: Long Division, which was recorded in the fall of '94, was already their second record. On beautiful clear vinyl, with one of my favorite songs recorded in the 90s ("Shame"). Long Division was championed back in the day by the hardest of the Touch & Go fans even moreso than by so-called 'indie' people. That's one of the interesting things about the band, they were adopted by the Albini-types from the moment they appeared. I could go on and on about this, from the historical point of view, though I won't.

But the real kicker is this: I continually read on Dissensus about Low being "one of the only indie bands that X still listens to." Ha! No one ever seems to mention that they are hard-core mormons/christians, and that they continually promote their christian views in their lyrics. My favorite example is the song "Missouri," from Secret Name. They pronounce the word as "misery," not "Missouri," and then alternate the phrase "oh, speak to me adam and eve" with "missouri/misery" and "what did you get for your dishes and sweat." Do you, by any chance, have any idea why Low would sing a song entitled "Missouri" but sing about Adam and Eve instead?

The answer is that mormons believe that the garden of eden was in a town in Daviess County, Missouri, at a site called Adam Ondi Ahman. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam-ondi-Ahman. There are plenty more examples of Low's prosyletizing, simply google. The wife/Mimi even converted in order 'to obey' the husband . . . oh please . . .
 

mos dan

fact music
But the real kicker is this: I continually read on Dissensus about Low being "one of the only indie bands that X still listens to." Ha! No one ever seems to mention that they are hard-core mormons/christians, and that they continually promote their christian views in their lyrics.

the stuff about missouri/misery is very interesting, and thanks for that, but i don't see what the rather boastful "Ha!" is for... are they not allowed to be one of the only indie bands i/others here listen to regularly because they're h/c mormons? i mean you obviously like them.. is your fondness for their music more legitimate because you are fully conversant in the background to their songs?
 
D

dubversion

Guest
Low are one of my four or five favourite bands, I'm a tad obsessive about them so I'm reallt grateful for this being posted, and of course I'll be buying it.

Low are consistently fascinating, beautiful, inventive and moving.


I'm curious about Tate's comment..

But the real kicker is this: I continually read on Dissensus about Low being "one of the only indie bands that X still listens to." Ha! No one ever seems to mention that they are hard-core mormons/christians, and that they continually promote their christian views in their lyrics. ....

Obviously their beliefs (and I think when Zak was replaced with a new bassist that meant all 3 are now Mormons?) underpin what they're about, but I think to say they 'continually promote their christian views in their lyrics' overstates the case considerably.

There are allusions and references, often quite elliptical - tate, the example you quote almost proves the point because it's fairly obscure - but I think they actually keep things like this on a fairly tight rein. To me, the way Sparhawk seems to express his beliefs is by a constant reference to a kind of 'lack' in people's lives, a sadness or void. He doesn't then go on to state explicitly what would fill that void, so although you might have a pretty good idea, it's not rammed down your throat in any way...

Low's faith is expressed in far less insistent terms than much reggae, gospel and the like, and if I can enjoy that while rejecting the message behind it, then letting a very few subtle religious references in Low records wash over me is child's play.

On a related note, Sparhawk does seem 'better'. I saw them at the RFH just before his breakdown and he was clearly very troubled (i think this was the visit that saw him at the BBC getting some kind of 'message' from a John Peel photo in the lobby). He seemed to want to say something to the audience, some kind of faith-based view or something, but was stopping himself, perhaps because - it's my feeling, anyway - Low have always been quite careful about how they present their views. This was in the midst of the early days of the Iraq invasion (if i recall correctly) and he said = something like " please don't worry, we will all be OK.. everything's going to be OK" in a very garbled and urgent way. Quite upsetting..

shit - surely my longest post on Dissensus ever?
 

tate

Brown Sugar
Mos dan and dubversion are quite right, there is no need to object to Low on the basis of their christian lyrics, I ought to have merely cited that feature without adding value judgments. It is a record well worth listening to, as I indicated above, and I have much respect for the band's commitment and internal musical development over the years. Thanks again to soundslike1981 for sharing the record, which I assume - and hope - will be well received.
 

soundslike1981

Well-known member
So happy to see some positive responses here. I'm still really enjoying this album, hopeful that there'll be others who've written them off before who'll nevertheless enjoy this work. I agree there's a little fat that could've been trimmed, especially in the second half of the record. But on the whole it feels like a strong statement.

As for whether they're a pushy, happy-clappy group--I'll have to say I don't see it. I'm a "devout" nontheist/non-religionist, yet I have always appreciated the (subtle) ways in which Sparhawk's faith manifests itself in his art. Always there is the suggestion of a struggle, a moral, personal, emotional struggle to live a godly life, and that struggle easily extends to anyone trying to be a good person, with or without religion as a vehicle. I for one have never felt preached to by Sparhawk, because he seems to feel it's difficult enough to be his own good shepherd. From an interview I did with him a few years back:

Me: Even as an outsider to organised religion or spiritual faith, the spirituality (if you'll excuse me using the term) of all your work is achingly, joyously clear to me. However, in much of the work I take to be overtly religious, you emphasise penitent sombreness, tribulation, longing, or even anger -- rarely anything the English would call "happy-clappy". I can only guess awkwardly as to your motivations for favouring this sort of territory.

If you can do, tell us a little about why you sometimes approach spiritual expression through these less commonly acknowledged lenses. How does sorrow, plaintive hopefulness, or anger relate to your religious experience or your spiritual expression? (I'm thinking here especially of songs like "I Am the Lamb", "If You Were Born Today", "Whore", or your cover of "Lord, Can You Hear Me".)

Sparhawk: I wonder sometimes, myself, why the subject of spirituality in our music comes out in darker terms, when in all honesty, my personal experiences with spirituality and religion have brought mostly joy, peace, and hope. Maybe the struggle of finding that joy, peace, and hope is what is the most interesting and the most worthwhile to express. I hope to have eternity to express joy, but for now, every moment is a struggle and I think any form of expression or art is a reflection of the artists perception of that, whether they are religious or not. To deny the two sides of it all is perhaps the most evil thing possible.


(The rest of that interview is here, in case anyone is curious)

Not that I've followed the "hauntology" discussion very closely--but one wonders if this album doesn't feel a bit ghost-in-the-machine, a little haunted.
 

soundslike1981

Well-known member
The 'Bombscare' EP might also appeal to Dissensians more than most of their oeuvre, and would've been easily missed as it was a mere 17 minutes long and released only in the UK (to my knowledge).

Find it here.
 

soundslike1981

Well-known member
The "true fans" at the Low website are, predictably, pretty vehemently opposed to the album. "This can't be the final mix," "I prefer the live versions," "The original versions were so much spacier," "the last few tracks make a great sequence," etc. Every once in a while I think you lot are onto something with this "rockist" business ; )
 

soundslike1981

Well-known member
Anyone have any further thoughts on this album? It's stuck with me far more than I could've expected, and continues to feel. . . right, probably a dozen listens in.
 

soundslike1981

Well-known member
This record hit shops this week I believe--any Dissensians dared venture into the indie section, where it will inevitably be (mis)filed, to pick it up?
 

tate

Brown Sugar
This record hit shops this week I believe--any Dissensians dared venture into the indie section, where it will inevitably be (mis)filed, to pick it up?
To file Low under 'indie' is misfiling? So where does it belong then?

(Not that most record stores in the US even have an 'indie' section, it's all just 'rock' - better stores may have a bin for experimental/noise, but in this country its mainstream rock, R&b/hip-hop, and modern country that far far outnumber the sales of what dissensians call 'indie'.)
 

STN

sou'wester
I donned my duffel coat and sloped down to Berwick Street at lunchtime - thankfully I didn't have to brave the indie section as it was filed under 'new releases'. I will report back.
 
Top