MUSIC: Concert Review: Fictionist, NightNight
If life has taught me anything in my 22 short years, it is that you don’t always get exactly what you want. The same goes for concerts.
Saturday night’s Fictionist and NightNight show at Velour provided a microcosm of two bands at very different points in their musical evolution, one bursting with new creative life and the other struggling against their own self-imposed limitations.
NightNight, the night’s opening act, is the real deal. Featuring an all-star lineup of Provo talent (including McKay Stevens of the Vibrant Sound, Scott Shepard of Book on Tapeworm and Nate Pyfer of Code Hero), the trio’s mellow blend of introspective guitar-based pop tinged with electronica is heavily indebted to Ben Gibbard’s work with the Postal Service — and not just because Shepard’s ethereal vocals are eerily reminiscent of the Death Cab for Cutie frontman.
While NightNight’s performance was by no means perfect (after all, it was the band’s first show with their current lineup), there was a sense of excitement and adventure watching the players feel each other (and the songs) out on-stage, making the occasional mistake feel more like a badge of honor than a scar. This was a band that felt like they were taking risks and laying pieces of themselves — flawed though they might have been at times — bare for the audience to see.
Shepard and Pyfer’s harmonies wove together in a subtle yet effective vocal confession, underscored by the occasional skittering electronic beat and washed in a wave of synthesizers and atmospheric guitars tones. While the songs and their arrangements were undeniably simple and understated, they were both effective and affecting. By the time they closed the set with the excellent one-two punch of “Virginia Is For Lovers” and “Maslo’s Heirarchy,” it was apparent that NightNight has the potential to be more than just a whimsical side-project. Sure, there are kinks to be ironed out and the band definitely has room to grow artistically, but the foundation for a new major player in the Provo scene has been laid. It will be interesting to see where Stevens, Shepard and Pyfer take NightNight from here.
Fictionist, the show’s headliners, have become something of local legends in these parts of late. Having sprouted from the popular Good Morning Maxfield a few years back, the group has inspired near-hero worship from a very specific segment of the Provo population. I am not part of that segment.
For a band with so much local acclaim, Fictionist has never struck me as particularly awesome — or, more accurately, as awesome as everyone else considers them to be. Prior to Saturday evening, I had only seen them perform live once and that was a record store performance, which was less than flattering. In an endeavor to be fair and open-minded and to understand the hype, I decided to give them another shot in a proper venue, but came away only moderately more impressed.
Something deserves to be said up front: Fictionist are undoubtedly a very good band. Their musicianship is flawless, their live performances tight and their technical skills unrivaled in the Provo scene. However, I can’t help feeling like their songs suffer at the hands of their musical expertise.
Fictionist doesn’t lack ambition; if anything, their constant attempts to be different, unique and genre-less are what constricts their actual growth potential. It seems that most every song in their back catalog follows the same formula: slow-build to an epic finish, with no discernible song structure and heaps of guitar gimmicks to provide that “experimental” edge they so obviously seek. (“Oh look, they’re making bird noises with their guitars! Oh, now they’re playing them with a cello bow!” You get the idea.) In their attempts to defy formula and structure, they have become the epitome of both.
While all of these various musical pieces are fine in and of themselves, it seems Fictionist’s desire to use all of them at the same time often overpowers any actual songwriting that might be present and causes the band to feel more like a rather generic jam band than the truly progressive group they aspire to be. In short, they’ve become the Provo version of Phish. Now, Phish is a wildly popular band with a legion of hyper-passionate fans who love their endless guitar noodling and tendency to completely eschew structure to the point of cliche. If this is what Fictionist desire, then they have achieved their goal on a local level. If they are reaching for more nuanced creative heights, then there is still a ways to go.
The band did give promising signs on Saturday evening, particularly in the new songs off their yet-to-be-recorded next album. Less rambling and more controlled than your usual Fictionist fare, songs like “Burn Bright” (featuring a phenomenal slide guitar line) came off sounding more like the driven Southern rock of Kings of Leon than another sprawling six-minute opus. (I kept expecting lead vocalist Stuart Maxfield to start crooning about sex being on fire; unfortunately, it never happened.) While not all of the new creations came off smelling like roses, many showed increased musical discipline and a real dedication to songwriting craft over jam band aesthetics. For those who care about Fictionist’s potential and artistic evolution as a band, this is a very good sign.
Saturday evening was a tale of two bands — one taking its tenuous and uncertain first steps into a promising creative future, and another attempting to reconcile its successful yet unfulfilled past with a more focused, artistically disciplined new direction. Whether or not either group consciously realizes it, these things are happening and it will be most interesting for Provo music fans to experience the results.
Steve Pierce is editor and co-founder of Rhombus. He is not a fan of Phish.
Fictionist does seem to be breaking the mold of the loosely genred jam band they have embodied in the past. I agree this a good thing…I’m excited for their new CD.
But let’s be honst…just name one other band in Provo that can actually jam like Fictionist? Or use guitar affects in such a creative and interesting way to build texture and dynamics? no one comes to mind. case closed.
I’m pretty sure this is exactly what I argued. They are a very good band. They play their music very well and they’re very technically proficient. But I feel the songwriting suffers underneath all the gimmickry. That’s certainly just my personal perception and people are welcome to disagree, and it also doesn’t mean that Fictionist don’t have the talent to blow your face off in terms of live musicianship (they do), but it does strike at the underlying foundation of their artistic merit. They have the technical proficiency to be a My Morning Jacket-esque band if they improve their songwriting, but right now they’re settling for Phish. I’d just prefer to see them keep their guitar wizardry and excellent musicianship, but channel it into better, more cohesive songs. There’s no question they’re ridiculously talented; they just need discipline.
Hm…I’m just not sure what you’re actually getting at. My morning jacket is as jammy as they come in my opinion. And any band with real chops that you have the privilege to see live will “jam” out most of their songs. Isn’t that what you’re paying for? Not just a replay of the radio or album tune?
Anyway…I think ultimately we agree. Your review just came off negative. But I guess you’re only asking them to channel their talent – and there’s no harm in that. I actually think this is a natural growing pain that any great band will go through. Taking inventory of everything they CAN do and channeling it into what they SHOULD do. But when you have a “CAN do” pallet as wide as fictionist, it does make things a bit harder – wouldn’t you think? The possibilities are seemingly endless.
I believe, as you seem to hint at as well, that fictionist is on their way to great things–channeled yet unbridaled awesomeness. Don’t lose faith.
I shall keep my hopes high and hope they achieve that height. They certainly have the potential. (Although I would disagree about MMJ. They do jam a bit live, but their songs are largely contained. The songs in and of themselves, as contained in their original album form, are channeled and controlled. I want Fictionist to do the same – write a disciplined song, record it and then add a little jam live if they wish. I would like that. I love their talent, I just want them to harness it, which is a growing pain that you so astutely pointed out.) They have the potential to be great. They have all the tools. The realization of that potential rests in their hands. Thanks for reading and commenting!
I agree with you that from what Fictionist have been playing recently, they’ll have some more defined stuff coming down the pipe. It’ll be interesting to hear how that works for them when their new album is released. I’m pretty optimistic.
NightNight’s likely going to have quite a nice following in little time, and they deserve it. They’re making some very nice sounds. If they’re hoping to move this project into bigger places, though, I expect they’ll need to differentiate themselves more from Gibbard’s work. Fortunately, since they’re just starting out together, they’re also (as you’ve pointed out) far from being too established in any sound.
But where’s the feeling in containing the song … I think there’s a lot of musical emotion that builds up and with the 3 minute jam/guitar solos/musical interludes… and if you take those out or “contain” them then all you have is words and music… or music like sounds… and While I agree that some channeling does need to occur and there’s lot of stuff they could potentially do differently, I would have to say they have a formula that works!… even if it is the same build up to explosion … i mean that’s what I wait for every time … the build up… I admit as well that I am a definate huge fan of their earlier good morning maxfield stuff… and some of the new music misses that same feeling… If they would take Good Morning Maxfield’s structure and style and mix it with the music they make now I do believe they’d be pretty much perfect… “FIST” by the way is my favorite song on the invisible hand album… when i saw it played live it sealed the deal… I haven’t heard any of their newest stuff though because I live in las vegas… now I’m just rambling so… yeah
Steve, you seem to have confused your taste with the rules of good music. I could tell your review would be less than brilliant when you neatly divided the Provo music scene and then placed yourself on what you apparently think is the best side (as if there is one). That kind of binary thinking can’t even comprehend creativity, let alone judge between this or that person’s output or recommend how a band’s style should evolve (LOL!). I’m sure you’ll be posting your best song here in the next few days. I’d love to hear it.
Well written article. Categorizing Fictionist is a challenge. I really was impressed by Good Morning Maxwell but something with Fictionist’s most recent album “Noisy Birds”? was off setting to me. . .it lacked catchy hooks and friendliness. . . too many of the same boring bass lines, etc. They should be putting out much better because of their uncomparable talent.
They definitely would do great at some Kings of Leon style songs. I would listen to that.
I love McKay Stevens. . . he has the capacity to really churn out some great music. I would love to see Night Night.
Steve, you seem to have confused your taste with the rules of good music. I could tell your review would be less than brilliant when you neatly divided the Provo music scene and then placed yourself on what you apparently think is the best side (as if there is one). That kind… Read More of binary thinking can’t even comprehend creativity, let alone judge between this or that person’s output or recommend how a band’s style should evolve (LOL!). I’m sure you’ll be posting your best song here in the next few days. I’d love to hear it.
Joseph – Thanks for reading. However, I missed the part where I neatly divided the Provo music scene. I don’t really think I made any comments about the scene at all. I did say that I feel Fictionist hasn’t reached their full potential and that they need creative discipline. You are of course welcome to disagree with me, but that is the idea of a review – I give my thoughts on whatever given topic, in this case Fictionist. They are my personal feelings about the performance and the band in general, and I think there are areas for them to improve. That’s not to say I feel I could write better songs, because I don’t pretend that I can. But I do feel that they can write better songs and I’m sure they will as they grow as a group. The whole idea of art is to improve and evolve artistically which, by definition, means that any artist (even Fictionist) is never good enough to just stop progressing. There is always something to improve upon. You seem to suggest the opposite by arguing that I shouldn’t even presume to judge the band or even suggest how they could improve, because they are apparently so great as-is and could do nothing better. This seems short-sighted to me. I’m sure Fictionist themselves would agree that they can always improve and are probably looking to do so. If they’re not, then they are complacent and will never truly reach great artistic heights. But I’d be willing to bet my life on the former. Thanks again for reading.
For the record, you said:
“Having sprouted from the popular Good Morning Maxfield a few years back, the group has inspired near-hero worship from a very specific segment of the Provo population. I am not part of that segment”
It’s pompous of you to pretend to understand just what artistic failings affect the members of Fictionist. If the requirements for great art are really as specific and hard-won as you claim, then that condition automatically disqualifies you from judging them as an idle bystander. It’s also rather cowardly to hide behind the idea that “we could all improve”. Or maybe you’re just trying to be the next Glenn Beck, in which case I suggest you aim higher.
Joseph – Again, I think you’re misunderstanding a few things.
A) By saying I am not part of the group that hero-worships Fictionist, that does not “neatly divide” the scene. It is simply a statement that describes their very avid, dedicated group of fans (a point which, I might add, you are proving quite well) and declares myself as separate from that group. I think you’re trying to read way too much into that paragraph. To roughly translate it as I intended it: “Fictionist have a really passionate fan base. I am not one of them.” That’s all I’m really saying.
B) If it’s pompous for me (or anyone) to try to understand the artistic failings of Fictionist (or anyone, for that matter), then why do we have reviews in the first place? That is what reviews are: people objectively removed from the situation judging something (usually art) based on what they see, hear, and experience. We dedicate many pages in publications of all types to reviewing (or judging) artist’s work: music reviews, film reviews, book reviews, etc. It seems you’re really arguing one of two things: either a) you don’t like reviews on principle, which would lead me to ask why you chose to read this one, or b) you don’t like the way I reviewed Fictionist and personally disagree, which is fine but does not disqualify me from having my own opinion and sharing it in my chosen medium. Either way, I have to question your indignation over my audacity to review something. This isn’t exactly a new thing we invented here at Rhombus.
C) It’s not cowardly to say all artists can always improve upon something. I’m not hiding behind it. It’s true. Every artist, even the Beatles, could improve something and become better. That’s the essence of art. I just happen to believe Fictionist has a lot they can work on unless they are satisfied with remaining a simple collegiate jam band. If that’s their goal, then yes, they’re perfect just the way they are.
D) Glenn Beck has absolutely no relevance to anything we’ve discussed here. Unless I missed something, which I may well have. (P.S. This is also the first time I’ve ever been confused with Glenn Beck. Haha.)
Thanks again for reading, and for the great discussion.
I compared you to Glenn Beck because he divides and baits for the sake of attention. I’m calling you on your review. If I wanted to say that Fictionist is great and anyone who opposes them will fall, I could have. What I said could be applied to a review like yours of any band. As to your question “then why do we have reviews in the first place?” I can’t even begin to answer that. Seeing as we have reviewers and since I didn’t say you shouldn’t be able to review things, I’ll express the view that your review is condescending and relies on the “one true standard” of art fallacy. It’s not cowardly to say everyone can improve, but it’s cowardly to hide behind that idea in order to make your parental evaluation of your musical superiors seem innocent. Speaking of the Beatles maybe you should review them. You can call it “They could have been so much more”
Hey this is Stuart from Fictionist. After having read all this stuff I wanted to jump in here and say a couple things. Is that ok? I mean this is a local review of a local band and I live here, and I WANT A TURN!! ITS MY TURN! This is what I took from your review.
First, you defined your self as someone who isn’t a fan of our band, and more specifically not a fan of jam rock, which I understand to be any genre of rock that maintains some level of indeterminacy.
Second, our songs suffer because of our musical expertise.
Third, we have trapped ourselves in a restrictive paradigm of gimmicky guitar tricks.
Fourth, our textures overpower our poor song structures.
Fifth, if we are trying to be provo’s Phish then we are succeeding, and Phish is TERRIBLE!!
Sixth, I never sang “sex on fire” and you were bummed about that.
Honestly, I offer no apology. Let there be no mistake, the decisions that we are make about our songs are absolutely deliberate. We have a vision of chaotic, beautiful, indeterminate, expressive music. We choose to achieve that vision through unorthodox forms and means.
I have a wide appreciation of music. I enjoyed night night that night
I appreciate their minimalist take on sampled folkish music. Scott’s lyrics are beautiful, Nate’s drum programs and samples were cool, Mckay’s subtle decorative acoustic guitar work was appropriate. In short, I appreciate their music for what it is. If I were to review their music I would review it for what it is. If I didn’t understand the paradigm they create under, (every artist has one) I would try to understand it, because that understanding is what would allow me to see the merit of their art. This is something you already know.
If I have a criticism of your review it is that you don’t seem to like our genre of music to begin with, and I’m not sure that you understand the paradigm that guides our aesthetic choices. In short your review is anything but objective (no reviews ever are, but its nice when they approach it). If you would like to talk about indeterminate, and texture driven music more and its guiding principles, and more specifically the guiding principles of our music and taste, I would love that. I agree with you all art has room for improvement, but in our case those improvements won’t likely be in the direction of channeled, controlled and contained. I think we currently paint in broader strokes then you are used to, and we probably will continue to. We love chaos, we love freedom.
Finally let me describe to you a strange phenomenon. When we book shows at venues, people come. After we play our songs that people seem to like them. Those same people buy albums from us. In rehearsals our band goes about the making of our art sensitively, with great care and discipline. I’m not sure what to make of that. Maybe we are fooling everyone, or maybe our music as indeterminate, jammy and textural as it is, is actually worthy of praise. Who knows?
Anyway Steve, you are a good guy. Thanks for the debate, it has been entertaining.
Stuart, thanks for chiming in. It’s nice to hear it from the artist’s perspective. I will concede that jam rock isn’t my cup of tea, so I’m probably not the most objective observer.
That being said, perhaps I could have more been more clear on my position that you guys do what you do extremely well, but it’s just not my style. I definitely tried to expand the review past a simple “I don’t love it, but they’re good at it” concept by expanding what I personally thought would make it more palatable to me and others I have spoken with, but you are probably correct. At the end of the day, I just don’t connect with jam rock on the same visceral level as I do with, say, the more structured paradigm of folk, which is fine. It’s a difference in taste and opinion. Obviously, I’m going to think my opinion is correct (why else would I have the opinion?) and obviously you guys and your many fans (who are quite avid, if I may say so) will feel differently (why else would you make the music and why else would they buy it?)
But really, that kind of “everyone likes what they like” attitude is good in practice and is probably the best way to approach life in general, but it also makes for generally uninteresting reviews. As a writer, I have to take a position and I’ll stand with the one I took, as detached as it may be due to my complete missing the jam band boat. You guys will of course continue to make music as you see fit and feel inspired and some of it will probably not connect with me, but will undoubtedly connect with your many fans.
I’ll probably never be the world’s biggest Fictionist fan (which I’m sure you’re not too broken up about, though I’m pretty sure my friend Grant loves you enough for the both of us) because it just doesn’t get me firing on all cylinders. This is fine. I’ll probably keep writing about your shows (albeit from a more informed perspective after this discussion, which has been fairly enlightening) and I’ll probably keep trying to articulate that “If Fictionist just did ______, I would be in love with them,” and your devotees will continue telling me I’m an idiot. Likewise, you will keep making music and generally ignoring everything I say because it really doesn’t matter. I feel this is probably the natural order of the musical world in general.
That being said, you guys do the jam thing really well and I did really enjoy some of the new stuff (although not apparently for the same reason you intended) and I look forward to hearing the next album. (Also, “Invisible Hand” just about melted my face off. Just sayin’. And with my tongue firmly planted in cheek, I’ll continue holding out for songs about sex and fire.) But keep making your music and don’t listen to me. After all, if Almost Famous taught us nothing else, it taught us that I am the enemy — and I’m kind of okay with that. Do your thing; a lot of people love it. Maybe one day you’ll have made me a full-time believer as well. Thanks again for the comments and insights.
On a simpler note, maybe you should review the show next time and not the band. Also, I don’t get all this jam band talk. Ya they
“play” around with atmospherics, but Phish? I’m a hippie at heart and I don’t remember any extended “jamming” in that sense, either at the show or on the last CD. Just a thought. Thanks for your input Stuart.
Steve, love your comments. I’m not offended in the least. Art the pleases everyone isn’t art at all in my opinion. Trust me, when we go on the road, there are people that go nuts for what we do, and there are also those who absolutely hate it. Thats the fun of it right? Jam band shmam band, I don’t have any Idea what we are, but we are going to keep going in that direction what ever that is. All the best everyone!
people. its a review! its the writers opinion! i’m disappointed to see that steve feels the need to defend himself. you said it. that’s how you feel. and that’s great.
a review should be an opinion from someone that doesn’t have to “get” or “understand” the band he’s reviewing. really, if reviews were limited to die hard fans of the band, (and band members themselves), i have a feeling that EVERY band would come off as GREATEST BAND EVER!!!!!! GO TEAM!!!!!
i’m always very interested in hearing the good and the bad. i WANT an opinion that isn’t just a cheerleading love-fest.
and for all the fans that disagree with this review, GREAT! Thats fine too. and it’s great that you put you comments down. believe it or not, we all have opinions, and all are different, and that’s good. it doesn’t mean that one OPINION is right or wrong. its the way we feel.
That said, responses like, “well.. i’d like to hear YOUR song, and we’ll see if its better….” are really, REALLY stupid. art is going to be critiqued. the basis of your statement/arguement would mean that really NO ONE but Bach, Da Vinci, and Jesus could ever publish a negative opinion about what some one else creates.
take a deep breath. take the review for what it is. Phish is a jam band, and the dude that said they aren’t might still be high on whatever it was he was smoking during those years, (just my opinion of coarse). lets realize that Fictionist fans are still gonna be fans, and those non-fans are still gonna be non-fans.
steve, stop defending yourself. put it out there and stand by it man.
nightnight was good.
Come on, ya turkeys!