Andrew Bird — Imitosis
Album: Armchair ApocryphaAvg rating:
Your rating:
Total ratings: 1870
Length: 3:55
Plays (last 30 days): 0
share
tweet
He's keeping busy
Yeah he's bleeding stones
With his machinations and his palindromes
It was anything but hear the voice
anything but hear the voice
It was anything but hear the voice
That says that we're all basically alone
Poor Professor Pynchon had only good intentions
When he put his Bunsen burners all away
And turning to a playground in a Petri dish
Where single cells would swing their fists
At anything that looks like easy prey
In this nature show that rages every day
It was then he heard his intuition say
We were all basically alone
And despite what all his studies had shown
That what's mistaken for closeness
Is just a case for mitosis
And why do some show no mercy
While others are painfully shy
Tell me doctor can you quantify
He just wants to know the reason, the reason why
Why do they congregate in groups of four
Scatter like a billion spores
And let the wind just carry them away?
How can kids be so mean?
Our famous doctor tried to glean
As he went home at the end of the day
In this nature show that rages every day
It was then he heard his intuition say
We were all basically alone
Despite what all his studies had shown
That what's mistaken for closeness
Is just a case of mitosis
Sure fatal doses of malcontent through osmosis
And why do some show no mercy
While others are painfully shy
Tell me doctor, can you quantify?
The reason why
Yeah he's bleeding stones
With his machinations and his palindromes
It was anything but hear the voice
anything but hear the voice
It was anything but hear the voice
That says that we're all basically alone
Poor Professor Pynchon had only good intentions
When he put his Bunsen burners all away
And turning to a playground in a Petri dish
Where single cells would swing their fists
At anything that looks like easy prey
In this nature show that rages every day
It was then he heard his intuition say
We were all basically alone
And despite what all his studies had shown
That what's mistaken for closeness
Is just a case for mitosis
And why do some show no mercy
While others are painfully shy
Tell me doctor can you quantify
He just wants to know the reason, the reason why
Why do they congregate in groups of four
Scatter like a billion spores
And let the wind just carry them away?
How can kids be so mean?
Our famous doctor tried to glean
As he went home at the end of the day
In this nature show that rages every day
It was then he heard his intuition say
We were all basically alone
Despite what all his studies had shown
That what's mistaken for closeness
Is just a case of mitosis
Sure fatal doses of malcontent through osmosis
And why do some show no mercy
While others are painfully shy
Tell me doctor, can you quantify?
The reason why
Comments (138)add comment
This song might benefit from a Santana guitar solo and maybe Rob Thomas on lead vocals...
gatorade wrote:
How funny! The LP cover is a photo of a budgie, and my little budgie loves this song!
I had a budgie once...Called him Onan 'cause he spilled his seed...
Tony in NJ
W.A.S.T.E.
Lyrics, whoa.
dandinpantelimon wrote:
Or an exercise in tenuousness.
I put it at six and half bricks.
Or an exercise in tenuousness.
I put it at six and half bricks.
WonderLizard wrote:
Fascinating comment. It has never occurred to me to quantify art—except for its market value, itself a tenuous exercise.
Or an exercise in tenuousness.
Fascinating comment. It has never occurred to me to quantify art—except for its market value, itself a tenuous exercise.
Or an exercise in tenuousness.
+1 for daughter cells with chromosomes identical to the parent.
Groovy, baby.
Trite
SECA_Alan wrote:
Fascinating comment. It has never occurred to me to quantify art—except for its market value, itself a tenuous exercise.
It cannot be quantified. Still, a clever and well crafted piece of art from another perspective, and I like it a lot for that.
Fascinating comment. It has never occurred to me to quantify art—except for its market value, itself a tenuous exercise.
Toward a missing link, outspoken or not.
It cannot be quantified. Still, a clever and well crafted piece of art from another perspective, and I like it a lot for that.
OceanBlue wrote:
Wow, what a dry and boring comment thread for such a rich and interesting song. Lighten up boys.
Wow, what a dry and boring comment thread for such a rich and interesting song. Lighten up boys.
Fascinating babble. Keep it up, boys and girls.
Why do some people post the same twice ?...weeks apart....is it like brain damage ?
Why do some people post the same twice ?...weeks apart....is it like brain damage ?
I like this track...a bit.
Why do some people post the same twice ?...weeks apart....is it like brain damage ?
I like this track...a bit.
You guys below...Quit taking up all the comment space with your babbling and talk about the music.
Thank you for your time.
zepher wrote:
Another influential book —- THE BIBLE —— said that we are not alone, and can have a personal relationship with God.
"Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me." REV 3:20
<—-
Researching - THE LONELY CROWD
—->
I propose that there is another social type "God-Directed" that views our maker as the external gyroscope that controls the whole universe. We are all connected to this influence and have a spirit within that completes the connection. Our selfishness and then our need for forgiveness has disrupted this connection since Eden. You can re-connect through God's son, Jesus who lived as a man and understands and loves us all. Once connected, the Spirit can be stoked by following God and understanding his character through Jesus. I think we all tend to be 'inner' and 'other' directed. The key is to tap into a broader external influence, you never know when you will be directed to selfless acts that can make a big difference.
How is your "God-directed" social type of today different from religious people from previous generations whom Riesman et al. describe as "inner-directed"? Do you believe "God-directed" types receive spiritual and moral guidance directly and personally from an active God, independent of religious organizations and officials? Riesman's "inner-directed" groups of earlier generations—groups that disappeared with the rise of the "other-directed" types—internalized religious teachings from their churches and religious leaders to create their moral compasses. Perhaps your "God-directed" types of today simply create their own religious understandings and draw moral lessons from those understandings all on their own without taking instructions from a church.
Your Wikipedia excerpt about The Lonely Crowd makes me wonder whether the book is on shaky ground when dividing people into "inner-directed" and "other-directed" groups. It strikes me that the "inner-directed" groups were seeking approval and perhaps love from others too, only their groups were not based on average wealth, consumption patterns, or income-based social classes. I agree with Riesman that when you have people trying to judge their self-worth based on how much money they make relative to others or how many possessions they have, they're going to feel morally or spiritually adrift and emotionally disconnected from others. Our consumer society doesn't give us lessons about the meaning of life, our obligations to others, the possibility of a higher power, etc.
But I'm not sure how someone can be purely "inner-directed." If you've embraced and internalized life lessons from your church, family, or social group, you're still "other-directed" even if your marching orders don't come from material goods and the consumer society.
I'm also not sure that peer pressure is such a driving force in consumption patterns anymore. Americans like reality shows in part because they like to watch other people ruining their lives or doing crazy things. Those shows also tacitly encourage the notions of being true to yourself and not viewing others with more stuff as better than you. These days people buy stuff because they view the stuff as extension of themselves (Apple's genius lies in getting people to buy into that) and enriching their lives. I think Americans aren't as worried about keeping up with the Joneses and may even mentally tell the Joneses to f*ck off.
10/19/14 insomnia-induced edit: from a NYT article :
"We embraced art and rejected a major-label system that cared only about selling records. Oddly, we expressed our position by buying records. The problem with my life as an anticorporate bohemian was that it was predicated on a consumer behavior.
Joseph Heath and Andrew Potter explore this contradiction in their 2004 book, “Nation of Rebels: How Counterculture Became Consumer Culture.” They argue that contemporary consumer culture is driven not by a desire to keep up with the Joneses but by the opposite impulse: to individuate. We believe our purchases distinguish us from a perceived mainstream of numb consumers, so we cannot stop buying things."
Another influential book —- THE BIBLE —— said that we are not alone, and can have a personal relationship with God.
"Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me." REV 3:20
<—-
Researching - THE LONELY CROWD
—->
The earliest social type was obtained by people who were inner-directed. They discovered the potential within themselves to live and act not according to established norms but based on what they discovered using their own inner gyroscope. Inner-directed people live as adults what they learned in childhood, and tend to be confident, sometimes rigid.
After the Industrial Revolution in America had succeeded in developing a middle-class state, institutions that had flourished within the tradition-directed and the inner-directed social framework became secondary to daily life. Instead of living according to traditions, or conforming to the values of organized religion, of the family, or societal codes, the new middle class gradually adopted a malleability in the way people lived with each other. The increasing ability to consume goods and afford material abundance was accompanied by a shift away from tradition or inner-directedness. How to define one's self became a function of the way others lived.
Riesman and his researchers found that other-directed people were flexible and willing to accommodate others to gain approval. Because large organizations preferred this type of personality, it became indispensable to the institutions that thrived with the growth of industry in America.As Riesman writes, "The other-directed person wants to be loved rather than esteemed," not necessarily to control others but to relate to them. Those who are other-directed need assurance that they are emotionally in tune with others.
By the 1940s, the other-directed character was beginning to dominate society. Today the triumph of this type of social personality is complete. If one applies the other-direction criteria to everyday actors as portrayed in modern culture, for example, the other-directed person is easy to identify. But since the other-directed could only identify themselves through references to others in their communities (and what they earned, owned, consumed, believed in) they inherently were restricted in their ability to know themselves.
Riesman's book argues that although other-directed individuals are crucial for the smooth functioning of the modern organization, the value of autonomy is compromised. The Lonely Crowd also argues that society dominated by the other-directed faces profound deficiencies in leadership, individual self-knowledge, and human potential.
———>I propose that there is another social type "God-Directed" that views our maker as the external gyroscope that controls the whole universe. We are all connected to this influence and have a spirit within that completes the connection. Our selfishness and then our need for forgiveness has disrupted this connection since Eden. You can re-connect through God's son, Jesus who lived as a man and understands and loves us all. Once connected, the Spirit can be stoked by following God and understanding his character through Jesus. I think we all tend to be 'inner' and 'other' directed. The key is to tap into a broader external influence, you never know when you will be directed to selfless acts that can make a big difference.
How is your "God-directed" social type of today different from religious people from previous generations whom Riesman et al. describe as "inner-directed"? Do you believe "God-directed" types receive spiritual and moral guidance directly and personally from an active God, independent of religious organizations and officials? Riesman's "inner-directed" groups of earlier generations—groups that disappeared with the rise of the "other-directed" types—internalized religious teachings from their churches and religious leaders to create their moral compasses. Perhaps your "God-directed" types of today simply create their own religious understandings and draw moral lessons from those understandings all on their own without taking instructions from a church.
Your Wikipedia excerpt about The Lonely Crowd makes me wonder whether the book is on shaky ground when dividing people into "inner-directed" and "other-directed" groups. It strikes me that the "inner-directed" groups were seeking approval and perhaps love from others too, only their groups were not based on average wealth, consumption patterns, or income-based social classes. I agree with Riesman that when you have people trying to judge their self-worth based on how much money they make relative to others or how many possessions they have, they're going to feel morally or spiritually adrift and emotionally disconnected from others. Our consumer society doesn't give us lessons about the meaning of life, our obligations to others, the possibility of a higher power, etc.
But I'm not sure how someone can be purely "inner-directed." If you've embraced and internalized life lessons from your church, family, or social group, you're still "other-directed" even if your marching orders don't come from material goods and the consumer society.
I'm also not sure that peer pressure is such a driving force in consumption patterns anymore. Americans like reality shows in part because they like to watch other people ruining their lives or doing crazy things. Those shows also tacitly encourage the notions of being true to yourself and not viewing others with more stuff as better than you. These days people buy stuff because they view the stuff as extension of themselves (Apple's genius lies in getting people to buy into that) and enriching their lives. I think Americans aren't as worried about keeping up with the Joneses and may even mentally tell the Joneses to f*ck off.
10/19/14 insomnia-induced edit: from a NYT article :
"We embraced art and rejected a major-label system that cared only about selling records. Oddly, we expressed our position by buying records. The problem with my life as an anticorporate bohemian was that it was predicated on a consumer behavior.
Joseph Heath and Andrew Potter explore this contradiction in their 2004 book, “Nation of Rebels: How Counterculture Became Consumer Culture.” They argue that contemporary consumer culture is driven not by a desire to keep up with the Joneses but by the opposite impulse: to individuate. We believe our purchases distinguish us from a perceived mainstream of numb consumers, so we cannot stop buying things."
DaidyBoy wrote:
Only if they have been eating Hali Berries.
Do budgies have halitosis?
Only if they have been eating Hali Berries.
Solid 9.
rdo wrote:
Another influential book --- THE BIBLE ---- said that we are not alone, and can have a personal relationship with God.
"Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me." REV 3:20
<---
Researching - THE LONELY CROWD
--->
I propose that there is another social type "God-Directed" that views our maker as the external gyroscope that controls the whole universe. We are all connected to this influence and have a spirit within that completes the connection. Our selfishness and then our need for forgiveness has disrupted this connection since Eden. You can re-connect through God's son, Jesus who lived as a man and understands and loves us all. Once connected, the Spirit can be stoked by following God and understanding his character through Jesus. I think we all tend to be 'inner' and 'other' directed. The key is to tap into a broader external influence, you never know when you will be directed to selfless acts that can make a big difference.
In 1950 there was an influential book --- THE LONELY CROWD --- that said we are all basically alone.
Another influential book --- THE BIBLE ---- said that we are not alone, and can have a personal relationship with God.
"Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me." REV 3:20
<---
Researching - THE LONELY CROWD
--->
The earliest social type was obtained by people who were inner-directed. They discovered the potential within themselves to live and act not according to established norms but based on what they discovered using their own inner gyroscope. Inner-directed people live as adults what they learned in childhood, and tend to be confident, sometimes rigid.
After the Industrial Revolution in America had succeeded in developing a middle-class state, institutions that had flourished within the tradition-directed and the inner-directed social framework became secondary to daily life. Instead of living according to traditions, or conforming to the values of organized religion, of the family, or societal codes, the new middle class gradually adopted a malleability in the way people lived with each other. The increasing ability to consume goods and afford material abundance was accompanied by a shift away from tradition or inner-directedness. How to define one's self became a function of the way others lived.
Riesman and his researchers found that other-directed people were flexible and willing to accommodate others to gain approval. Because large organizations preferred this type of personality, it became indispensable to the institutions that thrived with the growth of industry in America.As Riesman writes, "The other-directed person wants to be loved rather than esteemed," not necessarily to control others but to relate to them. Those who are other-directed need assurance that they are emotionally in tune with others.
By the 1940s, the other-directed character was beginning to dominate society. Today the triumph of this type of social personality is complete. If one applies the other-direction criteria to everyday actors as portrayed in modern culture, for example, the other-directed person is easy to identify. But since the other-directed could only identify themselves through references to others in their communities (and what they earned, owned, consumed, believed in) they inherently were restricted in their ability to know themselves.
Riesman's book argues that although other-directed individuals are crucial for the smooth functioning of the modern organization, the value of autonomy is compromised. The Lonely Crowd also argues that society dominated by the other-directed faces profound deficiencies in leadership, individual self-knowledge, and human potential.
------>I propose that there is another social type "God-Directed" that views our maker as the external gyroscope that controls the whole universe. We are all connected to this influence and have a spirit within that completes the connection. Our selfishness and then our need for forgiveness has disrupted this connection since Eden. You can re-connect through God's son, Jesus who lived as a man and understands and loves us all. Once connected, the Spirit can be stoked by following God and understanding his character through Jesus. I think we all tend to be 'inner' and 'other' directed. The key is to tap into a broader external influence, you never know when you will be directed to selfless acts that can make a big difference.
Do budgies have halitosis?
fredriley wrote:
psittacosis is the answer.
Who's a pretty boy, then? Squawk!
psittacosis is the answer.
rdo wrote:
yes i do agree, sadly so
In 1950 there was an influential book --- THE LONELY CROWD --- that said we are all basically alone.
yes i do agree, sadly so
In 1950 there was an influential book --- THE LONELY CROWD --- that said we are all basically alone.
Who's a pretty boy, then? Squawk!
I still give this song an 8 (by ignoring the lyrics), and I used to be a fan, but the pretentious cleverness has worn too thin with me.
CrackerjaxATX wrote:
I'll just drop this here, too:
https://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Myxomatosis-lyrics-Radiohead/7BE8051383C2693348256D340008F056
Anyone who can properly use mitosis in a song gets mad props from me!!
Krispian wrote:
Krispian wrote:
This song has THE coolest, nerdiest, most wonderful lyrics I've ever heard!
I'll just drop this here, too:
https://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Myxomatosis-lyrics-Radiohead/7BE8051383C2693348256D340008F056
Very nice song!
Anyone who can properly use mitosis in a song gets mad props from me!!
Krispian wrote:
Krispian wrote:
This song has THE coolest, nerdiest, most wonderful lyrics I've ever heard!
Krispian wrote:
He also has the coolest amp ever...
https://www.specimenproducts.com/single-ended-octoblock-tube-amplifier/
This song has THE coolest, nerdiest, most wonderful lyrics I've ever heard!
He also has the coolest amp ever...
https://www.specimenproducts.com/single-ended-octoblock-tube-amplifier/
but does he have halitosis?
like - sounds a bit like Sting though for some reason
I've seen Andrew Bird live four times, twice front-row. He's a fantastic musician and a joy to see in person. If you're a fan of his albums, seeing him live is a requirement.
crankage up
Catchy enough to draw the attention of the CDC.
This song has THE coolest, nerdiest, most wonderful lyrics I've ever heard!
Very nice!
bachbeet wrote:
He always speaks very highly of you, but sometimes he does so using made-up words.
After listening to the songs played here by Andrew Bird, I can definitely say I am not a fan.
He always speaks very highly of you, but sometimes he does so using made-up words.
I am so grateful for Radio Paradise right now! 
Makes me happy!
Makes me happy!After listening to the songs played here by Andrew Bird, I can definitely say I am not a fan.
misterbearbaby wrote:
HD radio is garbage! The CODEC is AAC at sample rates around 64kbps for 2 channel stations. It may be cleaner than analog FM because the noise floor is quite low, but it is unlistenable on anything but a car radio. With the cost of storage currently at 3x10^^-09 cents/bit it makes sense to only save WAV files or lossless compresed files. Just be aware WMA Lossles is a proprietary CODEC and will only play back on a very few media servers (but will play basically any computer)
The trend in the audiophile community is toward FLAC, which is a lossless format that is compressed—saving space—and expanded only when played.
HD radio is garbage! The CODEC is AAC at sample rates around 64kbps for 2 channel stations. It may be cleaner than analog FM because the noise floor is quite low, but it is unlistenable on anything but a car radio. With the cost of storage currently at 3x10^^-09 cents/bit it makes sense to only save WAV files or lossless compresed files. Just be aware WMA Lossles is a proprietary CODEC and will only play back on a very few media servers (but will play basically any computer)
The trend in the audiophile community is toward FLAC, which is a lossless format that is compressed—saving space—and expanded only when played.
it grooves!
WonderLizard wrote:
I meant MPEG-4. Sorry. Agree with BIll that MP3s at 320kbps can sound pretty good at times—at least equivalent to HD radio. However, as a matter of preference (almost said "principle"—which I don't think audio is so important that one resorts to "principles;" perspective, right?), I go with lossless formats. Can't accept the idea that throwing out data somehow preserves the intent or quality of the sound.
HD radio is garbage! The CODEC is AAC at sample rates around 64kbps for 2 channel stations. It may be cleaner than analog FM because the noise floor is quite low, but it is unlistenable on anything but a car radio. With the cost of storage currently at 3x10^^-09 cents/bit it makes sense to only save WAV files or lossless compresed files. Just be aware WMA Lossles is a proprietary CODEC and will only play back on a very few media servers (but will play basically any computer)
I meant MPEG-4. Sorry. Agree with BIll that MP3s at 320kbps can sound pretty good at times—at least equivalent to HD radio. However, as a matter of preference (almost said "principle"—which I don't think audio is so important that one resorts to "principles;" perspective, right?), I go with lossless formats. Can't accept the idea that throwing out data somehow preserves the intent or quality of the sound.
HD radio is garbage! The CODEC is AAC at sample rates around 64kbps for 2 channel stations. It may be cleaner than analog FM because the noise floor is quite low, but it is unlistenable on anything but a car radio. With the cost of storage currently at 3x10^^-09 cents/bit it makes sense to only save WAV files or lossless compresed files. Just be aware WMA Lossles is a proprietary CODEC and will only play back on a very few media servers (but will play basically any computer)
Help me my feet have started moving of their own accord!
keidse wrote:
man, you've got that right!
Phenomenal live act
man, you've got that right!
Cool ! I'll jump in and share that from my experience with listening to streaming music and such, it is amazing to me how good RP sounds compared to the usual mp3, ACC, FLAC, uncompressed stuff, etc. that being said, it is also most inconvenient for the casual music listener to find a better source of music than what Radio Paradise can do. Rock On RP!
BillG wrote:
A couple of corrections: MPEG-2 is most definitely not a lossless format, and well-encoded MP3s at 320kbps (or as low as 192k for some source material) are hardly low-fidelity. You can't judge the MP3 standard itself by the crappily-encoded 128k files that seem to be the norm these days.
I meant MPEG-4. Sorry. Agree with BIll that MP3s at 320kbps can sound pretty good at times—at least equivalent to HD radio. However, as a matter of preference (almost said "principle"—which I don't think audio is so important that one resorts to "principles;" perspective, right?), I go with lossless formats. Can't accept the idea that throwing out data somehow preserves the intent or quality of the sound.
A couple of corrections: MPEG-2 is most definitely not a lossless format, and well-encoded MP3s at 320kbps (or as low as 192k for some source material) are hardly low-fidelity. You can't judge the MP3 standard itself by the crappily-encoded 128k files that seem to be the norm these days.
I meant MPEG-4. Sorry. Agree with BIll that MP3s at 320kbps can sound pretty good at times—at least equivalent to HD radio. However, as a matter of preference (almost said "principle"—which I don't think audio is so important that one resorts to "principles;" perspective, right?), I go with lossless formats. Can't accept the idea that throwing out data somehow preserves the intent or quality of the sound.
Wow the lyrics to this song are phenominal! Pretty smart bird.
I love this song; reminds me of What Makes The Monkey Dance.
Phenomenal live act
How funny! The LP cover is a photo of a budgie, and my little budgie loves this song!
BillG wrote:
A couple of corrections: MPEG-2 is most definitely not a lossless format, and well-encoded MP3s at 320kbps (or as low as 192k for some source material) are hardly low-fidelity. You can't judge the MP3 standard itself by the crappily-encoded 128k files that seem to be the norm these days.
What the hell do you know fella?
Who do you think you are...a recording engineer....a DJ?
Keep up the good work William!
A couple of corrections: MPEG-2 is most definitely not a lossless format, and well-encoded MP3s at 320kbps (or as low as 192k for some source material) are hardly low-fidelity. You can't judge the MP3 standard itself by the crappily-encoded 128k files that seem to be the norm these days.
What the hell do you know fella?
Who do you think you are...a recording engineer....a DJ?
Keep up the good work William!
joemama wrote:
It's a similar, minor-chord progression; the bass player is not playing the exact same bass line but it could certainly fit in. Which reminds me, there isn't enought Kraftwerk on RP.
Why do I keep hearing the bass line from Kraftwerk's "The Model" in this?
It's a similar, minor-chord progression; the bass player is not playing the exact same bass line but it could certainly fit in. Which reminds me, there isn't enought Kraftwerk on RP.
WonderLizard wrote:
I agree completely if...you want to toss out 7 of every 8 bits of recorded information and replace high fidelity with low fidelity. That said, there are a number of high fidelity file formats (FLAC, MPEG-2, and more) that are lossless and compatible with a host of playback devices, including the iPod and other portable players. Then again, if you grew up on AM radio and don't know hi-fi from Adam, peace.
A couple of corrections: MPEG-2 is most definitely not a lossless format, and well-encoded MP3s at 320kbps (or as low as 192k for some source material) are hardly low-fidelity. You can't judge the MP3 standard itself by the crappily-encoded 128k files that seem to be the norm these days.
I agree completely if...you want to toss out 7 of every 8 bits of recorded information and replace high fidelity with low fidelity. That said, there are a number of high fidelity file formats (FLAC, MPEG-2, and more) that are lossless and compatible with a host of playback devices, including the iPod and other portable players. Then again, if you grew up on AM radio and don't know hi-fi from Adam, peace.
A couple of corrections: MPEG-2 is most definitely not a lossless format, and well-encoded MP3s at 320kbps (or as low as 192k for some source material) are hardly low-fidelity. You can't judge the MP3 standard itself by the crappily-encoded 128k files that seem to be the norm these days.
Like a Sting voice.
Nice budgie. Best stay away from vacuum cleaners :o)
This is a foot tapper 
7.
7. jagdriver wrote:
Your CD player. Replace it with MP3 capability.
I agree completely if...you want to toss out 7 of every 8 bits of recorded information and replace high fidelity with low fidelity. That said, there are a number of high fidelity file formats (FLAC, MPEG-2, and more) that are lossless and compatible with a host of playback devices, including the iPod and other portable players. Then again, if you grew up on AM radio and don't know hi-fi from Adam, peace.
Your CD player. Replace it with MP3 capability.
I agree completely if...you want to toss out 7 of every 8 bits of recorded information and replace high fidelity with low fidelity. That said, there are a number of high fidelity file formats (FLAC, MPEG-2, and more) that are lossless and compatible with a host of playback devices, including the iPod and other portable players. Then again, if you grew up on AM radio and don't know hi-fi from Adam, peace.
Where is the "more cowbell" person?
I like his music.
kellis wrote:
Both guys have class - true,
but,...naaaah!
Reminds me of Sting.
My thoughts exactly.
My thoughts exactly.
Both guys have class - true,
but,...naaaah!
Not for me.
Great cover, though!
("5-6")
Great cover, though!
("5-6")
Dragonfly_Launch wrote:
Your CD player. Replace it with MP3 capability.
New Bird is out. And he is the first artist that I have ever kept his prior disc in rotation in my car all the way around until the next disc was released. They are now both in there along with the Motel Motels and Nils Peter Molvar. Shit. What will I remove?
Your CD player. Replace it with MP3 capability.
Why do I keep hearing the bass line from Kraftwerk's "The Model" in this?
arsenault wrote:
Totally. 7 -> 9
this is a great song....and great instrumentation.
Totally. 7 -> 9
New Bird is out. And he is the first artist that I have ever kept his prior disc in rotation in my car all the way around until the next disc was released. They are now both in there along with the Motel Motels and Nils Peter Molvar. Shit. What will I remove?
this is why RP rules....where else would i hear this?
this is a great song....and great instrumentation.
this is a great song....and great instrumentation.
DoctorHooey wrote:
us regular folks Who might wear a tennis shoe or an occasional python boot know this exquisite little inconvenience by the name of:
STINKFOOT!
Here Fido... bring the slippers!
A little less closeness, you've got halitosis.
He sounds a bit like Paul Brady, especially in the beginning of this tune.
kellis wrote:
My thoughts exactly.
except not boring and insufferably self-satisfied.
...i'm getting deep vein thrombosis - well, not really, but there are the ingredients of a witty line in there somewhere...
...we all basically play trombone?..
gerardjfe wrote:
yes, indeed, he says "It what was mistaken for closeness was just a case of mitosis"
There is always a time for change...sometimes "loose change" will do. Ask Beck if you don't believe me.
tomkoshiol wrote:
Reminds me of Sting.
My thoughts exactly.
gerardjfe wrote:
yes, indeed, he says "It what was mistaken for closeness was just a case of mitosis"
Maybe "case FOR mitosis"? As in, we're all alone, being alone sucks, and it's all just a case for asexual reproduction?
Sabor!
Bat wrote:
But Imitosis isn't a word or is it? I know what mitosis means (I got degree in Biology, then immediately got an another degree in CS where I've been ever since).
yes, indeed, he says "It what was mistaken for closeness was just a case of mitosis"
A lovely song, but it'd be nice if it weren't played every day (or so it seems), this and the also great Fiery Crash.
Reminds me of Sting.
Extremely groovacious!
I have it, I like it, this CD I mean.I like the way he slides into his words.
Saw him live in Gotheburg, Sweden. Great show.
Ilove the album cover. Reminiscent of Gerard Richters portrait of his daughter -"Betty".
I don't care if it i can't understand a word he is singing, i really like this song!
Andrew Bird always sounds like he's trying to sing without moving his mouth.
He does mention "like a million spores"
that references a biological phenomenon
yet he says "like a"
so perhaps not
i think imitosis is a play on mitosis and imitation
But then... let's break it into it's letters creatively...
I'm I to Sis
Does Andrew have a sister? Does he wish he did?
"I'm I" plays on the we're all alone theme, yet why "to Sis"?
Anyhoo, love this little ditty. It's great to hear an artist doing something new.
Dragonfly_Launch wrote:
I believe he says Imitosis, the name of the song.
But Imitosis isn't a word or is it? I know what mitosis means (I got degree in Biology, then immediately got an another degree in CS where I've been ever since).
StevenQ wrote:
I'd recommend that in warm climates we all go naked as nature intended. Clothing is an unnatural perversion.
And what happened to "free love"? Are children born hating or does "civilization" teach us?
Everybody, take off all your clothes right now.
And then, embrace your co-workers and neighbours in the name of Peace, not War.
Go Chicago! I hear he's very good live...
perezia23 wrote:
One of my new faves...thanks RP!
"we were all basically all alone
Despite what all his studies had shown
What was mistaken for closeness was just a case for mitosis "
I believe he says Imitosis, the name of the song.
Great song- great album.
Thx to my cuz in DC that introduced me to AB.
IMGoph wrote:
buy this CD ASAP! it's amazing, top to bottom. i can't say enough good things about him!
I agree with all the ravers, Andrew Bird is a brilliant musician... although I must say that his album "mysterious production of eggs" is considerably better than this most recent record...
And I really don't understand all the Sting comparisons, I think this guy is one of a kind!
iTuner wrote:
"what's that falling from the sky?"
"they're bombing people with turkeys"
"oh the humanity"
is there a day goes by that I don't draw inspiration from the insights offered on that fine krp episode?
loved seeing this as I logged in, deserved a comment
perezia23 wrote:
I'd recommend letting birds fly free as intended
"what's that falling from the sky?"
"they're bombing people with turkeys"
"oh the humanity"
perezia23 wrote:
I'd recommend letting birds fly free as intended
I'd recommend that in warm climates we all go naked as nature intended. Clothing is an unnatural perversion.
sukilau wrote:
reminds me of the Zappa tune about bromidrosis.
us regular folks Who might wear a tennis shoe or an occasional python boot know this exquisite little inconvenience by the name of:
STINKFOOT!
slartibart_O wrote:
all you bird people out there: as a pet would you recommend a budgie, a 'keet or a cockatiel?
Get a bird of prey and devote a stretch of your life to training it to hunt in the wild and let you take it home when it's had a meal. Never feed it anything it didn't catch itself, which means taking it out every couple of days to find a live animal to kill and eat. Maybe store a little of its kill for a day or two. Build a coop large enough for a small family to live in just for the bird. Study other birds of prey, and learn how to identify them and understand their place in the wild. Get close enough to it to begin to understand what a wild animal really is, then watch it fly away one day, leaving you and your world behind forever.
Don't ever buy a bird in a pet shop.
slartibart_O wrote:
all you bird people out there: as a pet would you recommend a budgie, a 'keet or a cockatiel?
I'd recommend letting birds fly free as intended
One of my new faves...thanks RP!
"we were all basically all alone
Despite what all his studies had shown
What was mistaken for closeness was just a case for mitosis "
Always want to hear Myxomatosis after this plays.
A musical savant - pure genius. When you see him live it's amazing. He draws you into his slightly insane world of musical patterns, progressions and loop-de-loops. You walk away forgetting who you are for a moment or two....
all you bird people out there: as a pet would you recommend a budgie, a 'keet or a cockatiel?
reminds me of the Zappa tune about bromidrosis.
I'd love to hear Rodrigo y Gabriela backing him up on this.
Ooh Yay! Very good!
Very good!Wow, I wouldn't have correlated Sting with this song. Sting is usually very lame, while Andrew Bird is usually very good!
Odyzzeuz wrote:
I prefer the real Sting.
I prefer the real Sting.
This just keeps getting better and better to me.
nicolaluna wrote:
nicolaluna wrote:
f`ing brilliant. who is this guy!!?
philbertr wrote:
AMG gives 6 of his 7 albums 4 stars (the 7th--actually the first--is unrated)
f'ing excellent. who is AMG!!?
nicolaluna wrote:
f`ing brilliant. who is this guy!!?
AMG gives 6 of his 7 albums 4 stars (the 7th--actually the first--is unrated)
It's not very often that a song makes me run in from the other room to see who it is...I did just that, sans towel, straight out of the shower!! This is freaking GREAT!! 
If you liked this song (or not) check this link out
https://www.fabchannel.com/andrew_bird_2007
Saludos
P.
I hear a little too much "Sting" in his voice, can't help but imagine that anal fool singing this
Love it.
Clever. Very nice. "Sounds Like" some Carlos Santana ....
great tune
nicolaluna wrote:
f`ing brilliant. who is this guy!!?
he was the 5th Squirrel Nut Zipper... or something like that.