What Mumford & Sons have produced in Sigh No More is nothing more than an empty shell of a half-decent record.
I have been brought up on folk and listen to a lot of modern folk bands that are around at the moment and think Mumford and Sons are a breath of fresh air. I thought they were the next 'big thing'. Especially in a time where I happen to think the Fleet Foxes are sounding pretty stale. But 90% of the reviews I'm reading for Sigh No More are really having a go. I'm confused. I know that reviews and reviewers are generally fucking twats but I can't have got the band/album this wrong??
What's with the fact that no one has mentioned the Custom Blue album 'All Will Be Well' at all? Got to be the best release of the year, pure Americana folk...
Any road, now that's off my chest, I quite like this album...
I think this will be an album that people actually like, reviewers will hate it because they don't want to run without the herd and ruin any chance they have of writing for the observer music monthly or whatever. Plus it's folk, which some find quite difficult to quantify, let alone listen to.
Having a vaguely upper-middle-class background will also make you filth to the media. Which I never understand, why does being poor, make you a more credible musician? Joe Strummer was the son of a diplomat wasn't he? Sonic Youth probably have a few bob now eh?
5/10 is a ridiculously low mark for what is a well put together and enjoyable affair. To compare them to Nickelback says it all really. If The XX gets a chuffing 9 then ....etc etc
My problem with them is that they kind of sound like a Tesco Own Brand Fleet Foxes. Though I can see why that might appeal.
how the same press who had such a hard-on for this band mere months ago are now dismissing their debut?
Personally, I never warmed to them from the start. The British folk flag is held beautifully aloft by Fanfarlo and Jonquil. Far superior records.
What this world needs is a folk version of the My Bloody Valentine LP 'Ecstasy & Wine...' Fact.
and having a shameful penchant for folk and earnestness, I like them. But the album demonstrates a misunderstanding of their own charms - it's too clean and does not cohere. I've always felt there was a naivety in their lyricism, awkward places where style overtook substance - but I've never doubted their genuine intentions and there really is something welcome about what they do. Trouble is, it's all fine being a band that 'everyone loves' when you're dealing with small tribes of people following the live music, but with all this media coverage they are simply out of context. I do hope you're right about the possibility of better things to come - with an interesting producer and a good kick up the rear they could well make something special one day...
If he's not bothered by it, why mention that there has been any criticism of their background at all? It's a review of the album isn't it? not the press reaction to it?
The Fleet Foxes thing is noticeable, however I think M&S (which as an acronym does nothing to help them) have a far more rollicking approach. I don't remember many hoe-downs on the FF record for example.
And it irked me because it's not really a valid criticism.
Well I still think it's a decent record. I'm kinda glad I've got something to argue about, the amount of pish swilling shite that gets touted as genius from reviews these days. However I bought Efterklang and Peter Broderick also yesterday and both are better.
the reviewers opinion is nothing to you. Seems like you've been personally insulted.
Pro or otherwise. And I don't go to cafes, or hump trends.
But everything else is right.
The comments for most reviews on DiS read simply "good review, I do, of course, agree". Nice to finally see that the opinions of the reviewers aren't viewed as canon.
I tried listening to some earlier EPs of theirs, didn't like them, but thought I'd go and see them live anyway.
Their live show was much, much better than I'd anticipated, so I'm looking forward to listening to this very much.
And two of the tracks on their EP are on this album.
Just saying I don't know how an album with 2 8/10 tracks can slip to a 5 :(
Just because an album is instantly satisfying does not make it a shallow experience. I am a big fan of the modern folk scene and this band seem like a breath of fresh air. The fact that they embrace more conventional pop structures is, dare I say it, exactly the kind of thing that more rambling contemporary acts could do with.
I bought this album the other day and am enjoying it very much so far.
sigh sigh sigh
This music just makes me sigh.
It's just such annoying music - gets in your head like a fly.
from monied backgrounds, but are terrified of their readership discovering this so the play up to this ridiculous class war lite.
and not aimed at the reviewer.
You really think 'most journalists' went to private school? I suppose a fair number probably did, but I think you're giving the profession more credit than it's due (or at least, music-wise - don't private school kids tend to be successful?)
this is the album of the decade. i really don't get that the reviews of this album haven't been raving. the press have either:
a) decided that the 'new-folk' genre is over and they're about to jump on a new bandwagon,
b) they're all copying each other
c) they're scared to like something that is on the national radio playlists
d) decided that it doesn't sound as wild as animal collective
either way, it's a 10/10 album, so the mediocre press reviews can simply f*** off. and yes, i am personally offended by the reviews, such is the level of emotion i have invested in this album and band. for the first time in a while, the fans are spot on, so stick with the iTunes reviews.
will be very interested in how the press rate the next laura marling album in february, the next folk classic, and see if they are painting from the same brush.
It's all about the veneer of their aesthetic and not much else -the absence of any desire to actually step off a metaphorical fence renders them impotent.
I do have one complaint with the review though, and it's around an issue that I had hoped had disappeared following Amiga Power taking it up: why, oh why does such a (deserved) negative review warrant a score of 5/10? Average does not equal 7/10!
"this will be an album that people actually like, reviewers will hate it because they don't want to run without the herd and ruin any chance they have of writing for the observer music monthly or whatever."
What? Reviewers will hate it because they don't want to not like it like everyone else? Huh?
I heard these guys on Colin Murray ages ago and loved them immediately. I liked their session tracks so much that I recorded the show, and accidentally started playing it earlier today, and was reminded why I liked them; it was so full of energy, the rawest music I've heard.
I liked the band so much that when I heard they were coming to a small pub in my town I was there, and I loved it, because even though there wasn't space to move and half the people were drunk, the music was fantastic. I haven't heard the album yet, I hope to get it on vinyl, but I find it so hard to believe that the songs could sound flat and dull, unless the producer did something horrific.
5/10 just doesn't sound right at all. I like Fleet Foxes, but I would have thought the M&S songs I've heard are better than most, excluding Mykonos and a few others.
- the music will remain, the review will be but a distant memory. Who ever remembers reviews anyway? The only reviews that are in any way guaranteed an iota of immortality are those "misinformed mistakes" - terrible reviews of things now regarded as classics. The Dark Side of The Moon was, for example, almost universally panned upon release. (Cue tedious and predictable onslaught of "and it remains universally panned to this day" comments - or whatever).
The point is, a review is but one person's opinion and is, therefore, completely and utterly irrelevant. It's the music that counts, and the notion that people might still want to listen once the buzz has died down. In regards to Mumford and Sons - I think they will.
It also forces the reviewer's hand somewhat but to give this 5/10 was a fair result, I think.
Bollocks!!! There's nothing wrong with liking stuff that's popular mate! Music doesn't always have to be ground breaking to be worth a 9/10! Great vocals, on top of well constructed instrumentals. Its' almost like you've slagged it off because it's inoffensive, and therefore very accessable. That doesn't make it bad...
Fucking great album!
having a little cry up there is the best thing I've seen on DiS in a while. Particularly the bedwetters refusing to accept/unable to comprehend an opinion different to their own.
Turns out not everybody loves insincere gap year drivel as much as you. You'll be ok.