Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
the interview makes you seem like you do...
...but yeah, I quite like it.
I just wanted a aserious dsicussion as everyone seems to rape it. I think its pretty good too.
when you write stuff like that in the spiel before an interview, you always mean it? is it not journalistic convention to always be nice, cause you always see in newspapers rave interviews where they make the new album out as genius, and then flip to reviews to see it get a raping. I'm just interested is all...
...thus, problem solved.
do you still have to be nice?
in Logo you interviewing Brand New, and i remember being impressed that you managed to write an interview piece that fans would read and enjoy, without at any point actually saying you liked the band.
like brand new? poor show indeed
when i read it i didnt like brand new. perhaps i was projecting
so many usually reputable people seem to think its good? pitchfork and somewhere else i usually agree with both said it was experimental and brave and clever. to which i say: bumcakes
i really like worlds apart though, so i expect it to be fairly good.
It's a good album. Just don't compare it to Source Tags, because it's something completely different. Not saying that anyone does. Just that they shouldn't. The bastards.
if you don't like the band / are disappointed by their recent output, it's pretty easy to gloss over the subject. Unless you're writing a review, there's no need to provide your opinion on the band in question...though interviewing Don Cab earlier this year having heard the newbie was pretty diffiuclt.
I liked Worlds Apart, so I might think about picking this up. I've enjoyed every single TOD record in a different way, so I'll probably like this one too.
liked worlds apart and hate the new one.
I only like "So Divided", "Witches Web" and "Sunken Dreams" on the new one. And they aren't even that great.