Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
please tell me there is someone...
as good as a half-decent Smiths tribute band, yeah.
do you even know my taste?
the shins, tom waits, nick cave, bowie, the cure, elliott smith, phoenix, cut copy, panda bear, at the drive-in, lcd, bjork... these are just a few of the artists who mean the world to me.
they had cultural relevance, they tapped into particular traditions in their artwork and imagery, they had different musical ideas, and their songs actually had some lyrical content about politics, emotions etc.
Now The Drums are what they are, and I don't dislike them particuarly, but surely by their admission they write camp, pleasant but slightly vacous little pop songs. If they are the heirs to The Smiths, then there's a great big bastardisation inbetween.
You going 'They're amazing.'
And then some other people going 'Wtf?!, they're completely average.'
So the vitriol against them is purely a reaction against the hype, rather than because of any qualities they themselves do or don't have - they're far too bland to actively dislike.
They really aren't.
U R DOIN IT RONG
honestly think you should be ashamed of yourself if you care
I don't get the controversy. Honest, I expected them to be some sort of haircut band I'd hate, but it's just a pretty good indie record, I just don't understand how it's offended people, I really don't.
be great or terrible, innit.
mostly, i don't like that anyone, including myself, is wasting one and energy on them.
it's not like it's unusual for an indie band to be 'pretty good', I don't think that's the source of the controversy: 'Better than average indie band releases songs, community shaken'. They seem to be a really passionately polarising band, which seems quite baffling.
Better off dead.
It's a slightly above average record. I can understand why a lot of people feel passionately about it (in favour and against), but I'm just a little indifferent to it all...
in the world of music reviews
10 - exceptional record, really fucking good, you should listen to this or you'll be incomplete
9 - really good
8 - good
6-7 - all right, not great, not awful i.e. average
5 & below - no one needs to know about this record, except for how dull/bad it is
Ideally, a band doesn't want to make an album that is anything less than an 8. 7.5, to Pitchfork, means that the Drums have made an album that is alright bordering on something good, they just have to hone the good bits to hit an 8 or even 9.
then they'd know that 7/10 does not equal average.
You don't use the same rating systems for films, computer games, TV, theatre and music, that would be too easy.
now I find out Pitchfork have given them 7.5 I don't no whether to go or not. Whens the DIS review
but tl;dr - I going
Some people really like them (I don't know why), some can't stand them and some just think they're okay so it seems like an average based on the general consensus about them.
Personally I can't see why a group doing utterly unoriginal music that has been done better enough times to never run out of stuff to listen to should be lauded by anyone with even an elementary knowledge of music.
but there's something fundamentally dishonest about them I can't quite put my finger on. Too considered, too arch, too much affectation in the vocals.
It makes reading these threads hilarious fun without having to commit to having an opinion of my own :)
...to be honest I was expecting them to give it something far worse. You see actually recognise why people don't like The Drums and whatever is raised a criticism just comes across as a strength to me or something I am easily able to forgive simply because I really just enjoy their sound. It's a wonderful pop album - as good as any I have heard in a very long time and contrary to the Guardian's review a couple of weeks ago, I do find their sound "affecting" on an emotional level. Not all the time but then nothing does that.
No, the album was never going to get the same hype as the EP got and to some extent that is justified but it's still packed with a great collection of melodies and hooks.
I don't want everyone to like The Drums anyway because I really think I'll start to like them less a lot less - it was a bit like that when Bloc Party released 'Silent Alarm' - it just wasn't the same.
Morrissey, Marr, Rourke and Joyce. Four reasons why you're wrong.
and they are likely to have a cult following for a time. But I think we are generally so desperate to find the next big bands that will shape the future we are hyping anything that's half decent. 7.5 is fair enough!
They sound like your typical 'here today gone tomorrow' type band to me. They've really nailed that 'dickless' guitar sound, bravo chaps.
Theres nothing really intiguing, genuine, imaginative, subtle or inspiring about them - they're OK...they're just another guitar band following the same rules and appealing to the same sort of people who liked all the stuff similar to them thats went before. Its just not interesting. Its OK. Its acceptable. But, really? its not amazing, is it? I mean, come on now. What is it that we have to "get"? They seem pretty vacuous to me. I think 7.5 seems like an acceptable score for a band like this.
best band of their generation... for those who thought the kooks were the best of their generation also...