Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
4.6 and 4.0 apiece for their new albums! Are their reviews justified (in your opinion)?
Only heard both of these for the first time in the past 24hrs (appears I only get sent promos of records I couldn't give a shit about).
Interpol record is solid and I like it but I was sort of left thinking 'I wish whoever produced and mixed this could rework on The National's records in sounding this good'
Blonde Redhead, on first listen, seems quite slight, especially compared to how epic and incredible '23' was. I'm liking it but then they're pretty much the result of an algorithm of music-wot-i-likes.
Interpol - 7/10 http://drownedinsound.com/releases/15664/reviews/4140894
Blonde Redhead review to follow, keep your eyes on http://drownedinsound.com/releases/reviewed
both albums were big disappointments for me. 'Penny Sparkle' left me feeling cold, 'Interpol' just left me feeling depressed at the band's decline. I can see where the criticism's stemmed from.
ALTHOUGH this could be an elaborate dismissal of what's probably the best week for releases throughout the entire year.
Tomorrow: Grinderman gets a 3.2, Of Montreal get the video of the surprised kitty - 0.1.
Not to go all indie snob but they've been on a marked decline since the first album. Maybe even earlier since The Specialist is still their best song...
PDA was released before the album as well...
is that they lack the sentimantality of a lot of other publications. Conversely it often means their reviews are pretty cold and humourless, but at the end of the day if you don't like a record then why pussyfoot about giving it 6/10 or whatever?
That said I think with Interpol you do get the impression that they were one of those bands all set to slide out of favour with P4K anyway - certainly the review reads like an interrogation of where the band is at first and foremost - but at the same time this record hasn't been recieved totally ecstatically by their fans, so it's probably a reasonably reflection of that... I quite like it, but then, I think Antics is one of the most crushingly disappointing records ever made, so I' possibly not one to talk...
the reviews have pretty much devolved into a stream of non-confrontational 7s and 8s.
DiS writers don't (anymore), hence reviews are assigned voluntarily, and people tend to gravitate towards writing about things they expect to enjoy, plus they tend to be, y'know, younger and a bit less professionally jaded. I also suspect the inevitable flack one gets in comments if you give a low score puts some people off getting their hands too dirty - it's never actively nice to get abuse (see the recent Sufjan review, for instance).
Although as I've said before, if you round P4K scores to the nearest whole number they're for the most part 7 or 8s, the decimalistion is a pretty nifty bit of sleight of hand. But yeah, as I saiud above, fair dos to P4K for consistently holding their nerves with 'big' bands.
and that there is a match-up between the taste of the reviewer and what they're reviewing and that all makes sense.
But still, a 7-8 score for everything that gets reviewed is a bad look, surely?
Also I think the comments section at the bottom of the reviews is a good thing - but if you're saying what I think you are and that it's making writers scared to say what they really think it's worth DiS considering scrapping it, or getting braver writers.
I don't really think it's REALLY likely to be a meaningful factor, I think it's much more to do with people writing about things they like.
But I think my piint about the P4K decimislaistion still stands - I think they do have a tendency to step up to the plat one way another with big releases, but if you round up yeaterday you get
Teengirl Fantasy 7/10
Cloudland Canyon 7/10
which is hardly mindblowingly bold.
The basic fact of the matter is that things would probably be different and a bit more 'professional' (by definition) if there was money to pay people, but I do think that the odd bit of iconclasm and the use of the decimal system does make P4K look like they're giving a much wider spread of scores than they in fact are.
the likes of Sufjan, Black Mountain and Underworld have all had bad reviews here recently
theory - I don't mind the decimal point at all. It seems to work pretty successfully, I don't see the point really in figuring out it's flaws.
Anyway, I don't really want to be negative cos I like this site a lot. I'm sure most people don't mind, or haven't noticed any drop in professionalism or if the reviews seem a lot safer than they used to.
I don't think being boldly negative for the sake of it is the way to fix it either tho. The Sufjan Stevens one definitely got people talking, but the fact that NO-ONE agrees with the reviewer suggests that they might not have got it which isn't exactly ideal either.
is that it makes it look like there's a much wider spread of opinion that there really is on P4K, when in fact most things there would be getting 7/8 if they had to round up. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a really great idea, but we'd kind of look like douches if we suddenly adopted it...
Seemed to me that the reviewer thought that there was nothing particularly wrong with the music and that it was all well done, but they just found it a real downer. Which is fair enough, but seems to be one of those scores that is reviewing the album specifically in the context of the past ones, rather than whether it's any good in it's own right. So an Interpol 4.6 could someone else's 6.0
Looking forward to the False Priest one - apparently they're not too enamoured with it.
Just The Walkmen, Deerhunter and Grinderman maybe?
It was out a week ago in the US wasn't it? Did they decide to wait and find out what all the other critics thought first?
I was expecting them to give it a lowish score anyway though.
There has been a lot out in the last week, and they were probably catching up with stuff they missed during their 90s songs countdown.
I'm glad it got a worse score than OLTA. Because it's the weakest of the four.
the interpol album is by FAR the most boring thing I've heard all year... despite the glorious opening track I found it mundayne and it totally washed over me. I took me 4 attempts to get to the end of the album *previously calling it a day by track 4* and I was left with an expression best reserved for a lobotomy patient.
Blonde Redhead album is relly nice though, but I can understand someone in not liking it, especially if they were expecting a Blonde Redhead LP.
Some people don't like/get/have the patience for the Interpol album. Oh well. Always been a band that divides opinion.
it goes way downhill after that. I listened to Blonde Redhead's new one yesterday and it completely washed over me. I had to listen to 23 over again to remind myself why I liked them in the first place!
It's too bad that 5/10 doesn't describe average records, which would spread out the scores a bit. But average records get 6 and 7's and good ones get 8's. Music critics tend to be fans who almost always give the benefit of the doubt. Take a look at Metacritic Movie scores: those dudes are stingy!
the Interpol album is just straight up boring. Interpol's has to be the most frustrating fall from grace of any band in the past ten years. Classic debut and then three albums progressively worse that what came before. They are just going through the motions at this point.
it's just a shame it followed one of the best records of all time. In that sense of the word, 'worse, I guess
...but I loved Antics.
I just listened to Interpol for the 3rd time and gave up a couple of tracks into the second half where it doesn't seem to go anywhere. I had such high hope as I enjoyed 'Lights' and some of the first half is promising.
I've never listened to 23 properly but had it down as one to check out for years. I listened to 'Penny Sparkle' yesterday and it completely passed me by. Just a bit boring really.