Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
what a lazy half assed non-review.
that's a mag review, John (who edits the Quietus and is an upstanding chap) didn't exactly have loads of words to work with.
just to like.. convey their opinions. if he was really a good reviewer he'd have just agreed with me in a single clause sentence!
you really think that's extravagant vocab? think you might be projecting onto him a little bit
smacks of "I've listened to the record and it sounds like dull, regurgitated, unimaginative Americana and I am going to use my vocabulary to sum this up in three succinct words so it will not eat into my strict word limit." Pretty good review, I liked the Neutral Milk Bail Hostel bit.
They only like fad bands. A bad review from NME usually means the record is great. And it is. Not their best but still miles better than the crap the NME usually fawns over.
on the enduring classic "A bad review from NME usually means the record is great" 'maxim'
I 10000% guarantee you will be rather less bold about it by the end
The Decemberists used to be a bad I got excited about but now they're a bit blah and I think that is soley down to the fact they now sound like any other American folk band who stumble across the odd moment of genius, but the problem is it's not by accident and the other songs are screaming greatness when they are just downright dull which in a way is more off putting then something that's just dull.
So the Mumford & Sons trying to be REM point, based on what I've just said I could see where he was coming from... he should of just phrased it better, but if this is a magazine review then I can assure you he didn't have a lot of words to work with.
Not such a fan of X meets Y meets Z kinda writing but it's nigh on impossible not to do that in that short a space - you should check out some of his writing for the Quietus, it's great.
and i found that review funny
He's got a very low word count to get his point across, and he's working to brief, or at least a "house style". If he says it's rubbish but is balanced, it's not entertaining, and no more reviews commisioned (and therefore no eating).
I like the album a lot though, cheers.
but I would say the one bewildering thing - This Is Why We Fight compared to Time of Your Life - eh?!
For a while a few years ago I thought they might be my new favorite band. But from what I've heard of the new album he may be right. 'Turgid Americana pastiche' is a great line.
It's a pretty big departure (hardly any narrative songs, much more acoustic) especially following on from Hazards. To me, it kind of sounds like a Colin Meloy solo record.
I like it. I think it'll be a grower. But I can't quite escape a little sense of disappointment.
they started slating Decemberist album's around Picaresque. Since I recently sold their last 3 album's I think they were the one mag kind of right about them while everyone else was heaping praise. They are grating, somewhat tuneless album's and lyrics and the way they are sung get's old quick. Haven't heard the new one yet but I'll give it a listen. With the NME review it doesn't look like much has changed.
In fact, how can anyone describe any of the music of The Decemberists as "tuneless"? Surely that's to say that it's devoid of melody? And to argue that their songs are devoid of melody is about as worthwhile as arguing that they're devoid of guitars, or vocals, or drums, or lyrics. Or something.
as Sky Blue Sky is to Wilco?
has a dodgy mid-section, but its opening four tracks are sublime. that said, it probably is their weakest LP as a whole. i can't compare though since the Decemberists have always reeked of faux-theatre to me and hence i am unable to listen to them.
despite my opinions, Doran's review renders music journalism redundant.
but the album is wallpaper.
p.s. doran is one of the better/best writers around, don't judge him on a pithy review of a nothing record.
It was about Bombay Bicycle Club's new album, due out sometime this year, which if I'm thinking correctly will make 3 albums in 3 consecutive years - and yet the whole article was based around their 'slow working pace' and how they're 'never ones to rush things'. Thought it was a bit bizarre, really.
It did begin with the fact that it apparently took them 3 years between winning a slot at V Festival and releasing their debut, but I think the writer had then oddly pretended this was still happening purely to give the article some kind of flow. Strange.
and i also like the Decemberists...
but which is better? There's only one way to find out!
...he is definitely up for a more gentlemanly way of duelling. He suggests a chilli contest. You can take it from me, his deployment of chipotle is quite the masterstroke.
being simple countryfolk, i can't imagine the decemberists being anything but rusty with the hot sauce
and the sulky notion of other people actually having the cheek to enjoy it.
I've not heard the whole album yet though so the rest could be right for all I know.
it's the sort of album i'd give to someone struggling through a Battle With Cancer. pleasant enough to create a nice atmosphere and lacking anything with weight or depth that might get them thinking too hard.
it's a very vanilla record, is what it is.
Ruck with AIDS - 9pm
Let's fuck up Heart Disease - 8pm
Old Blue Last
But this is really funny !!!!
kind of makes it sound like something on the menu of an edgily independent burger bar
CUNTERY AND WESTERN SELLOUTS
then they shouldn't employ REM musicians to REM-up their record.
Pretty much every review of the album has mentioned it.
I like it.
Who, I think we can all agree, release a shite record and get panned in the reviews we all laugh at how funny the reviews are.
Then when a band who you like gets the same treatment you fall over yourselves stating that the same tactics used in this review are some sort of crime.
and....i gotta say, they've had that white lies record on repeat at work and it's really not THAT bad.
i mean, i'd never listen to it through choice...but there is at least one song that i really don't mind.
lyrics are utter shit, mind.....but i don't find it too offensive for some reason. i'd probably give it 4/10 in a review, but i wouldn't use it as an excuse for a 'HEY LOOK AT ME MAKING JOKES ABOUT A SHIT RECORD' type review.