afuture

Very good - a first class example of what the electronic word should read like.

Editors on MOTD. They are the new Athlete.

But criticisng anything for not being experimental ("Nothing Athlete has ever released is") is pretty pointless. Forget about what the accompanying press release may or may not have said.

Athlete have never sought to be Kraftwerk or Radiohead, and while this record is strewn with popcorn crackle percussion and synths, listening to it more than once shows what's really in it.

This review doesn't seem to have digested the record, hence whole parags simply describe what happens in the tracks and in order.

Go listen and re-listen. It's nice.

...but the fact that it's not The Maccabees could be its undoing. Maybe they could form a supergroup wit the bassist from JJ72 if they get dropped?

right.

'Ill'.

Gareth - very good, clearly wasted on many of these proles.

The first four tunes are massive, just feel the rest sounds like poor man's QOTSA.

The live set is currently mindblowing though.

Ax

they're not touring with Simon Tong playing lead guitar!

Good article - if a bit long. It would indeed be a shame if their legacy was to be tainted by some over-bloated Song For The Lovers with McCabe on guitar nonsense.

Not unexpected but a shame no less.

Though some people were unaffected by The Cooper Temple Clause, nonetheless, they were many people's favourite.

Many acts are liked, listened to and watched, but few indie bands since Suede, Placebo and Mansun drew quite the same level of fan adoration.

And though the NME may have abandoned them after they helped shift tons of magazine throughout the 2002/3 heyday, the fact is, they were doing the whole Primal Scream vs Oasis rip-off/mash-up long before Kasabian, with a lot more originality and tons more style.

It's unfair to underestimate just how far forward the Coopers pushed sullen British indie, the three excellent records they produced will stand as a testament to that.

No, it simply pointed out that a particular portion of the review didn't make sense and also highlighted a couple of factual inaccuracies in it.

Ends.

No, they're not Tool, but don't be silly, you don't compare the piano playing of Bach with that on a Supergrass record.

It's about the context of what they're doing.

Compared to Libertines et al, it's adventurous and - as you say - pretty spot on.

Diver - it wasn't a personal attack on anyone. Make it so if you will - it's the typically immature thing to do, but the point is made.

Whoever 'reviewed' this clearly neither listened to it properly nor understood the concept.

Firstly, the turn of phrase that endeared Arctic Monkeys so much into the public and critical consciousness was one that romanticised the bitter things, not one which bitterly recalled them.

Every bar fight, taxi row or bouncer scuffle is told with a sense of 'it'll be alrate'.

Arctic Monkeys have the humour of Mozza with little of acerbicness.

So much of this review doesn't even make sense in basic English, look at the comments concerning Teddy Picker three lines up from the end of the second para, for example. What exactly are you trying to say here?

Also, the musicianship here is far from basic.

The kind of adventurous rhythms used here - the tempo changes, beat changes and dynamic changes - are miles beyond your Kaiser Chiefs. This is such a fundamental aspect of what the band do, it seems unbelievable that it would go without mention.

Reviews need to be done in context. Rather than just rattling off the same old lines about 'hype' and it being 'accessible', why not change the record and do a bit of homework?

I bet Colin Roberts wouldn't have allowed a perfect score for something as pointless as Jamie T. Aside from how the writer namechecks Pete Doherty against Weller, Bowie, Strummer and (presumably Robert, though it needs to be made clear) Smith, this really isn't music for a generation.

There's whole paragraphs of this review which are utterly meaningless. Such as:

<i>"I know them inside out, through the layers of the lining, and I have done since I first laid ears on them - the music, which stumbles drunkenly through wicked and un-cool revival punk like Rancid and into the drive-by-night, shot-eyed thrills of hip-hop and jungle, spilling out across the doomed, sepia-tinged English love affair that was The Libertines, maps my obsessions from nothingness 'til the present day."</i>

It's a shame, because the Explosions in the Sky article is really good.

Utter fucking genius.

to this country's music and media industry that a band this atroicious can not only get a deal but get coverage too.

They really are a composite of borrowed ideals and stolen impersonations. They make Nowasis (Oasis tribute band that famously made it on to TOTP) look like The Verve.

Whoever agreed to bankrole this at Warner's should be sent to Iraq.

This is probably the worst major label band in a long time. Absolute cack.

Haha, yes, it's an inconvenience that when bands you've been championing to get massive for years get big and bring the shitstained pants of popular nonculture with them.

There was many an insult flying about at The Noisettes during their Muse support, and I expect it'll be cretin-ville down in Brixton tomorrow night for The Killers too.

Still, I think comparing Muse and The Killers is pretty bloody pointless. But on past episodes, Killers have never been the greatest live band, though they have betetr pop songs than Moose.