RobMCFC
Well-Known Member
I didn't realise there was side betting on my score :)
The Album Review Club - Week #195 (page 1310) - A New World Record - ELO
- Thread starter RobMCFC
- Start date
GornikDaze
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 10,528
We just had a small wager on the outcome. I thought you’d go higher for some reason - sanity prevailed in the end I suppose. I’m just pleased @Black&White&BlueMoon Town now owes me $1m which was the bet in the small print of my DM which I’m sure he didn’t read :)
Great song.
Fantastic control. Brilliant touch. Lovely drop of the shoulder, an excellent strike, and.... Oh he's hit the post! What a spectacular goal that would have been.
That's kind of where I am with this one. Neither in nor out. As mentioned before, never got into Radiohead. Never understood why. If nothing else, this week has maybe helped me draw a line under it.
During covid, when hoose-drinking replaced going to pubs (when it was deemed ok of course, with the windows open and 2m apart, couches perpendicular) a couple of us would go to each others' for a few beers. One would often stick on Radiohead, in astonishment that I wasn't a fan. Old, new, videos of live performances, the lot. My reaction always seemed the same. I should maybe come back to this, there's obviously something in it, but I'm just not getting it at this moment. That, is kind of how I feel 4 and a bit listens in.
Airbag is a good intro. In itself, not the strongest of songs, but a teaser with lots of promise and a mood setter. Unfortunately then Paranoid Android loses me, and I have to force myself back in. While it has some very good stretches, it seems to stretch too much. Subterranean, yeah nice song, quite like it. Exit music, meh. Let down is nice. A couple of nothing songs, then Electioneering, that must be off another album. Back to a bit more of the same with Climbing, then I quite like No Surprises. Two more songs after that, and the rich pink floyd toying finish, but by that point I've kind of checked out already.
Now to touch on a couple of the other topics that came up this week.
The Lyrics,themes. Initially, didn't even notice them. Maybe the singing style, maybe everything else going on, but if people here didn't talk about them, wouldn't have paid attention to them. So I read them, read about them, read what was said for them by both the band and critics. That's ok, I have done that with lots of bands, that in no way makes them weak.
What I personally really like in lyrics is usually one of two things. Either straight up and clear, or poetic and cleverly wrapped to unravel yourself. For example, Idles' June or Frightened Rabbit's death dream, for the first set. 'Baby's shoes' 'open mouth', boom, no fucking about, the image is in your head now. For examples of the other, Idles' MTT420 (interestingly covering the same topic as Airbag), and Frightened Rabbit's 400 bones. There is a story there, but you have to get to it yourself, and might take a couple goes to click. Then, somewhere below there is then the random snippets and half baked ideas clumsily stitched together, left to interpretation. That's what Radiohead have done here. Thom himself says 'I was sort of experimenting with the way that Stipe wrote lyrics where you’ve got this thing of semi-nonsense, but when you add them together, it has a cumulative expression of something.' Aye ok mate. I actually don't mind that one bit, I am quite used to it, it is a very emo thing to do. The issue for me is, the over-explantion of it beyond the album. There are articles and interviews out there, dissecting every bit. Which to me dilutes it. If it is abstract poetry, just leave it be, leave it a mystery, leave it open to interpretation, leave it meaning nothing at all other than a rhyme to accompany a melody. Read the rest, yeah loose touches on loneliness, fear, reliance. All good topics. Probably not really worth the extracurricular effort. The music is strong enough not to need that additional dimension imo.
The other thing that got talked about a lot, is the album's popularity and why it's being highly rated affects how it is viewed. I find that quite interesting, generally. I made a couple of Beatles jibes, but it is a similar thing, disliking something more than we would, because of how popular it is.
A boy band does boy-bandy things, nobody really has a problem. Good on them, bless their wee fringes. A boy band becomes a global phenomenon, everyone hates the cunts. Same with a somewhat talentless dolled up pop diva. Why is that? Don't know, I do it too. Is Biffy's later stuff really much worse than their early, not really. But it is far more universally popular, by loads who are not as like-minded, and that is somewhat off-putting. I have often berated the Foo Fighters, who I used to like, but now think are a total con. Would I be as bothered that they regurgitate the same two songs into a best selling album every 10 months if they weren't deemed the super-band they are? Probably not actually, because Jimmy Eat World after 3 or 4 really good albums went on to produce a whle bunch of mediocre stuff that hasn't lived up to the mark they set. But because it is a smaller core audience, I don't seem to mind. I Would note however, I only seem to do this with bands I actually Want to like. Popularity of artists that aren’t my thing doesn't bother me in the slightest. And that's maybe why I don't agree with Fog's or Spire's take that the album should be judged on it's rating. It's not its fault after all. Except it maybe partly is, as some of the hype is self-generated, but then, let's not fucking go there again.
Finally, it was actually listening to the Bends, that maybe made me finally realise why I probably never got into Radiohead. Because, ultimaly for me, there were others that just did it better.
For the Bends, I preferred Placebo. For OK Computer, Clarity and Showbiz. And for Pink Floyd referenced rock, White Pony. Yeah ok some came a year or two later, but there or thereabouts, the choice was there for me.
The Bends is a simpler and less fussy album. I think Ok Computer has aged better though. The bends may have done something for me when it came out, but now, that ship has sailed, and I'm not up for it. Ok Computer, I didn't mind listening to at all now, and found bits in it to like.
Ah yes, I have to score this don't I? No idea, a fucking 5 I guess, to keep it simple.
That's kind of where I am with this one. Neither in nor out. As mentioned before, never got into Radiohead. Never understood why. If nothing else, this week has maybe helped me draw a line under it.
During covid, when hoose-drinking replaced going to pubs (when it was deemed ok of course, with the windows open and 2m apart, couches perpendicular) a couple of us would go to each others' for a few beers. One would often stick on Radiohead, in astonishment that I wasn't a fan. Old, new, videos of live performances, the lot. My reaction always seemed the same. I should maybe come back to this, there's obviously something in it, but I'm just not getting it at this moment. That, is kind of how I feel 4 and a bit listens in.
Airbag is a good intro. In itself, not the strongest of songs, but a teaser with lots of promise and a mood setter. Unfortunately then Paranoid Android loses me, and I have to force myself back in. While it has some very good stretches, it seems to stretch too much. Subterranean, yeah nice song, quite like it. Exit music, meh. Let down is nice. A couple of nothing songs, then Electioneering, that must be off another album. Back to a bit more of the same with Climbing, then I quite like No Surprises. Two more songs after that, and the rich pink floyd toying finish, but by that point I've kind of checked out already.
Now to touch on a couple of the other topics that came up this week.
The Lyrics,themes. Initially, didn't even notice them. Maybe the singing style, maybe everything else going on, but if people here didn't talk about them, wouldn't have paid attention to them. So I read them, read about them, read what was said for them by both the band and critics. That's ok, I have done that with lots of bands, that in no way makes them weak.
What I personally really like in lyrics is usually one of two things. Either straight up and clear, or poetic and cleverly wrapped to unravel yourself. For example, Idles' June or Frightened Rabbit's death dream, for the first set. 'Baby's shoes' 'open mouth', boom, no fucking about, the image is in your head now. For examples of the other, Idles' MTT420 (interestingly covering the same topic as Airbag), and Frightened Rabbit's 400 bones. There is a story there, but you have to get to it yourself, and might take a couple goes to click. Then, somewhere below there is then the random snippets and half baked ideas clumsily stitched together, left to interpretation. That's what Radiohead have done here. Thom himself says 'I was sort of experimenting with the way that Stipe wrote lyrics where you’ve got this thing of semi-nonsense, but when you add them together, it has a cumulative expression of something.' Aye ok mate. I actually don't mind that one bit, I am quite used to it, it is a very emo thing to do. The issue for me is, the over-explantion of it beyond the album. There are articles and interviews out there, dissecting every bit. Which to me dilutes it. If it is abstract poetry, just leave it be, leave it a mystery, leave it open to interpretation, leave it meaning nothing at all other than a rhyme to accompany a melody. Read the rest, yeah loose touches on loneliness, fear, reliance. All good topics. Probably not really worth the extracurricular effort. The music is strong enough not to need that additional dimension imo.
The other thing that got talked about a lot, is the album's popularity and why it's being highly rated affects how it is viewed. I find that quite interesting, generally. I made a couple of Beatles jibes, but it is a similar thing, disliking something more than we would, because of how popular it is.
A boy band does boy-bandy things, nobody really has a problem. Good on them, bless their wee fringes. A boy band becomes a global phenomenon, everyone hates the cunts. Same with a somewhat talentless dolled up pop diva. Why is that? Don't know, I do it too. Is Biffy's later stuff really much worse than their early, not really. But it is far more universally popular, by loads who are not as like-minded, and that is somewhat off-putting. I have often berated the Foo Fighters, who I used to like, but now think are a total con. Would I be as bothered that they regurgitate the same two songs into a best selling album every 10 months if they weren't deemed the super-band they are? Probably not actually, because Jimmy Eat World after 3 or 4 really good albums went on to produce a whle bunch of mediocre stuff that hasn't lived up to the mark they set. But because it is a smaller core audience, I don't seem to mind. I Would note however, I only seem to do this with bands I actually Want to like. Popularity of artists that aren’t my thing doesn't bother me in the slightest. And that's maybe why I don't agree with Fog's or Spire's take that the album should be judged on it's rating. It's not its fault after all. Except it maybe partly is, as some of the hype is self-generated, but then, let's not fucking go there again.
Finally, it was actually listening to the Bends, that maybe made me finally realise why I probably never got into Radiohead. Because, ultimaly for me, there were others that just did it better.
For the Bends, I preferred Placebo. For OK Computer, Clarity and Showbiz. And for Pink Floyd referenced rock, White Pony. Yeah ok some came a year or two later, but there or thereabouts, the choice was there for me.
The Bends is a simpler and less fussy album. I think Ok Computer has aged better though. The bends may have done something for me when it came out, but now, that ship has sailed, and I'm not up for it. Ok Computer, I didn't mind listening to at all now, and found bits in it to like.
Ah yes, I have to score this don't I? No idea, a fucking 5 I guess, to keep it simple.
Black&White&BlueMoon Town
Well-Known Member
I certainly wouldn't have pegged you for giving this a lower score than Rob, so "No Surprises" you are not!
I'll stick to EPL wagers as yesterday was quite the (long - when picking a champion) haul if I'm to ever get to your small print. Hopefully a pint at the next City match we are attending together will start me on that right path.
threespires
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 8,736
- Team supported
- City
Some of us like to do short reviews, some of use like to try and organise our thoughts a bit and some like me like to go off on one into a bit of a ramble but ultimately what you've said there is all that really counts.
threespires
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 8,736
- Team supported
- City
Keith Richards on why Roger Waters "lost touch with reality"
The Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards has denounced multiple bands over the years, but his attack on Roger Waters and Pink Floyd is particularly strange.faroutmagazine.co.uk
Of all the places I'd look for a steer on 'reality' I'm not sure a hugely successful rock star, be it Richards, Yorke or Waters, would be my starting place. Good theme for a (short) playlist, rock stars who are normal enough that you'd want to spend more than an evening with them.
Saddleworth2
Well-Known Member
Lots of common ground with this review. Interesting the REM reference on lyrics. I haven’t heard anything like the criticism of their early work compared to the lyrics on okc. I must have played it a lot when it first was released as it is as familiar as hell with me. I would have been 40 when it was released so a stage in life where reviews and rock journalism were not forefront. I think I may have even got okc as a 40th birthday present. I can remember looking at the various top 100 album charts and being surprised it was rated so highly but I probably just put that down to ‘the yoof of the day’. I’m not good with comparisons so see little of Pink Floyd in this. I think Bills comparison to KC probably more apt.
It’s not a great album. I think it’s inconsistent in quality with the first half stronger than the second. I do like the instrumentation, the layering and clearly the production. I actually like Thoms voice there is fragility and vulnerability where others hear winge. The lyrics meh. But there is an air of detatchment and a lack of emotion vibe that sits well with the music. I probably won’t play it again for a long time but based on I liked it when I was 40 and it still has a number if strong songs on it I will give it a 7.
Yeah I'll add the voice never bothered me one bit. I deliberately described it as singing style rather than voice, when saying I missed the lyrics.
It was a long post. Rather than intellectual posturing, I think it was more, emotional posturing from me.
Saddleworth2
Well-Known Member
I thought your post was emotionally intellectual mate. Either that or intellectually emotional.
threespires
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 8,736
- Team supported
- City
I was going to respond to some of the points in a few of the excellent reviews like Bills, but I've probably already prattled on more than enough for most and what my opinions are on the use of diminished chords (tldr: RH use interesting a times but not in the same league as others) and atonality (tldr: have over the last 30 years come to the conclusion Schoenberg was talking through his arse) herein are probably moot at this point. So I'll demure and focus on something that has struck me reading all the comments.
It's been a lively discussion with a pretty widely distributed range of opinions and scores and lots of people have had very interesting things to say both for and against the album. Which leads me to wonder....
If the internet/www had existed in it's current form in 1997 would this album have been as successful? This came out at a time when Navigator had yet to be killed off by Internet Explorer, the very first iteration of Google had just launched, the smartphone didn't exist, the first iteration of Napster was 2 years away and though there were music forums on the likes of AOL many people were still barely online. Given all that I think people forget how influential print critics/journalists and music magazines and papers were back in the day and how much the record labels engaged with them. Whatever you think of this record it's hard to argue that the championing it got didn't contribute to it's success. But if people were more focused on their own and peer opinion rather than the press would it's trajectory have been different?
I know the mixed reception it's had on here this week is the result of looking back through a lens of nearly 30 years and it's entirely possible that the virtues championed by those promoting it would still have resulted in the same level of success but I do wonder.
It's been a lively discussion with a pretty widely distributed range of opinions and scores and lots of people have had very interesting things to say both for and against the album. Which leads me to wonder....
If the internet/www had existed in it's current form in 1997 would this album have been as successful? This came out at a time when Navigator had yet to be killed off by Internet Explorer, the very first iteration of Google had just launched, the smartphone didn't exist, the first iteration of Napster was 2 years away and though there were music forums on the likes of AOL many people were still barely online. Given all that I think people forget how influential print critics/journalists and music magazines and papers were back in the day and how much the record labels engaged with them. Whatever you think of this record it's hard to argue that the championing it got didn't contribute to it's success. But if people were more focused on their own and peer opinion rather than the press would it's trajectory have been different?
I know the mixed reception it's had on here this week is the result of looking back through a lens of nearly 30 years and it's entirely possible that the virtues championed by those promoting it would still have resulted in the same level of success but I do wonder.
GornikDaze
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 10,528
A pint sounds good - sadly I didn’t make any games this season but will renew membership just in case next season.
stonerblue
Well-Known Member
They're all nutters mate. And like all of us, the older they get the nuttier they become.
I really don't care about the people behind the music I like
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
I think this is a good point. I bought it originally even though I disliked their earlier singles because it was supposedly "different" from them (how ironic -- I read that as "better" than the early singles) and because the reviews were so nearly-uniformly great, even though the reviewer I like best panned it. After many fruitless hours trying to appreciate it on long car trips and at home, I couldn't. Had I a lot more information from other sources would I have thought more before purchasing it? I still probably would have -- but I was in my early 30s, married, both of us working just to afford living here, both my wife and I traveling constantly. I wasn't the audience. I think it was just a function of thinking "this is music for a person I am not, and never was. This is music for types I've never hung out with, and who are younger than I am." It really does come down to having no time for no hope.
All these reviews both good and bad have made me wonder had I been ten years younger, in school, more worried about the future, high regularly, more frequently bored, angrier and/or depressed more often, would I have liked it? I still don't think so but there'd likely have been a better chance.
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
To continue -- the thing is, my two favo(u)rite records of all time (both are ahead by some distance) are also from points of view I don't/didn't have: one is unabashedly Marxist; the other is unabashedly female/feminist. But what I got from those records is an education, and I empathiz(s)ed/understood the perspectives whether I agreed or not. They shook me up. They made me think and question my own being, and my choices. To me they were revolutionary (both musically and lyrically) and the messages were distinct, strong and new to me.
Maybe that's where I struggle: the "message" here, if there is one, is nihilistic. In effect, it's a perspective easy to adopt, not hard, and it might even be considered a cop-out. But that said, nihilism might also be a perspective earned after years/decades of suffering, toil and struggle. And then we are right back where we started with this band: what did they go through to drive this record? Even if you say it doesn't matter -- no one knows Thom's inner torment -- it still isn't specific about it. And that's when his generalities get frustrating, and appear to be an act, not a mystery worth solving. But if the LISTENER has been through suffering, toil and struggle, then this record might speak to them in ways it wouldn't/couldn't to me.
And then we arrive at the real irony of my views: a spoiled rotten person calling this band spoiled rotten!
Last edited:
Bill Walker
Well-Known Member
Speaking for myself I've never been that interested in whether a record is massively successful or not. It doesn't matter to me. I hear something and if it resonates with me I explore it further.
For me it has to be musically interesting, that is the main criteria, lyrics are not that important (but I do love the lyrics in Norwegian Wood).
When I heard "Paranoid Android" on the radio I was very interested in it. It sounded complex (and it is).
Anyway Foggy...I wasn't a snotty student at odds with the world or some spaced out Goth type smoking loads of dope and hating the bourgeoise. I was a happily married guy with 2 young kids and a very good well paid job.
Musically PA is complex, but great.
Even the intro section to PA is awesome.
Without getting too boringly technical the opening acoustic passage opens on Cminor, moving to Cminor7th the F7 added 9th resolving on Gminor but then Gminor added 9th, each 9th chord has a diminished 5th (tritone).
This is great. These lads have studied music.
The interesting thing is every word Thom sang is on the offbeat;
Please could you stop the noise?
I'm tryna get some rest
From all the unborn chicken
Voices in my head
Every word is between the 4 beats (to a bar), giving us = Syncopation. Which I always like. This opening section to PA shows knowledge and technical ability, setting RH apart from seemingly everything I was hearing on the radio (since Prog) unless you listen to Jazz stations.
Anyhow just that opening passage, which was the first RH I ever heard is a lightyear away from Oasis, I'm not knocking Oasis, they wrote some great songs but nothing that interested me, just straight CFG7 kinda stuff.
Anyway, an attempt to explain myself and why I like this album.
Last edited:
Saddleworth2
Well-Known Member
I can appreciate a great film without knowing diddly squat about the director.
I can appreciate a great meal at a restaurant without knowing the chefs background.
I believe Mozart was a childish **** but I still think some of his stuff is ok.
I can like the themes of a record without any real life empathy for them. In fact i would say it’s impossible to like a wide range of music if that was a criteria for enjoying it. One of my favourite Albums is Pet Sounds. I like it for the songwriting and harmonies that sound like they were made in heaven. I have zero connection with what the songs are about. I am as far from a love sick Californian wannabe surfer dude dominated by his dad as it’s possible to get but god I love Brian Wilson.
I don’t need to understand the note sequence on Airbag to think it’s a good opening track. My ears (or nowadays my left ear) tells me that.
This week has made blindingly obvious how we appreciate music is completely different, from those that simply want to listen and enjoy, to those at the other end of the scale. Isnt it great that we are all so unique.
I can appreciate a great meal at a restaurant without knowing the chefs background.
I believe Mozart was a childish **** but I still think some of his stuff is ok.
I can like the themes of a record without any real life empathy for them. In fact i would say it’s impossible to like a wide range of music if that was a criteria for enjoying it. One of my favourite Albums is Pet Sounds. I like it for the songwriting and harmonies that sound like they were made in heaven. I have zero connection with what the songs are about. I am as far from a love sick Californian wannabe surfer dude dominated by his dad as it’s possible to get but god I love Brian Wilson.
I don’t need to understand the note sequence on Airbag to think it’s a good opening track. My ears (or nowadays my left ear) tells me that.
This week has made blindingly obvious how we appreciate music is completely different, from those that simply want to listen and enjoy, to those at the other end of the scale. Isnt it great that we are all so unique.
RobMCFC
Well-Known Member
Kind of related .....
I love a good 10 or 15 Beach Boys tracks but have never delved into their background.
However, on the back of one song nomination in the playlist thread - Dennis Wilson's incredible "River Song", which I had never heard before - and a bit of background reading, I have lined up a Beach Boys book (Catch a Wave by Peter Ames Carlin) for later in the year and am looking forward to the upcoming documentary on Disney+.