What Rating Would You Give PFAYM?

[savemejebus]

Why are there no minus options here. I couldn't even honestly rate this cynical sell out attempt at "1".

[Napoleon Bonaparte]

Originally Posted by savemejebus

Why are there no minus options here. I couldn't even honestly rate this cynical sell out attempt at "1".

Sean?

[nocultureicons]

I went for 7, it's a solid and consistent album but not without it's flaws. I think the press are getting a little over-excited with their 4/5 ratings.

[The Gutless Wonder]

Boo! (aimed at Saveme's post btw!)

[savemejebus]

Who is Sean?

No, but seriously this album is hopeless compared to anything the guys have produced (including lifeblood). I just can't get past the lacklustre production, weak mix and that's not even mentioning the sell out cynicism of producing an album explicitly to sell the most units possible, mass communication my arse, rather than producing something amazing and powerful.

[Tetsu]

Originally Posted by savemejebus

No, but seriously this album is hopeless compared to anything the guys have produced (including lifeblood)

First of all, Lifeblood is one their best albums. Second, this album is INCOMPARABLY better than SATT (their only truly disappointingly bland, mediocre and unconvincing album). It's also better than KYE, just to mention another example.

I really don't understand all the negativity PFAYM is getting from so many fans... And it's even stranger if you contrast it with he enthusiastic reception from the vast majority of the music press... It's intriguing to see such divisive reactions... Even if you don't like the album (which is perfectly fine), I completely fail to see anything offensive about it!

[Frozendiva]

This album isn't even being sold with a brown cover or anything.

No complaints on my end. I've enjoyed every listen.

[Himynameisjon]

4. At a push. Very Disapointed...

[savemejebus]

Originally Posted by Tetsu

First of all, Lifeblood is one their best albums. Second, this album is INCOMPARABLY better than SATT (their only truly disappointingly bland, mediocre and unconvincing album). It's also better than KYE, just to mention another example.

I really don't understand all the negativity PFAYM is getting from so many fans... And it's even stranger if you contrast it with he enthusiastic reception from the vast majority of the music press... It's intriguing to see such divisive reactions... Even if you don't like the album (which is perfectly fine), I completely fail to see anything offensive about it!

Lifeblood suffers from the same syndrome as Postcards in that it was the manics trying to be something that they're not, trying to fold themselves into what they thought the public would like. Send Away The Tigers was at least honest and had the manics playing to their strengths.

To me, and this is my personal opinion, what is offensive about Postcards From a Young Man is that it is, essentially, the Manic Street Preachers looking at their back catalogue and thinking "oooh everything must go sold well, lets try and make another album like that except stripping everything good from it and replacing emotion and originality with blandness and what we think people liked about britpop". To me it is an album with no soul that exposes the bands limitations rather than playing to their strengths.

As for why the music press are falling all over themselves to praise it, well look at how the music press fawn over snow patrol, or the worst kings of leon album.

All my 2 cents though, nothing more.

[nocultureicons]

Originally Posted by Tetsu

First of all, Lifeblood is one their best albums. Second, this album is INCOMPARABLY better than SATT (their only truly disappointingly bland, mediocre and unconvincing album). It's also better than KYE, just to mention another example.

I really don't understand all the negativity PFAYM is getting from so many fans... And it's even stranger if you contrast it with he enthusiastic reception from the vast majority of the music press... It's intriguing to see such divisive reactions... Even if you don't like the album (which is perfectly fine), I completely fail to see anything offensive about it!

After the brilliance of Journal I can understand people's hesitance but I don't understand the outright rage directed at it.

[Red]

6. Great performances of not-so-great songs.

[Kieslowski]

It's 7/10 for me. I was expecting it to be my most hated Manics album, but I'm actually really enjoying listening to it. There are bits I don't like in several songs, and I really wish that they didn't have the general public's expectations in mind when they start writing songs for a new album, but at the moment I'm still finding myself wanting to listen to it all the time, and I seem to have had one of the tracks in the back of my mind at all times since Saturday. Hearing the single in the context of the album has even made me start liking the song!

My current ranking of Manics albums is thus, although it may change after a few more weeks (as it usually does) because although I think it's a more consistent album than SATT, I'm not sure any of the songs are ones that I'll see myself thinking "hmmm, I fancy listening to that album because of that song", whereas SATT has several of those (SATT, TSGD, Patsy, Bodybags):

THB (10/10)
JFPL (9/10)
GT (8/10)
LB (8/10)
GATS (7/10)
KYE (7/10)
PFAYM (7/10)
SATT (7/10)
TIMTTMY (6/10)
EMG (5/10)

[darkanddivine]

Originally Posted by savemejebus

Lifeblood suffers from the same syndrome as Postcards in that it was the manics trying to be something that they're not, trying to fold themselves into what they thought the public would like. Send Away The Tigers was at least honest and had the manics playing to their strengths.

To me, and this is my personal opinion, what is offensive about Postcards From a Young Man is that it is, essentially, the Manic Street Preachers looking at their back catalogue and thinking "oooh everything must go sold well, lets try and make another album like that except stripping everything good from it and replacing emotion and originality with blandness and what we think people liked about britpop". To me it is an album with no soul that exposes the bands limitations rather than playing to their strengths.

As for why the music press are falling all over themselves to praise it, well look at how the music press fawn over snow patrol, or the worst kings of leon album.

All my 2 cents though, nothing more.

I don't think this album is as cynical as you point out, certainly no more than SATT which was also a blatant attempt to win back commercial success. I think Lifeblood is like TIMT, not without its flaws but the sound of a band exploring something they wanted to, not obviously pushing for commercial success. The difference with these records though, is that SATT had more than enough decent, good or even great moments to warrant further listening, whereas this one doesn't.

I don't necessarily think that the Manics have gone out looking to do anything other than make another big sounding album, the kind that they have pretty much been making since 1996 and onwards. However, to me at least, it just seems that for once they have slipped up on the old quality control. I'll be looking out for the next one in due course and I hope they do something purely for musical reasons next time. They've come back before and I'm sure they will again, but I think that history will look at PFAYM as one of their lesser albums in the grand scheme of things.

[Midlands_Junk]

Nothing higher than a 6.

[Embla Claymore]

5/10. I know they can do better than this, so I'm not going to encourage them with a higher mark!
Fair enough, a couple of songs (3-4 TOPS) are fairly decent, but they don't make this a great album.