#61
|
||||
|
||||
I really like the interview of the band in this era... so easy and funny
|
#62
|
||||
|
||||
Listened to the opening track on my way to coffee shop this morning. Great no nonsense rock track.
Underdogs is absolute pish though, isn't it? |
#63
|
||||
|
||||
Haven't listened to it in ages, don't intend to. A few good songs, but just too safe for me. It was such a massive letdown after Lifeblood, they'd gone away for a few years and i expected something amazing to come out of them. It didn't, but at least it wasn't as bad as the biggest disappointment of them all...PFAYM.
That said it was a great tour, as was the December one that year. Hearing 1985 and Forever Delayed played again was a real highlight. |
#64
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#65
|
||||
|
||||
Well compared to Coldplay it probably isn't...but for a Manics album 'bad' is just too high a compliment.
|
#66
|
||||
|
||||
I still say that PFAYM is SATT done right. Commercial pop/rock anthems but this time the band actually sound involved.
__________________
|
#67
|
||||
|
||||
Couldn't be more wrong.
|
#68
|
||||
|
||||
Urmom.
__________________
|
#69
|
||||
|
||||
And there was me thinking an esteemed member of the forum might engage in a discussion about the nuances between the two more commercial albums of the last few years - one which achieved both it's critical and commercial objectives, and one that is arguably a more overblown and even more poorly produced album than know your enemy.
But yeah, urmom. |
#70
|
||||
|
||||
Well, a jokey flippant answer seemed like the best reply to such a blunt, flippant comment. I didn't realise you expected nuanced and intelligent discussion after such an abrupt and equally nonexplanative reply that essentially carries the meaning of "bullshit" stretched to four words. "Please elaborate" often works better.
But since you so desire: I don't care about whether it satisfied its intended objectives, that's an objective standard and has zero relevance to my personal views, on behalf of which I'm strictly speaking. Both albums are crafted from the same vein - chorus-oriented pop/rock anthems for the masses. But where SATT sounds lifeless, uninspired and like it's on autopilot, PFAYM actually manages to be joyous and engaging in a way that sounds like the band's actually got their heart and soul behind it. Overblown? Perhaps, but I don't find that automatically bad: in fact, I quite wish they had properly dwelled into that direction rather than restricting the choirs etc into a couple of songs. Furthermore, where SATT fumbles on Wire's all-time-worst lyrics, PFAYM is a swell enough return to form for him. I don't find the idea of a band touching their pop sensibilities inherently evil, and PFAYM shows that. It's not a great album, it's somewhere near the bottom of the list in my Manics album ordering and it carries a couple of right clunkers, but it's a good one and I find it far more enjoyable SATT. It's more relaxed, more loose, more enjoying itself as opposed to SATT's forced, going-through-the-motions feel. It may have been just as cynical of a hit-seeker as SATT IS, but the key thing is that it's not as audible: PFAYM sounds like a pop album that they made because they fancied having a go at that sound, and not simply because they desperately wanted another hit single under their name by all means necessary. In an ideal world they wouldn't have had such a forced need to get a hit and would have been more than happy to continue exploring new paths and indulging on their artistic sides, but in the situation where we stand I'll far more gladly reach out for PFAYM than SATT. (I quite like KYE's production as well, as a sidenote. Or productions, seeing as how varied that album is in sound.)
__________________
Last edited by Flint; 20-01-2012 at 19:54. |
#71
|
||||
|
||||
PFAYM has better lyrics, but SATT sounded like they knew they were against the wall and wanted to come back with a friendly guitar sound. To my ears anyway. PFAYM wouldn't have been as received if it came out after SATT.
There's great hooks on PFAYM, but the band don't sound as threatened as they do on SATT. Or that they couldn't afford John Cale and a choir in the first place. |
#72
|
||||
|
||||
PFAYM > SATT
|
#73
|
||||
|
||||
i totally agree with you
__________________
Vienna 28/04/2012 Prague 14/05/2014 |
#74
|
||||
|
||||
Listening to 'the beast' right now!
I can't choose between SATT and Postcards. Couldn't do without either of them! Both albums knock ten shades out of alot of the up and comings out there as far as I'm concerned!
__________________
"Former glam-punk rocker James Dean Bradfield now looks like your friendly, slightly rumpled Welsh uncle who always brings you chocolate when he visits. That's not a bad thing." - Allister Thompson aka The Gateless Gate (Canadian musician) |
#75
|
||||
|
||||
not played either for a while but Postcards edges it I think. Last couple of times i played SATT i switched to something else
__________________
IS IT MANICS O'CLOCK YET?
|
|
|