The quest to reclaim PFAYM - Page 4 - Forever Delayed

hummingbird · #46 05-10-2013, 20:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by UEF

If you depended on sales for your income and keeping your house going you'd soon start to associate good feelings with big sellers and bad feelings with the Lifebloods, unfortunately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bachelorette

With touring and saving loads by having their own studio, 90s record sales and a few slow burners in their back catalogue, do you really think they are back-to-the-wall financially? I mean, they are obviously not as rich as some, but I don't think they're suffering hardship, either.
I'd imagine that it's more about the fact that they seem to equate being relevant as band with (big) record sales. They seem to have a very narrow definition of "success" in that way.

They may not have Lady Gaga's budget but that doesn't mean they're suffering financially. I remember someone on here saying that the deal they signed when they renewed their contract wasn't that big as if that was a negative. A million pound contract is great but it's a debt that needs to be paid back through record sales. The smaller the deal the smaller the debt, and the quicker you make money for yourself.

tomd2103 · #47 06-10-2013, 13:22

I really don't share the negative views on PFAYM. It's an album I still listen to quite often and still enjoy. I do think it could have done with a more 'raw' sound (much prefer the acoustic version of Hazleton Avenue that can be found on Youtube) and am not too keen additions like the 'community choirs' that appear on a number of songs, but I don't think it is anywhere near as bad as has been made out in this thread.

Bathtub · #48 06-10-2013, 16:32

I Think I Found it and The Descent are two of the worst songs they've ever put on an album.

They should have Engage With My Shadow (which would have been a great album title) on it, best song from the era, joint with golden platitudes and future has been here 4ever.

Bathtub · #49 06-10-2013, 16:38

The Strictly debacle was also not exactly a career highpoint I would say either. That was rhe worst thing about the period for me. Baffling why they ever entertained the idea of doing it let alone go through with it.

amnesic · #50 06-10-2013, 16:49

RTF was one last chance for me. Thank god I love it. Postcards and SATT, IMHO, are shit beyond shit. I didn't even get chance to listen to the lyrics, which I've been told are a bit ropey, but I couldn't get past the fact that between the two records there wasn't a single decent tune. There are no melodies. SATT I can kinda understand as it is their version of the Clash which, again IMHO, always means no tune (Masses, anyone?), although their much earlier Clash era work is quite tuneful. It seems to be when they are deliberately trying to be noisy that they make a hash of it. Just cause you're only using three chords does not mean that there isn't a decent melody in there! But Postcards is even worse. It was meant to be melodic and radio friendly and it sounds like a dirge. If Kurt Cobain had been a happy man with 2.4 kids this is the kind of rubbish he would make!

starstruck · #51 06-10-2013, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bathtub

They should have Engage With My Shadow (which would have been a great album title) on it, best song from the era, joint with golden platitudes and future has been here 4ever.

scott_laconia · #52 06-10-2013, 17:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by amnesic

RTF was one last chance for me. Thank god I love it. Postcards and SATT, IMHO, are shit beyond shit. I didn't even get chance to t I couldn't get past the fact that between the two records there wasn't a single decent tune. There are no melodies. SATT I can kinda understand as it is their version of the Clash which, again IMHO, always means no tune (Masses, anyone?), although their much earlier Clash era work is quite tuneful. It seems to be when they are deliberately trying to be noisy that they make a hash of it. Just cause you're only using three chords does not mean that there isn't a decent melody in there! But Postcards is even worse. It was meant to be melodic and radio friendly and it sounds like a dirge. If Kurt Cobain had been a happy man with 2.4 kids this is the kind of rubbish he would make!

They aren't the best albums by a long shot but they are full of melodies.

MoMoney MoJunk · #53 06-10-2013, 17:21

Edit - at startruck's post.

scott_laconia · #54 06-10-2013, 17:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bathtub

The Strictly debacle was also not exactly a career highpoint I would say either. That was rhe worst thing about the period for me. Baffling why they ever entertained the idea of doing it let alone go through with it.

Same reason they did smash hits, top of the pops etc

Bathtub · #55 06-10-2013, 17:34

They said they did Strictly as a "Situationist spectacle". I have no idea what that means nor do I suspect Wire does. My attitude remains if you must go on strictly fine, but don't dress it up as something it isn't.

Or have some general artistic integrity and not say yes to everything. You wouldn't catch Radiohead on one of these Xfactors or Strictlys.

beautifuldistortion · #56 06-10-2013, 17:41

They ain't fucking Radiohead though are they?!
It is so so so plain to see they always wanted to be a mainstream band!
They wanted/want to sell records.
And I find it admirable that they ain't like loads of other rock 'stars' who preach world peace or anti poverty or other noble causes whilst coining it in! If theses bands meant what they say then they should donate the earnings from an album!
Why do the Manics have to have the same stance as other bands? Especially fucking Radiohead - who in case you haven't noticed piss me off with some of their self righteousness!

hummingbird · #57 06-10-2013, 17:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by beautifuldistortion

They ain't fucking Radiohead though are they?!
It is so so so plain to see they always wanted to be a mainstream band!
They wanted/want to sell records.
And I find it admirable that they ain't like loads of other rock 'stars' who preach world peace or anti poverty or other noble causes whilst coining it in! If theses bands meant what they say then they should donate the earnings from an album!
Why do the Manics have to have the same stance as other bands? Especially fucking Radiohead - who in case you haven't noticed piss me off with some of their self righteousness!

Truth

Who the fuck cares what radiohead do or don't do.

Bathtub · #58 06-10-2013, 17:54

It doesn't have to be Radiohead, they're just an example of people with more integrity.

Anyway you've missed my point. If they want to go on strictly, ok it's a dumb choice, but everyone's got to make money. So do the show, but don't pretend that it is anything other than a sales push as Wire did. Unless anyone really did find it to be a "situationist spectacle."

hummingbird · #59 06-10-2013, 17:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bathtub

It doesn't have to be Radiohead, they're just an example of people with more integrity.

Anyway you've missed my point. If they want to go on strictly, ok it's a dumb choice, but everyone's got to make money. So do the show, but don't pretend that it is anything other than a sales push as Wire did. Unless anyone really did find it to be a "situationist spectacle."

I'll agree with you on the *situationist spectacle* comment.. but there's nothing wrong with appearing on strictly. They have bags of integrity in other things. It's just a TV show and they have always said they don't refuse TV.

starstruck · #60 06-10-2013, 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by beautifuldistortion

They ain't fucking Radiohead though are they?!
It is so so so plain to see they always wanted to be a mainstream band!
They wanted/want to sell records.

i am no fan of Radiohead, but surely they have not sold all that many more records than the Manics? i always assumed, bar 1 or 2 big hits, they were a "selective appeal" sort.

what's wrong with wanting to sell lots and lots of records? why do it, otherwise? it's not something they have ever hidden away from, recalling the plans for Generation Terrorists, for example.

it is somewhat better to sell lots and lots of records with your own sound catching on, however, than by bowing to what seems popular. even then, it's hardly a disaster - U2 without mercy ripped off the baggy sound for Achtung Baby, made it into their own thing with that same fucking thing Edge does on every fucking record, and off you go, arguably their finest hour.

if Nicky had brought in someone from outside the band to help write lyrics i would have considered that a bigger failure than any of the odd choices they have made with singles. at least when they have "gone pop" it's been their way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by beautifuldistortion

And I find it admirable that they ain't like loads of other rock 'stars' who preach world peace or anti poverty or other noble causes whilst coining it in! If theses bands meant what they say then they should donate the earnings from an album!

the Manics have, admirably, always been up and ready to support any cause they believe in, or think their presence at can make a positive difference.

i think you are being harsh on rock stars. sure, post-Live Aid and the visible boost to record sales for artists who appeared record labels flog the fuck out of their acts as and when they do these charity gigs. i'd like to think for the most part the artists do it not because they think they can bring world peace or end poverty, but because their presence puts a particular cause in the spotlight and gives it attention.

Bono & U2 are the ones usually singled out for criticism. i say again, as i have before, find me the charity concert or event where they stand and say "give your money to this". they don't. they turn up and play because they know they are the biggest band in the world and thus the reason for the gig gets more media attention with them there. do i approve of their tax dodges and what not? if i were sat on millions i would probably be reluctant to just hand over loads and loads of it, to be honest, in particular after working fucking hard for it for over 30 years.

and on your logic, it would appear U2 did exactly what you suggested. i have seen copies of U2 albums released here during apartheid. they are "special editions" in that they contain a statement indicating that the band are anti-apartheid and have agreed to release the album in apartheid SA only so every single penny from the sales can go towards the campaigns to end the system.

interestingly Simple Minds, Springsteen, etc all seem to have released albums here during the same era without any such message.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by beautifuldistortion

Why do the Manics have to have the same stance as other bands? Especially fucking Radiohead - who in case you haven't noticed piss me off with some of their self righteousness!

i recall an interview with Wire where he said the band tends to be "a bit too clever" for most music journalists, and that is spot on. bar the odd comment about Anne Robinson or Glastobury at a gig, they tend to let the music just say whatever it is they want to say, but leave it to you to work out what it means to you, if that makes sense.