|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 1, 2009 17:12:51 GMT
not downloaded im just gonna give it one run through when i get a phsyical copy of it. but crying lightning gets better each listen so the album could be similar
|
|
|
|
Post by kokainekinney on Aug 1, 2009 20:57:20 GMT
i know the album is planned to be 'dark'....but its just dull and boring. the lyrics on the album are terrible.
it might be a grower, but i can't see myself going back to listening to it anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 1, 2009 22:27:23 GMT
again im only going off crying lightning, but i cant see the lyrics not been to my taste.
but even if it is awful, im glad they tried to progress rather than staying in the same place musically.
|
|
birchy
Groupie
MCFC
Posts: 129
|
Post by birchy on Aug 3, 2009 19:34:33 GMT
Ive had a couple of listens and I cant say its great  |
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 3, 2009 19:48:49 GMT
heard pretty visitors on radio 1 after uprising and thought it was a pretty decent track  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2009 11:43:00 GMT
i've listened through it a few times now, and it seems to be split between upbeat, catchy songs like My Propeller, Crying Lightning, Dangerous Animals and Pretty Visitors, and much slower, much darker songs like Fire+Thud and Cornerstone, which i think will grow on me.
Secret Door is very Last Shadow Puppets, which i had hoped the band would try to avoid, but nvm. The album would certainly have benefited from the inclusion of Sandtrap and Bite Mark In A Terror Pocket
|
|
|
|
Post by benraul on Aug 4, 2009 20:34:26 GMT
The album would certainly have benefited from the inclusion of Sandtrap and Bite Mark In A Terror Pocket I strongly disagree about this statement Matt. Sandtrap and Terror Pocket should never been included. Been pointless really as that was the time they were experimenting before stopping to make the album. Im not happy with the inclusion of fire and the thud as I class that in the same bracket. Been around ages. Would like unheard new tracks, and more than the ten they have put on the album. They did a set in America two nights ago. They didnt have A Certain Romance at the end. Gutting. That is a tradition. |
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 4, 2009 20:42:46 GMT
The album would certainly have benefited from the inclusion of Sandtrap and Bite Mark In A Terror Pocket I strongly disagree about this statement Matt. Sandtrap and Terror Pocket should never been included. Been pointless really as that was the time they were experimenting before stopping to make the album. Im not happy with the inclusion of fire and the thud as I class that in the same bracket. Been around ages. Would like unheard new tracks, and more than the ten they have put on the album. They did a set in America two nights ago. They didnt have A Certain Romance at the end. Gutting. That is a tradition. on the bright side mate, we can always expect top b-sides from them. and they didnt close with that at appolo either? nice that they shook it up abit. theyre not fucking oasis, they dont need to rely on their first two albums for a decent set. |
|
|
|
Post by kokainekinney on Aug 5, 2009 17:52:37 GMT
matador should have been 1st track on the album.....
they have had some quality b-sides which could easily have made this album. tunes like da frame 2r, bad woman, nettles, if you've found this is probably too late (another quality opener for an album).
|
|
|
|
Post by benraul on Aug 5, 2009 19:12:23 GMT
Again, I disagree. Why put b sides onto an album? I am a big fan of the tracks mentioned above, but they have been around for ages. We all have them. Why put them on an album? Its lazy. I imagine they would have loads of tracks penned for the album and narrowed it down to the 10 they chose. I would have prefered all new tracks.
|
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 5, 2009 22:57:17 GMT
i agree with ben on that one, 100%, courteeners shouldnt have put NYD,NYD on their album i do not think, but we'd heard the whole album long before it was release so it doesnt matter really. but yes id like to listen to it and not be familiar with the tracks. why would i pay a tenner if its half b-sides..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2009 10:00:19 GMT
Again, I disagree. Why put b sides onto an album? I am a big fan of the tracks mentioned above, but they have been around for ages. We all have them. Why put them on an album? Its lazy. I imagine they would have loads of tracks penned for the album and narrowed it down to the 10 they chose. I would have prefered all new tracks. fair enough, im just thinking that sandtrap would be a brilliant album opener, and terror pocket would fit in towards the end to break up the slower paced second half of the album. I agree that fire+thud should never have made it on |
|
birchy
Groupie
MCFC
Posts: 129
|
Post by birchy on Aug 7, 2009 17:50:09 GMT
Its startin to grow on me now
|
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 10, 2009 2:02:22 GMT
somehow i think "who the f*ck are arctic monkeys" would have made a nice hidden track on this album, maybe if u pressed rewind on track 1 or something? i know its been released but it seems relevant!
|
|
|
|
Post by chezza on Aug 10, 2009 13:24:22 GMT
Zane Lowe is doing an arctic monkeys special next Monday (17) the band will be doing some live tracks from Mada vale and Zane will be talking to them about the new album!
|
|
