Okay, the Razorlight discussion didn't exactly burn up the forum. Maybe y'all will talk about an album that you actually listened to, because of its heavy hype. Let's shake off the corpe-like lethargy!

I love the Libertines. The band, not their second album. I saw them at the Empty Bottle last year and stood right in front of the stage, loving every second. I really wanted this album to be great. How could it not be? Up The Bracket nailed that post-London Calling vibe that Rancid valiently attempted for three albums straight, but never quite got. Even their B-Sides kick ass (hear "Don't Look Back Into The Sun"). Which is why I was so shocked when I heard the new album. It sounded sloppy and unfinished. It didn't rock. I hoped it was a joke, that it was some old demos posted as the real album. Sadly that's not the case.

Shockingly, the critical responses so far have been nearly universal raves. Uncut gave it five stars. It's a confusing review, commenting on their high standard of songwriting, but referring to their first album as the proof that they took over from The Kinks, Clash and Jam. It talks largely about how "their lives are their art, and their art is their lives." Then it talks more about how great Up The Bracket is. And how great the song "For Lovers" is, by Doherty's side project, Babyshambles. It refers to the production being somewhat shitty, which somehow makes the album thrilling, and how the songs sound improvised. I'll buy that second assertion for a dollar. But not the Big Star Third/Sister Lovers and Only Ones comparisons.

James Oldham then gives up on the music and raves about the lyrics. "Time and again, The Libertines returns to the same ground. Drugs are everywhere." Yeah, great. Five stars then. This is justified because the truth shines through. Whatever.

Drowned In Sound's review is easier to swallow.

"From the very start, The Libertines is the sound of the band at its most muzzled; paralysed by poor production, underdeveloped songs and private lives that have become more sensational and noteworthy than the music. With guitar lines that don't seem to know what to do with themselves, What Katie Did is a dawdled mid-tempo affair that never raises itself above sounding like a lost session track; Don't Be Shy decides after about two minutes that it doesn't want to be a pop song anymore and trails off into some kind of sub-Stone Roses jam session that they just don't have the musical competence to pull off; and if they thought that speeding up the bass-heavy, tin-pan chords towards the end of Campaign of Hate would've added an ounce of energy to a tune that was dead on arrival, then they're seriously deluded.

Which raises questions as to what exactly The Clash's Mick Jones did to this record. If his aim was to fashion the album into the same kind of masterpiece of passion and melody as London Calling, then he has failed - the album is as poorly-recorded, as shabby and hollow- sounding as a set of demos. And if his aim was to reign-in Doherty's attention-deficit songwriting and set the bar as high as the finest moments on their debut, then he has failed again..."
http://www.drownedinsound.com/articles/10108.html

The slew of comments after the review are pretty good.

Other reviews:

Playlouder - http://www.playlouder.com/review/+thelibertines-2/
BBC - http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/rockandalt/reviews/libertines_libertines.s html

Discuss.

I've not heard the new one yet, but I wasn't blown away by "Up the Bracket." I wanted to love it but the hype (from the UK press) made me expect "London Calling" when what I got was smatterings from "Sandinista."

For what it was, it was fine. For what the UK press SAID it was, I was disappointed. There was nothing on it nearly as potent as any of my 20 favorite Clash songs. This is, admittedly, a high standard to set.

But, I enjoyed it enough to keep my promo copy and I look forward to hearing the new one. I've dodged the reviews purposefully: I'll go into this one not burdened by what the UK press had to say. I wish I would have done that with Franz Ferdinand, whose hype was SO ANNOYING that I deliberately avoided them for as long as I could. The fact that I now enjoy that record notwithstanding, the UK press drives me nuts sometimes. Of course, the US indie press can do the same: the fact that so many people (Pitchfork excluded) hyped Peaches' most recent record as revelatory still makes me chuckle. Ugh. Same with the Fiery Furnaces.

The Libertines never sounded like the Clash, while on the other hand, almost every Rancid album sounds ALMOST EXACTLY like "The Clash", the first album (whether import or domestic.)

I already reviewed this at the other part of Metacritic, but I have no problem recapping here. The album isn't great, but neither does it deserve the vitriol posited at DIS, and yes, they e-mail every week, so I read their "first" review almost two months ago.

My comments include the fact that somehow I NEVER noticed any Morrisey influences, but the first song sounds a lot like Him. You say that it sounds like demos. That is completely correct. What I noticed was that there are almost NO overdubs and that some of the songs are already playing when you first hear them here. I think that not only means it was recorded live, but it may have only been recorded once. So is that bad? Could they only record it once because they were so strung out? I don't know, but maybe if you play it really LOUD, it will sound like a live show.

Now as far as the lyrics "redeeming" shitty sound, or vice versa, I don't even think about such things. I liked "Up the Bracket" MUCH more than pE, but I agree this doesn't sound anything like it. However, I HIGHLY recommend anyone who actually PAID money for this to give it a FEW chances. The sloppiest, least-interesting songs are all up front. It's only about when you get to the fourth song that you actually understand how heart-breaking this album is. I don't really ever remember the sound of Souls distintegrating before my ears before. (True, I'm old, but I missed "3rd" until I was in my forties.)

There you go; add me to the pretentious lemmings, but hey, I'm listenin' to it now, and I'm cryin' (what a baby!)

quote:

---

Originally posted by mark f:
The Libertines never sounded like the Clash, while on the other hand, almost every Rancid album sounds ALMOST EXACTLY like "The Clash", the first album (whether import or domestic.)

---

I'm with ya, mark. I never thought they sounded like the Clash, and maybe because of all of the Clash comparisons, I was expecting something different. I think I set the bar too high because I bought into the hype.

I'm looking forward to hearing the new one, especially after your rave review, but I've not picked it up yet because it's a ridiculous $17.99 list. I'll find it on sale somewhere and pick it up.

I don't want to start contradicting myself, but after I typed my post, I realized that maybe some of "Up the Bracket" may have sounded like the Clash. "I Get Along", "The Boy Looked at Johnny" (especially the guitar solo), "What a Waster" and "Up the Bracket" qualify as inspired by the Clash more than anyone else I can think of. The intro to "Begging" sounds like Joy Division/New Order. The hidden track sounds like the Stray Cats on speed. Then again, the songs which sound produced the closest to the second album, the Beatlesish "Radio America" and "Tell the King" (as in the new album's "The Man Who Would Be King") are two of my favorites.

I was thinking of something which might make me seem ridiculous or visionary, but it may explain the different reactions to this album. The new Libertines album MUST really sound "hollow" on a computer, but since I don't ever listen to music through my computer or its speakers, I wouldn't know. It's my component stereo in the living room or the super pumped-up boombox with separated speakers in the computer room or outside. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I refuse to allow something newer, but "small", to tell this old fart how to enjoy the BIG, LOUD sounds of rock and roll.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mark f,

I bought a stereo receiver and a headphone-to-RCA wire and hooked my computer up to some good speakers I have. I can hear any of the 700 albums on my computer as loud as I want.

I figure most people have some speakers somewhere that are at least better than their computer speakers. I was able to pick up my receiver for 90 bucks at Best Buy, and can hook up my TV to it if I want to watch a movie with lots of explosions. I would highly recommend this to people with lots of music on their computers and crappy computer speakers.

I never knew a website where everytime you post a topic you have to worry about it being closed. kinda reminds me of the soup nazi.

haha... but seriously and i'm asking this question in all honesty. i imagine the reason for closing threads is to try to keep the site under control, and visually better but.... if someone comes to the site and either a) keeps getting their topics closed or

b) reads something they are interested in and wants to post but keeps realizing their threads are closed....

is it worth it?

how many months have to pass before a new thread with a similar topic can begin?

Your thread at Indie Rock is still open. I was just pointing you towards the discussion you wanted. At some point, your thread may be shut down because what is the point of having multiple threads everywhere? That is a rhetorical question; no need to reply.

If you prefer, go talk to yourself at your thread. You are here to have relevant discussions, correct? You're not here to lecture everybody over here that we are incompetent and anti-social, I hope? We are interested in what you have to say, as long as it's on-topic and at the best place.

By the way, does a two-way monologue involve one person or two? I prefer two-way discussions where one person takes turns listening to the other one. Otherwise, what's the point, or "is it worth it?" Peace.

Mark that seems a lil bittle like dirty laundry. But that's cool, at the end of the day this is a message board. but after all you are the moderator and so we'll play by your rules.

i just don't get why the moderators on the board are so eager to try and drive away new people on the board.

I missed most of this discussion, but as a moderator, I feel compelled to point out that closing/moving topics is done not to drive posters away but to put topics where they'll get the most traffic. The fact that the Razorlight and Libertines threads started (strangely) under "Critics and Publications" means they won't get the same traffic as they would posted in another place. Multiple posts on the same topic isn't the worst thing imaginable, but it gets hard, as this board gets bigger, to keep track of (and reply to and read) all of the posts, particularly if they're scattered in odd places...