quote:

Originally posted by Borachon:
If nothing else, I've been listening to them all night...and it's been a while since I did

Me too - I listened to the Cardigans more this week than I have in ages.

quote:

Especially Long Gone... I'm always shoving that album down the throats of anyone who even mentions The Cardigans in the hope someone appreciates it as much as I do (my tactic has worked twice so far, so I'll keep plugging away at the rest of the world's population!).

And I'm thinking Long Gone Before Daylight is even better than I remembered, although GT is still my favorite. Keep up the proselytizing!

quote:

Me too - I listened to the Cardigans more this week than I have in ages.

See, it was all just a ploy to get you to listen to the Cardigans again.

The Strokes after "Is This It?" Their debut album was excellent, but as their sophomore effort and third album have shown, they seem to be going downhill. And I seriously doubt they will ever live up to their first album.

quote:

Originally posted by Riku_88:
The Strokes after "Is This It?" Their debut album was excellent, but as their sophomore effort and third album have shown, they seem to be going downhill. And I seriously doubt they will ever live up to their first album.

I like all three of their albums quite a bit, including the second one more than their first. I think they are a pretty good band and I hope they continue to put out great music.

quote:

I like all three of their albums quite a bit, including the second one more than their first. I think they are a pretty good band and I hope they continue to put out great music.

Their first record is definitely better than their second. Room on fire lacks of bass and i think they should have try to make a different record instead of coying their first. the melodies doesn't sound so great too.

Bloc Party. First album amazing, second album shite.

I like Room on Fire and think it has more memorable songs than Is This It? But honestly, I never really fell for the Strokes, and anyone saying it was one of the best albums of this decade confuses me.

I found both the first and second Strokes albums at the same time. They were so short I burnt both of them to the same disk, and they flowed together very well. You couldn't hardly tell they were two different albums. I liked the songs a lot. I listen to the disk for about a week. They got old really fast though, and I can't for the life of me remeber a sing song now. I don't really have any desire to listen to it again. Not saying they are bad. I remember really likeing them. They were just sortof only catchy for a little while.

Again, I really don't think The Strokes belong in a mediocre bands discussion. No matter whether or not you think their first album was their strongest and the last album was weak, or vice versa or any combination in between, there's not really any doubt that they're a pretty great band.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the definition of mediocre.

me·di·o·cre (mē'dē-ō'kər)
adj.
Moderate to inferior in quality

of moderate or low quality, value, ability, or performance

The Strokes I've seen were pretty high on quality, ability and performance. A mediocre band to me, would be someone like Embrace, or Third Eye Blind, or Blink 182. Am I being pedantic?

I agree with you bro, I have twice seen The Strokes live and they put on a great show filled with tremendous energy. Plus, all of their albums are great.

quote:

Originally posted by BContrat:
I love Secaucus, your assumption is incorrect.

I put The Meadowlands down because

a) I think The Wrens have produced A stunner because I don't think Secaucus is amazing, but it is very good.

b) Despite two good albums, I still think that the band is mediocre, technically.

WTFBBQOMG! Mediocre technically? Have you heard some of the things Bissell and Whelan do on the guitar. It's freaking amazing. This band is anything but mediocre. They're exceptional, just really slow at putting music out.

quote:

Originally posted by Borachon:
Again, I really don't think The Strokes belong in a mediocre bands discussion. No matter whether or not you think their first album was their strongest and the last album was weak, or vice versa or any combination in between, there's not really any doubt that they're a pretty great band.

I doubt that they're a great band. Looks like Shadrach and I agree on that. They're neat, have a few good songs, but I would never say that they excel at anything or will change anyone's life.

quote:

Originally posted by Chamberk:
They're neat, have a few good songs, but I would never say that they excel at anything or will change anyone's life.

I disagree. They certainly changed the lives of a lot of people whose bands had absolutely no chance of being signed before, and suddenly found themselves flavour of the day. Is This It certainly changed the musical landscape, in the UK at least.

That aside, you didn't go as far as to say they're mediocre though, did you?

quote:

Originally posted by Vypa:

quote:

Originally posted by BContrat:
I love Secaucus, your assumption is incorrect.

I put The Meadowlands down because

a) I think The Wrens have produced A stunner because I don't think Secaucus is amazing, but it is very good.

b) Despite two good albums, I still think that the band is mediocre, technically.

WTFBBQOMG! Mediocre technically? Have you heard some of the things Bissell and Whelan do on the guitar. It's freaking amazing. This band is anything but mediocre. They're exceptional, just really slow at putting music out.

Yeah, I totally agree with Vypa. Going back to Borachon's definition of "mediocre" there is no way you could put the band that produced songs as brilliant as "Propane", "I've Made Enough Friends", "Rest Your Head", "This Boy is Exhausted", "I Married Sonja", "Everyone Chooses Sides", and "North to Nothing" in the "of moderate or low quality, value, ability, or performance" camp. Sheesh.

All the bands that come to my mind are far from mediocre, yet they've only produced one album or so of real merit:

Primus - The Brown Album. This album just rocks. It's so gritty, and funky. The production is terrible, which makes it even better.

Live - The Distance to Here. For some reason, incredibly unappreciated. Throwing Copper is their mainstream masterpiece, but The Distance... is just bizarrely uplifting; not for everyone, truly, but worth looking into.

The National- Boxer. Again, not mediocre by any sense of the word, but this album just blows away their other stuff.

Oh, and I completely disagree with any Interpol, Wilco, or Fleetwood Mac haters. Thanks.

Interpol still makes decent music, but they are only making the same music over and over. And their past two albums have been no where near as consistent as Turn on the Bright Lights. And that's coming from someone that fell in love with Antics first.

And I agree that Boxer is amazing, and different from The National's past work, but man... Alligator and Sad Songs For Dirty Lovers were both absolutely classic.

In an effort to agree with you on some point ProfAmeretto, I'll give you points for Fleetwood. And I might agree with you on Live as well, but I have to find The Distance to Here first. I sort of gave up on them after a while, although I always felt they still had huge potential.

quote:

Originally posted by Borachon:

quote:

Originally posted by Chamberk:
They're neat, have a few good songs, but I would never say that they excel at anything or will change anyone's life.

I disagree. They certainly changed the lives of a lot of people whose bands had absolutely no chance of being signed before, and suddenly found themselves flavour of the day. Is This It certainly changed the musical landscape, in the UK at least.

That aside, you didn't go as far as to say they're mediocre though, did you?

Nah. I said they were good. I'll concede that point.

My argument is that "Is This It," while influential, wasn't a GREAT record, and neither was "Room on Fire" - despite the fact that I enjoy both. Neither are a stunner in my eyes.

Nas - Illmatic
Caviar - Caviar
Hooverphonic - Blue Wonder Powder Milk
...I'll think of more later...

Good topic. I'm dating myself here... In the mediocre band that produced one stunner, I'll submit:

Patti Smith - Horses
In her long career, everything else she and her various bands have done is pretty mediocre, imo
(though Easter was pretty strong).

Steve Forbert - Alive on Arrival
Critics declared he was the "next Bob Dylan" at the time, but he never approximated anything so strong again. Too bad.

And You Will Know Us By The Trail of Dead - Source Tags and Codes
This one is rockin' good, so I'd call this a stunner. But everything else I've heard from them is pretty meh...

quote:

Originally posted by pak:
Nas - Illmatic

It's easy to dismiss his other work since Nas released what is arguably the greatest hip-hop album of all time. But by any other standard (other than that of comparing them to the best album ever) both Stillmatic and God's Son are really good albums. I wouldn't even call It Was Written or Street's Disciple mediocre.

And for the record, I love Is This It and really like Room On Fire. I might call First Impressions of Earth mediocre, but at worst The Strokes are still 2 for 3.