The Smiley Smile Message Board

Smiley Smile Stuff => General On Topic Discussions => Topic started by: Disney Boy (1985) on May 21, 2012, 10:49:17 AM



Title: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on May 21, 2012, 10:49:17 AM
Uncut have given TWGMTR 5 out of 10. I wont quote the entire review, but 'schmaltz' and 'auto-tune' are mentioned, and a lyric mentioning 'good vibrations' is described as 'cringe-inducing'. They say that 'even Brian's melancholy appears manufactured'. They also say that the title track is the best song on the album, which doesnt bode well for those of us who think it's not very good...

(Before anyone comments, yes I realise reviews are subjective, and I'm waiting to hear the album myself before passing judgement).


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Lowbacca on May 21, 2012, 10:55:29 AM
Tons of Beach Boys studio LPs received bad or mediocre reviews upon release. It's part of the "game".  ;D

Apart from that I'd be astonished to read exclusively good reviews about the new LP. It's a reunion album by an aging (/aged) rock group, there's bound to be some "meh.."-reviews.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on May 21, 2012, 11:01:54 AM
Tons of Beach Boys studio LPs received bad or mediocre reviews upon release. It's part of the "game".  ;D

Apart from that I'd be astonished to read exclusively good reviews about the new LP. It's a rreunion album by a aging (/aged) rock group, there's bound to be some "meh.."-reviews.

Exactly. As i said, i'm not passing judgement, merely quoting the review as i quoted the (very good) single review in NME.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on May 21, 2012, 11:05:22 AM
Meh, so what? I've already said that this album is not for reviewers, anyone who could enjoy it for what it is shouldn't care what a stupid magazine says


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: buddhahat on May 21, 2012, 11:08:48 AM
'auto-tune' are mentioned,

Hate to say I told you so, Wirestone!
 


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Shady on May 21, 2012, 11:11:21 AM
Good, it's a magazine nobody cares about


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on May 21, 2012, 11:11:33 AM
It is prefable for the new album to recieve good reviews rather than bad, and i don't believe we all wouldn't like to see that. The concerts have been getting great notices, it'd be very nice if the album did likewise. Yeah i love the Beach Boys no matter what anyone else thinks of 'em - but that doesn't mean that i just don't care whether their new album gets a good reception or not.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: guitarfool2002 on May 21, 2012, 11:15:23 AM
"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture."   - Martin Mull

"Listen, writing about music is like talking about fucking. Who wants to talk about it? But you know, maybe some people do want to talk about it."   - John Lennon

"Rock critics like Elvis Costello because rock critics look like Elvis Costello"  - David Lee Roth

"Rock critics love Van Halen and hate me because rock critics look like me but want to party with David Lee Roth."  - Elvis Costello


So this chap doesn't like the album, who cares? :)


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: monicker on May 21, 2012, 11:18:08 AM
So, who was it that said they'd be surprised if even one reviewer brought up Autotune in their review?

Also,
magazine that gives favorable review to product you like = good magazine, me like, they cool, they is valid, important, yay
magazine that gives unfavorable review to product you like = bad magazine, me hate, they stoopid, meaningless, boo


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Runaways on May 21, 2012, 11:23:02 AM
So, who was it that said they'd be surprised if even one reviewer brought up Autotune in their review?

Also,
magazine that gives favorable review to product you like = good magazine, me like, they cool, they is valid, important, yay
magazine that gives unfavorable review to product you like = bad magazine, me hate, they stoopid, meaningless, boo

pretty much.  One of the early tweets about the album came from an uncut writer who was unfavorable in his tweet.  so this isn't surprising


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: buddhahat on May 21, 2012, 11:25:42 AM
Good, it's a magazine nobody cares about

well we didn't feel that way when they gave The Smile Sessions a glowing review.

C'mon, can't we just accept that maybe this isn't Pet Sounds mk 2 but something more along the lines of MIU or KTSA i.e. critically going to take a hammering but with a lot to love for the die hards?


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Landlocked on May 21, 2012, 11:29:22 AM
Good, it's a magazine nobody cares about

well we didn't feel that way when they gave The Smile Sessions a glowing review.

C'mon, can't we just accept that maybe this isn't Pet Sounds mk 2 but something more along the lines of MIU or KTSA i.e. critically going to take a hammering but with a lot to love for the die hards?

I can totally accept that! I mean, if they lambasted the use of pitch correction and cringed at the cheesy planting of previous song titles into lyrics, like "good vibrations," I can't say I disagree with them. But I'll still buy the album, and hopefully, love it anyway.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Runaways on May 21, 2012, 11:30:30 AM
i wonder if they listened to FTTBA and thought it was autotune


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: guitarfool2002 on May 21, 2012, 11:33:58 AM
If you like it, that's all that matters. Right?

These reviewers who get an advance copy...some of them have an ego-complex thing happening where they want their word to be taken as the standing opinion on the album, and they feel that way most likely because no one who is a regular fan owns the album at this point and no one can challenge that reviewer's opinion using the actual songs as the deciding factor. The reviewer holds all the cards, what they say is what you can think because you don't have it in your hands to judge otherwise until it is released.

I said all this in the other thread, I have yet to see the worth or the value of advance reviews in too many cases. I hope opinions are not shaped or swayed either way by them, because it's just too much faith to be placed in one writer's opinion without actually being able to hear it for ourselves.

I'm not saying this guy or any of the writers lavishly praising the upcoming BB's album are right or wrong, but it's not a level playing field until we can hear the album, and until then it's tough to take any of their opinions seriously. When the album is out and I have it, I can go back and read the reviews. Until then, I read them but they are ultimately disposable.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Doo Dah on May 21, 2012, 11:37:47 AM
Gotta hear the dang thing before I'm ready to throw Uncut under the bus.

I'll say this; from what we've already heard via clips, it's obviously a delicate balancing act between the sun/fun cliche stuff and the melancholy introspective stuff. True fans that have been along for the whole ride will likely take this into consideration and judge the album charitably, whereas outta the loop journos will likely pounce on the obvious and carve away.

If I were to guess, I'd say that RS will be somewhat positive, Mojo will be quite positive, and your other hipster journals will no doubt go in guns blazin'. Just a guess.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: buddhahat on May 21, 2012, 11:40:11 AM
Gotta hear the dang thing before I'm ready to throw Uncut under the bus.

I'll say this; from what we've already heard via clips, it's obviously a delicate balancing act between the sun/fun cliche stuff and the melancholy introspective stuff. True fans that have been along for the whole ride will likely take this into consideration and judge the album charitably, whereas outta the loop journos will likely pounce on the obvious and carve away.

If I were to guess, I'd say that RS will be somewhat positive, Mojo will be quite positive, and your other hipster journals will no doubt go in guns blazin'. Just a guess.

It's difficult to say with Mojo. Generally they're pretty favourable towards BW's solo output, but they gave the Gershwin album a pretty harsh review, so don't hold your breath.

Anyone expecting a 90+ from Pitchfork is in for a shock though, I'll agree with you there!


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: pixletwin on May 21, 2012, 11:40:48 AM
I like Uncut. So the reviewer has an opinion. Who cares?


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Runaways on May 21, 2012, 11:47:39 AM
Gotta hear the dang thing before I'm ready to throw Uncut under the bus.

I'll say this; from what we've already heard via clips, it's obviously a delicate balancing act between the sun/fun cliche stuff and the melancholy introspective stuff. True fans that have been along for the whole ride will likely take this into consideration and judge the album charitably, whereas outta the loop journos will likely pounce on the obvious and carve away.

If I were to guess, I'd say that RS will be somewhat positive, Mojo will be quite positive, and your other hipster journals will no doubt go in guns blazin'. Just a guess.

It's difficult to say with Mojo. Generally they're pretty favourable towards BW's solo output, but they gave the Gershwin album a pretty harsh review, so don't hold your breath.

Anyone expecting a 90+ from Pitchfork is in for a shock though, I'll agree with you there!


we should have a prediction for pitchfork.  4.8-5.4?


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: bcdam on May 21, 2012, 11:55:28 AM
Is there a link to said review, or is it in print?


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Wirestone on May 21, 2012, 11:58:48 AM
'auto-tune' are mentioned,

Hate to say I told you so, Wirestone!
 

Indeed. So you did.

I'd be interested in seeing the wording, though. There is a difference between an offhand mention, in the context of an overall slick production, and the kind of lengthy condemnations that appear here. Overall, I've just never seen rock critics talk much about pitch correction -- for good or ill.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on May 21, 2012, 12:03:14 PM
Honestly, who cares, not everyone has to love it hahaha


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: buddhahat on May 21, 2012, 12:18:27 PM
'auto-tune' are mentioned,

Hate to say I told you so, Wirestone!
 

Indeed. So you did.

I'd be interested in seeing the wording, though. There is a difference between an offhand mention, in the context of an overall slick production, and the kind of lengthy condemnations that appear here. Overall, I've just never seen rock critics talk much about pitch correction -- for good or ill.

I think the use of autotune on a BB record is significant though. What a rare opportunity to get five of the original voices together and see what time has done to that blend! On songs about the aging process too - surely that requires a bit of authenticity and honesty? Not the audio equivalent of botox injections.

Perhaps the voices sound a bit shakey here and there? Then use a bit of subtle pitch correction to tighten everything up a little. But with this excessive treatment they have sucked the soul and the identity out of the harmonies. I don't often get worked up about production issues on these albums (who cares if a synth replaces a tack piano?!) but this vocal processing is something else. This is why I'm sure more reviewers will zero in on it, which is a shame because there are some great songs here, that could have really flowered given a more natural sound a la TLOS and BWRG. The problem is .... They f*cked with the formula!


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Zach95 on May 21, 2012, 12:26:45 PM
Pitchfork gave TLOS a 7.8. I'm guessing this will get somewhere around there, plus or minus a few tenths.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: buddhahat on May 21, 2012, 12:31:56 PM
Pitchfork gave TLOS a 7.8. I'm guessing this will get somewhere around there, plus or minus a few tenths.

I think as an artistic statement, TLOS is a much stronger album, so I really doubt Pitchfork will give this such a high score.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: The Shift on May 21, 2012, 12:39:18 PM
So, who was it that said they'd be surprised if even one reviewer brought up Autotune in their review?

Also,
magazine that gives favorable review to product you like = good magazine, me like, they cool, they is valid, important, yay
magazine that gives unfavorable review to product you like = bad magazine, me hate, they stoopid, meaningless, boo

pretty much.  One of the early tweets about the album came from an uncut writer who was unfavorable in his tweet.  so this isn't surprising

Uncut's a fine mag, much prefer it to Mojo these days as the latter has gone all contemporary and covers a lot more late '70s/'80s-onward stuff, like what kids like. They've not been big on the BBs for a long while; editor Allan Jones is however a big Neil Young fan, probably why Americana is the album of the month in the same issue.

Incidentally there's also a live review of one of the 50th anniversary shows in the same issue.  So while the reviews might not be the most favourable, it' a BB's heavy issue.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: the professor on May 21, 2012, 12:39:24 PM
it's a toxic combination when you give great music to the unlearned who are obliged to defend their hip credentials.  I can write a negative review just by adopting the snarky hipster persona; in other words, they write themselves.  I am embarassed for those critics and trust only my own aesthetic judgement.
As Alexander Pope made clear, for every bad poet there are 10 bad critics, who mislead our sense. Uncut means nothing to me.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Doo Dah on May 21, 2012, 12:39:45 PM
It's not the full album review - merely the title track:
 http://www.thespacelab.tv/spaceLAB/2012/04April/MusicReview-068-Beach-Boys-That-Why-God-Made-The-Radio.htm (http://www.thespacelab.tv/spaceLAB/2012/04April/MusicReview-068-Beach-Boys-That-Why-God-Made-The-Radio.htm)
 Vitriol.

I bring this up because we're going to see a lot of this play out. As fans we can surely analyze the song writing, whether or not we got to hear the 3rd section of the 'suite' (or whether some eeevil entity 86'd it), whether the vocals sound too processed, et al.

On the other hand, you're going to have a lot of these johnny come lately's break out their journalistic smirk and just butcher this poor album. It reminds me of those half-assed programs you see on VH-1 (top 40 one hit wonders, top ten sitcoms of all time, etc.). You see the video clips, and then you have a parade of media celebrities/comedians out duel themselves in coming up with some well-timed sarcastic put-down. As if the REAL art is in the put down.

Review it. Critique it. But don't be smart ass about it. Asking a lot for on-line journalism, I know...


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Landlocked on May 21, 2012, 12:44:20 PM
it's a toxic combination when you give great music to the unlearned who are obliged to defend their hip credentials.  I can write a negative review just by adopting the snarky hipster persona; in other words, they write themselves.  I am embarassed for those critics and trust only my own aesthetic judgement.
As Alexander Pope made clear, for every bad poet there are 10 bad critics, who mislead our sense. Uncut means nothing to me.

So you think every negative review that comes out regarding this album is necessarily not a critique of the music but more a profession of one's hipness? You know, it's possible the Beach Boys can do wrong, musically-speaking.. They've done so in the past, they can do so now. It's silly to write off everything critical as blind hatred.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: joshferrell on May 21, 2012, 12:44:31 PM
That's it.. I'm going to buy a copy of Uncut magazine and get a pair of scissors and cut it up....


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: guitarfool2002 on May 21, 2012, 12:53:50 PM
That's it.. I'm going to buy a copy of Uncut magazine and get a pair of scissors and cut it up....

A real hipster would use an old-fashioned straight razor, and shoot a stylized video of the cutting process set to the song "Stuck In The Middle With You", then post it on whatever upstart video host is seen as more "current" than YouTube in a Tarantino parody-tribute worthy of viral status.

Or if you were a staff writer at the Lampoon, you'd put the results of your magazine slashing next to a shot of the guy from Manic Street Preachers all cut to hell so the real music hipsters would be the only ones to get the connection, then proceed to tell everyone why it's relevant... :-D

But I digress.



Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Don_Zabu on May 21, 2012, 12:56:49 PM
That's it.. I'm going to buy a copy of Uncut magazine and get a pair of scissors and cut it up....
And give them another sale in so doing.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: joshferrell on May 21, 2012, 12:59:09 PM
That's it.. I'm going to buy a copy of Uncut magazine and get a pair of scissors and cut it up....
And give them another sale in so doing.
actually it was a joke  ;D :lol (Uncut...Cut it up so that it's not uncut anymore...wakka wakka..oh nevermind.. :'()


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Heysaboda on May 21, 2012, 01:21:21 PM
This Just In:

Uncut (usually a decent mag) can take a flying leap on this one.  Eff 'em!



Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Heysaboda on May 21, 2012, 01:23:34 PM
"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture."   - Martin Mull

"Listen, writing about music is like talking about f*cking. Who wants to talk about it? But you know, maybe some people do want to talk about it."   - John Lennon

"Rock critics like Elvis Costello because rock critics look like Elvis Costello"  - David Lee Roth

"Rock critics love Van Halen and hate me because rock critics look like me but want to party with David Lee Roth."  - Elvis Costello

"With me, grand opera is mostly the berries." - Al Capone


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: runnersdialzero on May 21, 2012, 01:30:44 PM
This Just In:

Uncut (usually a decent mag) can take a flying leap on this one.  Eff 'em!



How can you be so sure you won't end up agreeing with them? The review didn't sound particularly harsh or irrational, just honest.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Wirestone on May 21, 2012, 01:34:40 PM
Pitchfork gave TLOS a 7.8. I'm guessing this will get somewhere around there, plus or minus a few tenths.

I think as an artistic statement, TLOS is a much stronger album, so I really doubt Pitchfork will give this such a high score.

Have you heard the full new BB album? I think it's a bit premature to compare the two at this stage, assuming you've only heard samples of the new record.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on May 21, 2012, 01:41:23 PM
Pitchfork gave TLOS a 7.8. I'm guessing this will get somewhere around there, plus or minus a few tenths.

I think as an artistic statement, TLOS is a much stronger album, so I really doubt Pitchfork will give this such a high score.

Have you heard the full new BB album? I think it's a bit premature to compare the two at this stage, assuming you've only heard samples of the new record.

You're forgetting that Brian Wilson on his own has a bit more "hip capital" than The Beach Boys do with the Pitchfork crowd.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Zach95 on May 21, 2012, 02:09:24 PM
Pitchfork gave TLOS a 7.8. I'm guessing this will get somewhere around there, plus or minus a few tenths.

I think as an artistic statement, TLOS is a much stronger album, so I really doubt Pitchfork will give this such a high score.

Have you heard the full new BB album? I think it's a bit premature to compare the two at this stage, assuming you've only heard samples of the new record.

No, I'm just giving a very rough estimate as others have regarding the Pitchfork score. Pitchfork is very aware of the circumstances surrounding an album, i.e. BWPS received a 9 and number 5 on the greatest albums of 2004 from P-fork, and they very much articulated the monumental achievement of the album.  Of course, this album is not the official release of long lost Smile, but it is a very important feat and may mark the end of an amazing career. Pitchfork realizes this, and the album's review will reflect that, I presume.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on May 21, 2012, 04:14:19 PM
I'll wait for the guys at Rolling Stone to give it a shot.  I know David Fricke is a big Beach Boys fan. 

I don't trust reviews by reviewers I've never heard of.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Runaways on May 21, 2012, 05:11:22 PM
Rolling Stone has put out some questionable album reviews lately though.  I think pitchfork is a big Brian fan, not sure about the rest of the group.  Though they did rate Sunflower pretty highly. 


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Cam Mott on May 21, 2012, 05:31:48 PM
I don't read reviews say I.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Jon Stebbins on May 21, 2012, 05:41:50 PM


You're forgetting that Brian Wilson on his own has a bit more "hip capital" than The Beach Boys do with the Pitchfork crowd.
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/11943-pacific-ocean-blue-legacy-edition/


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on May 21, 2012, 07:07:21 PM


You're forgetting that Brian Wilson on his own has a bit more "hip capital" than The Beach Boys do with the Pitchfork crowd.
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/11943-pacific-ocean-blue-legacy-edition/

As does Dennis.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: OGoldin on May 21, 2012, 07:14:17 PM
I know we are not going to get another Smile but a negative review from the likes of Uncut might be what it takes to get Brian and his people to decide to give us something at least a little weird and out there again.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Zach95 on May 21, 2012, 07:14:37 PM
They all do! Smiley Smile received a 9.1, Sunflower/Surf's Up received an 8.9! Love You received a very formidable 7.8!


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on May 21, 2012, 07:35:31 PM
They all do! Smiley Smile received a 9.1, Sunflower/Surf's Up received an 8.9! Love You received a very formidable 7.8!

Yeahhhh...those are the ones they've reviewed. And for a reason. The Warmth of the Sun also got a very high rating with these little nuggets in it:

"Most Pitchfork readers are familiar with this period of the band's career-- they're used to debating how Wild Honey stacks up against Sunflower, and trying to figure out which of the mid-70s albums has the most to recommend."

"'All Summer Long' is an excellent opening thesis, but then the comp detours with four kitschy throwbacks in a row-- two about surfing ("Catch a Wave" and "Hawaii") and two about cars ("Little Honda" and "409"). The chorus of "Little Honda" is still something to behold, the way the backup vocals chug along like pistons while Mike Love gets us up to third gear. But "409" sounds like a middling test-run from the Chuck Berry rip-off days, and the dippy "Hawaii" is interesting only as history ("I don't know what town you're from, but don't tell me they have bigger waves/ Everyone that goes comes back with nothing but raves"). The meat of the lesser pre-Pet Sounds material are the songs that showed how far Brian Wilson's art had come even before he was considered a great artist."


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Mike's Beard on May 21, 2012, 11:39:31 PM
Who cares what music mags think?

Typical rock music magazine thinking.  "Blah blah blah The Beatles, blah blah blah The Sex Pistols, blah blah blah U2, blah blah blah Oasis, blah blah blah Coldplay".

Anyone else is always going to be considered secondary.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on May 22, 2012, 12:10:43 AM
For the record, it was only a very short review. My few remembered quotes was pretty much the entire thing (they also made an arsey comment re 'the original lineup are back together - David Marks after a mere 49 year break'). I hope though that if and when Mojo or Rolling Stone give the album a glowing review everyone here who's said they don't care about critics will still be saying 'Huh, music critics, who cares what they say'?


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: b00ts on May 22, 2012, 12:12:29 AM
I'll wait for the guys at Rolling Stone to give it a shot.  I know David Fricke is a big Beach Boys fan. 

I don't trust reviews by reviewers I've never heard of.
Rolling Stone will give it 3.5 stars, as with every other major label LP released since 1995.

Seriously, who cares? Why are people getting worked up over this? Whether it is a sincere dislike based on the record's perceived merits and shortcomings, or a poorly-informed review as the result of a cursory listen, a bad review doesn't mean you can't enjoy the record and think it is the best album ever.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: The Heartical Don on May 22, 2012, 02:02:47 AM
Moot point (that review, I mean) -

could well be that, if the writer is unknown, he/she wants to make a name for him/herself by working against the mood of today (admit it: Brian and the BBs, by TSS for example, are riding a high wave nowadays, and the current shows are really good by all accounts, not just 'retro-good for inducing nostalgia). And what better way than give TWGMTR a mark that would be termed: insufficient, in Dutch school lingo?

We in Holland have a respected writer, by the way, working for a quality newspaper, who did exactly the same with Bri's 'Presents Smile' and subsequent works. He is a good reviewer, but aging, and I ascribe his odd and really unbelievable/incredible vendetta against Brian to the same mechanism.

People with problems and/or grudges and/or over-ambition usually resort to these tactics, folks.

That said, in all fairness, Uncut is a very good rock mag.

But I am not impressed in the slightest, and will wait. Until the CD/LP materialises.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: The Shift on May 22, 2012, 03:08:00 AM
The thing about reviews in consumer mags is that they're in the same domain as the albums themselves the entertainment industry. The reviewers write to entertain us, the readers, not to put together some scientific analysis. Whether you agree with them or disagree with them, the point is that if you react, you're being entertained. Just as you;re being entertained whether you like TWGMTR or not.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: MBE on May 22, 2012, 03:19:15 AM
That's the thing, when I write for publication I make sure that a) I know the history of the artists involved, b) that I can offer an informed opinion but make it clear that, besides the known facts, my view still just an opinion. Why I became a writer was because I was tired of smart ass reviewers who cavalierly write about people they aren't versed on. It may or may not be a solid album, but we should judge that for ourselves as people who know the story, and the history of the music.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: obscurereference on May 22, 2012, 03:20:19 AM
Moot point (that review, I mean) -

could well be that, if the writer is unknown, he/she wants to make a name for him/herself by working against the mood of today (admit it: Brian and the BBs, by TSS for example, are riding a high wave nowadays, and the current shows are really good by all accounts, not just 'retro-good for inducing nostalgia). And what better way than give TWGMTR a mark that would be termed: insufficient, in Dutch school lingo?

We in Holland have a respected writer, by the way, working for a quality newspaper, who did exactly the same with Bri's 'Presents Smile' and subsequent works. He is a good reviewer, but aging, and I ascribe his odd and really unbelievable/incredible vendetta against Brian to the same mechanism.

People with problems and/or grudges and/or over-ambition usually resort to these tactics, folks.

That said, in all fairness, Uncut is a very good rock mag.

But I am not impressed in the slightest, and will wait. Until the CD/LP materialises.
Or, y'know, the reviewer might just not be that keen on the album. One of the two.

I don't think it's fair to question the motives of a reviewer just because they don't like our favourite band's new album. As you say, Uncut is a good magazine.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: MBE on May 22, 2012, 03:34:31 AM
It is a good magazine, but I feel the guy doesn't understand what this means to their history.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Alan Smith on May 22, 2012, 03:49:59 AM
Whether you agree with them or disagree with them, the point is that if you react, you're being entertained. Just as you're being entertained whether you like TWGMTR or not.
And if you're entertained, you may well purchase said mag and others like it (including the 20 years later edition review where previously witheld credibility may be bestowed)


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: The Heartical Don on May 22, 2012, 04:05:57 AM
Whether you agree with them or disagree with them, the point is that if you react, you're being entertained. Just as you're being entertained whether you like TWGMTR or not.
And if you're entertained, you may well purchase said mag and others like it (including the 20 years later edition review where previously witheld credibility may be bestowed)

 :-D so true...


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: kookadams on May 22, 2012, 04:31:58 AM
In this day and age who knows sh*t about anything anymore? The reunion, the tour, the album is a goshdarn milestone for christ sake! Naysayers speak out of jealousy and their opinions are hogwash. There are a handful of Beach Boys albums that haven't gotten the greatest reviews and it don't mean they're not amazing albums; critics get paid to criticize and push their horseshit on the masses. As a youth who's spent the majority of his life absorbing and dissecting the Beach Boys I find it amusing seeing what idiocy people spew out. The legends are dieing off more and more and as true music zealots we gotta preserve the greats while we still got em!
~BEACH BOYS FOREVER!~






facebook.com/kookadams


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Amy B. on May 22, 2012, 04:36:00 AM
Wait, so you're complaining about someone who listened to the album and gave his unvarnished opinion? Every person on this board will do the exact same thing when the album is released, only won't be paid for it.

I have to say, based on the clips I agree with some of the things the reviewer was saying.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Tristero on May 22, 2012, 04:55:33 AM
Who cares what music mags think?

Typical rock music magazine thinking.  "Blah blah blah The Beatles, blah blah blah The Sex Pistols, blah blah blah U2, blah blah blah Oasis, blah blah blah Coldplay".

Anyone else is always going to be considered secondary.
I dunno, I've always gotten the impression that Uncut and Mojo hold Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys in very high esteem.  There was a lot of hoopla surrounding SMiLE, both the Brian Wilson version and the recent box.  I don't think they would be so quick to dismiss a new album featuring all of the surviving members as more of a 'hipster' Spin type of publication might.  It's just one guy's opinion, of course, but I guess fans should brace themselves for more of the same, though I expect a mixture of different reactions.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Ron on May 22, 2012, 06:57:07 AM
My dog heard a few snippets on the album, and he gives it a solid 10. 


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: The Heartical Don on May 22, 2012, 07:08:06 AM
My dog heard a few snippets on the album, and he gives it a solid 10. 

That's the litmus test, Ron. Please treat your dog to a behemoth-sized Triple Mac tonight, in honour of Brian Wilson.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Wirestone on May 22, 2012, 07:16:26 AM
Who cares what music mags think?

Typical rock music magazine thinking.  "Blah blah blah The Beatles, blah blah blah The Sex Pistols, blah blah blah U2, blah blah blah Oasis, blah blah blah Coldplay".

Anyone else is always going to be considered secondary.
I dunno, I've always gotten the impression that Uncut and Mojo hold Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys in very high esteem.  There was a lot of hoopla surrounding SMiLE, both the Brian Wilson version and the recent box.  I don't think they would be so quick to dismiss a new album featuring all of the surviving members as more of a 'hipster' Spin type of publication might.  It's just one guy's opinion, of course, but I guess fans should brace themselves for more of the same, though I expect a mixture of different reactions.

Uncut published one of the nastiest hit pieces on BW in recent memory, after Imagination was released. Really vile stuff -- anonymous quotes, unflattering pics (from the wrong era), lots of Monster Melinda talk. I've not bothered with them since. It was simply cruel.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Landlocked on May 22, 2012, 08:03:09 AM
It is a good magazine, but I feel the guy doesn't understand what this means to their history.

Their history is irrelevant to the quality of the music. If the reviewer thinks that it's overly processed, saccharine crap, or on the other side of the spectrum, that it's a work of genius, the fact that it's a miracle these guys came back together won't change that.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Biggus Dikkus on May 22, 2012, 09:35:37 AM
It isn't a terrible song, I actually thought it was more of a 7.0/10, was expecting far worse. The mastering is kind of what kills me, but whatever, its a fun Beach Boys song, and I'm very happy they've gotten back together and are putting an effort into the album. I am a little worried about Brian, it just seems like he doesn't want to be there, he looks very distant--sad even. I hope he puts himself before this tour, would hate to see the guy get too pressured.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: buddhahat on May 22, 2012, 09:47:54 AM
Wait, so you're complaining about someone who listened to the album and gave his unvarnished opinion? Every person on this board will do the exact same thing when the album is released, only won't be paid for it.

Please post more often, voice of sanity.



Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: buddhahat on May 22, 2012, 09:53:04 AM
It is a good magazine, but I feel the guy doesn't understand what this means to their history.

Their history is irrelevant to the quality of the music. If the reviewer thinks that it's overly processed, saccharine crap, or on the other side of the spectrum, that it's a work of genius, the fact that it's a miracle these guys came back together won't change that.

Exactly. Why should every reviewer offset their opinion against the band's personal history? That's nonsense! Maybe with BWPS, Brian's personal story was important, but only because it was integral to, and referenced, within the work itself. The major benchmarks that reviewers go on are: Does this sound good? What is the artist saying? How does it relate to music and culture today? Not "These guys have got back together - we should be grateful. Let's give them an easy ride to ensure they release more albums."


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: meltedwhiskeyinmyhand on May 22, 2012, 09:56:26 AM
The guy didnt say anything that hasnt been said here a million times before (probably more). Who cares what he thinks?


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: b00ts on May 22, 2012, 10:46:07 AM
It is a good magazine, but I feel the guy doesn't understand what this means to their history.

Their history is irrelevant to the quality of the music. If the reviewer thinks that it's overly processed, saccharine crap, or on the other side of the spectrum, that it's a work of genius, the fact that it's a miracle these guys came back together won't change that.

Exactly. Why should every reviewer offset their opinion against the band's personal history? That's nonsense! Maybe with BWPS, Brian's personal story was important, but only because it was integral to, and referenced, within the work itself. The major benchmarks that reviewers go on are: Does this sound good? What is the artist saying? How does it relate to music and culture today? Not "These guys have got back together - we should be grateful. Let's give them an easy ride to ensure they release more albums."
That's ridiculous. Everybody on and off this board should agree that this album is flawless because we're
lucky to have it. Groupthink 101.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Runaways on May 22, 2012, 10:59:09 AM
I really want this album to be viewed as another beach boys album, not the 50th anniversary album.  Which means no historical context please


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on May 22, 2012, 11:06:17 AM
Maybe the new albums going to be a bit crap and we all secretly suspect that it's going to be a bit crap and that's why this review has generated such a strong reaction here, because it's played to all our fears. Certainly all the things i was worried the BB's would do on this album - schmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning, lame songs - are all brought up in this review, much to my disappointment. Of course i may yet happily discover that the reviewer is talking out of his arse, but a part of me sadly suspects not.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Runaways on May 22, 2012, 11:11:56 AM
Maybe the new albums going to be a bit crap and we all secretly suspect that it's going to be a bit crap and that's why this review has generated such a strong reaction here, because it's played to all our fears. Certainly all the things i was worried the BB's would do on this album - schmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning, lame songs - are all brought up in this review, much to my disappointment. Of course i may yet happily discover that the reviewer is talking out of his arse, but a part of me sadly suspects not.

The only place I'm expected something really good is the last three songs, so I don't have issue with the review Celt When he says Brian's melancholy seems fake  ::)


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: b00ts on May 22, 2012, 05:02:52 PM
Maybe the new albums going to be a bit crap and we all secretly suspect that it's going to be a bit crap and that's why this review has generated such a strong reaction here, because it's played to all our fears. Certainly all the things i was worried the BB's would do on this album - schmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning, lame songs - are all brought up in this review, much to my disappointment. Of course i may yet happily discover that the reviewer is talking out of his arse, but a part of me sadly suspects not.
I've been able to hear most of the record.

The review is right about some stuff - there's shmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning and at least one really lame song ("Beaches in Mind"), maybe two if you count "Daybreak over the Ocean," although I like that song well enough.

There are also 11 tracks with great melodies; three superb tracks that open the album, and three superb tracks that close the album.

For Beach Boys fans, this album is surely a good one, and far from the worst thing we could get. In terms of consistent quality and conceptual (if not musical) unity, it beats out any album since MIU in my opinion. For non-fans or casual fans, there is much to criticize, but that won't affect my enjoyment of the record. I am going to listen the sh*t out of it.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Zach95 on May 22, 2012, 05:06:29 PM
Maybe the new albums going to be a bit crap and we all secretly suspect that it's going to be a bit crap and that's why this review has generated such a strong reaction here, because it's played to all our fears. Certainly all the things i was worried the BB's would do on this album - schmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning, lame songs - are all brought up in this review, much to my disappointment. Of course i may yet happily discover that the reviewer is talking out of his arse, but a part of me sadly suspects not.
I've been able to hear most of the record.

The review is right about some stuff - there's shmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning and at least one really lame song ("Beaches in Mind"), maybe two if you count "Daybreak over the Ocean," although I like that song well enough.

There are also 11 tracks with great melodies; three superb tracks that open the album, and three superb tracks that close the album.

For Beach Boys fans, this album is surely a good one, and far from the worst thing we could get. In terms of consistent quality and conceptual (if not musical) unity, it beats out any album since MIU in my opinion. For non-fans or casual fans, there is much to criticize, but that won't affect my enjoyment of the record. I am going to listen the sh*t out of it.

That was refreshing.  Thank you Boots, you're a good man for your voice of reason. Because of that, I take your review to heart much more than a lot of the others we've seen out there.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on May 22, 2012, 05:27:51 PM
I really want this album to be viewed as another beach boys album, not the 50th anniversary album.  Which means no historical context please

I could see why you would want that, but it's not happening. The lyrics to most of the songs reference the fact that it's a reunion album, there's references all over to the past, the band's history, the fact that they are getting older but can still crank out the tunes etc.

It doesn't make it any less of an album, but it's gonna be the 50th anniversary album, enjoy it for exactly what it is and I think we'll get more out of it.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Ron on May 22, 2012, 09:38:54 PM
I didn't read the review. 


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: The_Holy_Bee on May 22, 2012, 10:27:20 PM
EDIT: Posted this in the wrong thread, and on review of this page a lot of the points have already been made, more succinctly, by other posters. Still, there are a couple of things I think still worth saying - and I've already written it - so here we go again.

I'd just like to point out  that - the nature, "hip" or otherwise, of the reviewing mag aside -  a positive review of the album would have received nothing but effusive support from the majority of posters (cf. our response to all those glowing summaries of TSS). Yet a single bad notice has provoked an outpouring of attacks not only on Uncut as a magazine, but of the motivations of its writers and, by extension, readers.

Obviously I agreed with those reviews in the case of TSS (including Uncut's beautifully elliptical piece, which I don't recall posters here assessing as invalid because it was in a "nothing" magazine for "hipsters") - and the music on it being utterly brilliant has to account largely for those assessments.

By the same token, all I've heard of the reunion album is a few low-fi 30-second samples, so I don't know yet what I personally will think of TWGMTR, or indeed if I'll buy it (and before I get ripped into for that, surely the best thing you can do for an artist is reward their best work and avoid the mediocre -  and isn't assistance in doing that just why advance reviews exist? Maybe, to change media, Tim Burton and Johnny Depp would be more selective and successful in their collaborations if movie audiences adopted a more circumspect approach than just rushing off to the cinemas automatically for yet another ninety minutes of pancake make-up and over-elaborate set design.)

And yes, I realize this album is a big deal for the BB's, after all the water under the bridge, and we all hope the beginning of some great new things, or at least a triumphant closing salvo. But the work produced is, nevertheless, the work produced.

Being a fan forum, ecstasy over positive reviews isn't unreasonable, and three pages thus far of scorn over a negative appraisal understandable, but rationally speaking it says less for SmileySmile's objectivity than it does for Uncut's. Especially since most of us haven't actually heard the album yet; and that the criticisms quoted in the review summary up top mention almost exclusively aspects of the recordings - Love-style call-backs, autotune etc - that posters here ourselves have called out for concern.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Jim V. on May 22, 2012, 11:25:37 PM
I didn't read the review. 

Well then we'd appreciate it if you didn't bother posting in this thread to tell us that.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Lonely Summer on May 22, 2012, 11:36:47 PM
I don't know why anyone would expect the BB's to get all artsy on this reunion album. it's a reunion for the $$$, so they're gonna go the road that they expect to pay the biggest - A/C, lots of nostalgia, nothing wierd like SMiLE. Their defense will be "that stuff sells to you guys, the die-hards, but we're trying to bring in the casual fans as well'. One last big payday before Brian and Al retire, and Mike and Bruce return to "their" Beach Boys.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: MBE on May 23, 2012, 12:48:10 AM
Ah but it does matter if he knows about the post 1974 ups and downs of at least their music. For one thing he can't measure just how much of a return to form this album may be. If he's only heard Pet Sounds, Smile, and the hits for instance, of course this new album will sound crappy. However if he has played even two or three of the 1976-96 albums he has a basis to go by. What would that take two to three hours? I think it's crucial a reviewer know and/or care about the subject. Why would I care to hear what some guy randomly thinks of the new Beach Boys album if he doesn't get what they went through to get there! I am not hired to write about speed metal but music I specalize in. It would be pointless for me to cover a group I only have general public knowledge on. It would waste my time and every readers. That's why so many reviews don't mean anything. If it's true isn't my point, my point is that you shouldn't write non fiction if you don't take the time to know what you are talking about. It's obvious he doesn't have any insight into this album so I ddon't really rate what he has to say about it. Simple as that.   


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: The_Holy_Bee on May 23, 2012, 01:05:32 AM
"I don't know why anyone would expect the BB's to get all artsy on this reunion album"

"For one thing he can't measure just how much of a return to form this album may be."

Surely, in terms of my comments at least, these are side issues? (And please bear in mind I haven't read the review, so I'm going completely upon the comments made my posters on the basic nature of reviewing and criticism. It may be that the review renders these observations invalid, in which case I comprehensively apologize.)

For the former quote, I don't think "artsy" has anything to do with it - at least outside the fan community, who are the ones who tend to think in terms of "Pets Sounds-esque artistically-driven music" and "Summer in Paradise-style commercially-motivated music" (if indeed those phrases mean anything in the first place). In the end, surely all reviews should fundamentally be based on the questions "does this album work", "did I enjoy it", "does it progress or develop the artform" and "does it meet the goals it sets for itself"? And being this is very much inherently a reunion album (check out the song titles if nothing else), that last enquiry seems very much appropriate.

For the second point, if you're genuinely arguing that to write professional criticism you need to be intimately acquainted with the ins-and-outs of an artist's back catalogue - that I couldn't review Elvis Costello, say, if all I'd heard was "Alison" and the "Cold Mountain" soundtrack, or that someone couldn't effectively review "Magnolia" without having seen "Boogie Nights" - well, frankly, that's a nonsense, or at least naive. Understanding, great. Knowledge of and enthusiasm for popular music if you're reviewing popular music (or for heavy metal if you're reviewing Metallica) - crucial.

But comparisons, as they say, are odious, and I'd argue that a good reviewer, with a sound knowledge of the breadth of the genre, doesn't even need to have heard "two or three of the 1976-96 albums". Reviews are basically about points of difference to the contemporary catalogue, and successes and merits on the art's own terms, and I wouldn't blame the reviewer for not having heard and compared TWGMTR to "Light Album" any more than I would if he or she hadn't heard "Pet Sounds". Much as one of those would be far more of a shame for the reviewer personally than the other.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Peadar 'Big Dinner' O'Driscoll on May 23, 2012, 04:50:58 AM
Uncuts an excellent mag which has always been good to the Beach Boys. No point turning on em now. This album will likely recieve plenty of bad /mediocre reviews judging by the samples IMO.

A final Beach Boys album with someone like Rick Rubin at the helm would have been interesting but the kind of personalities that exist within the Beach Boys means a Joe Thomas project was always more likely. This reunion is all about the live shows for me. Lost interest in the album pretty early on.

I remember telling everyone who would listen how good GIOMH was when it came out. Being a Beach Boys fanatic means you want everything to be great but sometimes it just isnt.


Title: Re: Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on May 24, 2012, 06:02:37 AM
Finally bought the new Uncut mag, rather than skim-reading it in WH Smith, and er... there's a BB live review as well at the back of the mag. Not very good either. Mike's somewhat bare-faced hypocrisy in praising H&V onstage is mentioned (they bring up his previous 'Brian's ego music' comment). They also say: 'it's sad seeing Brian Wilson having to sing on mid-'80's travesty Kokomo - by far the low point of the evening'. There is some praise too - they say the highlights of the evening are the tributes to Carl and Dennis.