Great album, check it out

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

ive been meaning to

muse are awful, this album is probably no exception. won't be checking out.

sorry :<

(if you're curious, here's a review, and this website is generally awesome so... http://www.sputnikmusic.com/album.php?albumid=40324)

_________________
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: true genius
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: doesn't make sense
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: till you're senseless

Cheers Mini, didn't know they had a new album out.
I'm buying it at the moment.

_________________
Ze Ãœbermensch

how about putting some pineapples up your ass? Muse is great, it's been awarded "best live band" a couple of years in a row, it's magical...

_________________
[SpA]Revenge "Wheres the element of surpise :/"

[SpA]Mint "IN.... MY....PANTS"

[SpA]Minimoose "Revenge is going to jump out of your pants?"

Yeah, I've seen Muse live here in our small country, and I quite liked it.
Only thing I missed was the interaction with the audience, they barely introduced themselves.
Other than that, great show.

_________________
Ze Ãœbermensch

Haha. That is messed up.

There was an advert for Muse on the TV just as I read Migu's post. It was a bit bizarre.

What Satterbrain said, and I do like pineapples.

Scatterbrain, reviews mean shit when it's for an art form imo

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

I dont like Muse either but you know what they say: "Opinions are like arseholes, everybody has one and usually one is not interested in anothers.." ( keyword here is USUALLY)

I mean, come on, some people even like country music..

_________________
Dear God(if you even exist), I am willing to trade Justin Bieber, all 3 Jonases and Miley Cyrus to get Paul Gray, Ronnie James Dio, Pete Steele, Dimebag Darrell and Chuck Schuldiner back.

:'(
John Denver - Country roads
It's simply awesome :p

_________________
"There is a simple, logical explanation... and there is nothing under the bed.”

Johnny Cash - Ring of Fire

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

Heed the words of the relatively small moose, they ring true :o

_________________
"There is a simple, logical explanation... and there is nothing under the bed.”

I dont count Mr Cash's songs as country. I guess that is the exception that confirms the rule.

I ment more in the lines of Garth Brooks..

_________________
Dear God(if you even exist), I am willing to trade Justin Bieber, all 3 Jonases and Miley Cyrus to get Paul Gray, Ronnie James Dio, Pete Steele, Dimebag Darrell and Chuck Schuldiner back.

Never heard of him :p
But yea, everyone got different tastes about music, movies and whatnot ^^

_________________
"There is a simple, logical explanation... and there is nothing under the bed.”

Art and art critique live side by side and good critique can advance the form as much as a talented painter.

enthusiastic amatures writing reviews however... not needed.

That said, I've never found interest in anything Muse released and having seen them 3 times have never understood why they were awarded live band of the year over and over. This however maybe subjective.. the first time I saw them was after their first album which wasn't really good live material anyway and after that its all really been stadium gigs which I detest anyway... still don't like their albums though.

_________________

really? some of the reviews over there are the best I've read. try this one -

http://www.sputnikmusic.com/album.php?albumid=185

_________________
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: true genius
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: doesn't make sense
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: till you're senseless

Thats certainly very well written, very studied and in some places contains quite profound insight.

However as a review it told me nothing, I'd have a hard job understanding what knid of music Pink Floyd make from that. As critique it lacked any anaylisis of the sound the key, the tempo, no understanding of music theory at bets this can be called a critique of theme and lyrics. This is endemic in Modern music journalism where attention to the precepts of critical thinking have been replaced by comment on style, rigid adherance to genre and subjectivity.
This is the lead in to that review, no justification is offered for the musical acomplishment, no comparison draw to other peaks of acheivement in rock let alone in music at all. It simply cannot be calle critique. The review ends with a similar statement:
Three intensley subjective statements made before a single full stop is reached. While I mentioned before the lacking of musical evidence to back up the statments made here the idea that this is a Literary work of genius swing from subjective to outright offensive. Especially considering that the analysis of the work presented here concentrates so heavily on the political and swerves away from the albums deeply engraind attack on religous doctrine. One of the quotes used attacks bot the capatalist and religous docotorines so openly its hard to see how the refeerances weren't noticed. I'll stop because honestly had this been presented as an analysis of the political themes of animals I'd love it as its presented to me as a review of an album or at worst critique of that album, I can't take it seriously at all.

I could easily go so far to say in the history of Rock-and-Roll there have been no real critics of the form, but I doubt thats true I just havent read any.

A good critic understands the form and structure of the thing they critique. To stay somewhat on a theme; a political critique of "Animal Farm" should offer me politcal insight to the novels characters and motivations and littery critique should give me a greater understanding of the authors technique and the craftsmanship of a writer as well as the conciets of litrature and structure of the story. Thats not to say the comment on the politic of "Animal Farm" could not be contained within a littery critique but it should never be its main purpose. Music criticism should be doing the same. For classical, especially critique written before 1960, it did for a long time, now hoever it does not. Until we see the kind of critical writing that art, architecture and litrature recieves music predominatly rock will always just be review and journalism

_________________

In your opinion

I would much rather decide whether I dislike something, rather than letting someone else lead me into disliking something. Reviews are useful, but if you let one review form your whole opinion on something then it's just silly, even if the critique is good.

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

My opinion is based on my study of Art and Music history in which critique was always intended for the artists themselves it became popular as review after it became widly puplished in the 19th century when several people became more famous for critique than their own work itself. The two feed each other. So who said any critique was intended for you in the first place? And I certainly never suggested you base your opinion on only one review. How you even came to that conclusion is beyond me.

So no not just my opinion, the opinion of Aristotle, the opinion of Kant, the opinion of Art history and even of historians them selves.

Oh and if we are talking about review which in this case we are, no you shouldnt trust just one review. You're buying based on you tastes in which case I suggest peer review rather than critique as critique as I've said should not be subjective to the tastes of the critic.

_________________

The thing is though, it's a review for an album that has been out for over three decades AND has garnered mucho critical acclaim in it's time. Personally Animals isn't my favourite album from 'The Floyd's' back catalogue but I can certainly appreciate it for the quality piece of work it so clearly is. When it all comes down to it though, I think a review for it at this stage in the game would always be gushy rather than actually informative. It's clearly written by a swooning fan of the genre who, I'm guessing, pretty much assumes that anybody reading the review simply wants to reiterate that it is, in fact, the dog's wagglies.

Which makes sense really. I doubt anybody would be reading this review in order to ascertain whether they want to nip down to HMV to part with their hard earned scratch. I do agree with you in the respect that reviews should really compare the subject with similar genre leaders; It's only good practice. However, for this particular review, I think it's just about sounding off about how awesome they think Pink Floyd are. And I agree. Pink Floyd are fucking awesome.

If it was a review for Muse's new album though, I'd expect a little more comparison and break down of style, and less brown nosery.

I was talking about scatterbrains dismissal due to that one review, not your opinion or the opinion of great philosophers

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

Don't forget the greatest thinker of modern times; Philosoraptor.

Then I recant. Though its more difficult to follow if you quote me and abuse scatter :p


That assumes that no-one new would be coming to the genre. Also my point is that critique should be something more that, review aspires to be critique and therefore deserves a better standard than what is given. Amatures are prone to this type of sentiment but critique can remain fresh otherwise there would be no more critical study of the Bronte's, Milton or Shakespeare, they've been around for a tad over 50 years and the critical analysis still rolls in.

Granted I'd be hiring hit men if I'd read that about a new album.

_________________

Yeah, i just couldnt be bothered to quote it, or make any reference to what i was talking about

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

whehehe

whoo... ok, I'm way out of my depth here so making a formulated reply would be a bit silly. but very interesting and enjoyable discussion, I gotta say.

and no, I'm not basing my entire opinions of the album on just that review; also from past experiences with muse, general musical banter, that sort of thing. and also making vaguely educated assumptions.

_________________
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: true genius
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: doesn't make sense
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: till you're senseless

The material point then still stands, There is no modern music criticism and Muse are fucking awful.

_________________

so hey i herd of dis great music site called pitchfrok its pretty rad and not preetenshush at all you guys shoud check it out some time srsly D;

(but I guess pitchfork is fairly love it or hate it too)

_________________
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: true genius
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: doesn't make sense
ュ~ちゃんgamer.jp Pinky: till you're senseless

Pitchfork is like the NME and all those metal mags, fairly entrenched in a single Genre that is itself fairly entrenched in its own musical dogma. Despite forays into the worlds of electronica, rap, IDM and metal its only the leading lights of those scenes that gets its review on the site where every obscure Indie release is reviewed, the bias is also skewed to that sound too, its a shame because the writing on Pitchfork tends to be a cut above that of most music writing on the web. However they're doing more to review a wider range of music than any magazine ever has so, lets here it fo' the fork.

As a side rant why the hell we still call it Indie when its now the most commercial style of music there is and most of the artists are on the majors is incomprehesible.

_________________

I really like muse, they are balls to the wall, batshit insane and their music pretty much throws out emotion and energy.

However the new album, so far from listening to it, fails to deliver...

A few gems, like uprising, United states of Eurasia/collateral damage, resistance bring out some pretty ace musical influences, like queen, churn out intense musical symphonies like the piano melodies etc blah ti far. Some brilliant guitar work, some brilliant orchestration.

But the rest?

Well its pretty mild in comparison to any other muse work... I always have to compare an album to Origin of symmetry. It was pretty much complete. Since then we got lots of gems, but no album has covered it all. And I think its muses fault.

They put the bar so high, every song feels like it should be a masterpeice, a song with no equal, intense piano interludes, guitar solos which make you hang off the edge of your pants and bass beats which constantly keep your head moving.

This album alot of the songs arent up to that standard, they are a bit predictable ( which is just not good muse ).

Probably due to lack of a producer, the band seems to have gone mental on about 3 songs, then thought "fuck we need to have some stock songs incase these dont work"... and stock songs are just pretty shite..

Next album better be intense energy driven insane instrumental monsters which take unpredictable turns at every step. Then I may be happy.

Then again if this wasnt made by muse it would probably be heralded as a masterpeice... we just expect more...