|
|
Post by chrome3d on Apr 15, 2009 10:39:24 GMT
rateyourmusic.com/artist/howling_bellsI catalogue all my stuff to a site called rateyourmusic.com. It´s possible to rate albums there on the scale from 1-5. There is a lot of people who know their music. It just caught my eye that the debut album was rated 3,60 from 199 ratings. When rating goes over 3,5 it usually means that the album is well received and gets a lot of high ratings with 4,5 and 5 stars. Radio Wars is rated only 3,09 from 77 ratings. Usually the albums get like 3,3 if they are mediocre but when it goes near 3 it means that there is a lot of negative ratings of 2 etc. and the album is viewed as some kind of failure. Is this a problem only because these people were expecting something else or is the album really worse than the debut? Will this "down rating" be corrected when it will get more listeners who don´t expect it to be something that it isn´t? At least at the moment it has gotten a lot worse response than the debut. Any views? I rated both albums as 4,5 as I think that it´s fair compared to most of the other stuff I listen. I´m not ready to go to 5 but it isn´t that far. I didn´t have any complaints that they updated their style but it seems other people didn´t like it so much.
|
|
|
|
Post by blade on Apr 15, 2009 11:54:36 GMT
I've read dozens of 'professional' reviews and posted many of them here: howlingbells.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=howlingbellsgeneral&action=display&thread=237Opinions swayed right across the spectrum from 'magnificent' to 'awful' and everything in between - I didn't post any of the 'awful' ones! I read two reviews (can't remember where from), one straight after the other. The first said "Couldn't wait for it to end", the second said "I've got it on auto-repeat". I also wrote in that thread, which I think that sums up how Radio Wars has generally been received: "Radio Wars has really divided the critics. From what I've read, the ones who don't like it wanted The First Album Mark Two, while those who do like it either didn't hear the debut album, or did hear it and liked it but now realise that if a band stands still they get left behind, and are commending them for expanding their repertoire. I must admit that, overall, I still prefer the first album but if I'd never heard that and came across Radio Wars as an album by a group I'd never heard before, I'd think, "Wow! This is brilliant!" That just shows how absolutely amazingly magnificently wonderfully stunningly superb the first album was!" The only true 'review' is number of sales! |
|
clac
Junior Member
Posts: 66
|
Post by clac on Apr 15, 2009 16:33:00 GMT
i read a "big" number of nice reviews, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Apr 15, 2009 22:51:17 GMT
I really like the album but of course I'm baised. However the fact is the band needs to secure its long term future and maybe that is why there are more popish type tunes on the album and why they've obviously done a deal for various songs to be used on TV.
Not many acts make money from the sales of CD's any more.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrome3d on Apr 16, 2009 3:47:28 GMT
I guess it could be said the response has been mixed. I just wanted to bring out another kind of view from hardcore music listeners. Some of those "real" reviews might not always be absolutely unbiased. You never know what magazine has connections to a label etc. To me it seemed that there were very few people who gave it a really good rating. I still believe that a new kind of group of listeners could find Radio Wars and see it´s virtues. I don´t mind if they "sell-out" to commercials  What commercials are those? |
|
|
|
Post by blade on Apr 16, 2009 14:14:47 GMT
Very eloquently and concisely worded Lee. I think I agree with everything you say but I couldn't have put it so well - a career in music journalism beckons!
And, by the way, we're very grateful you started this board!
|
|
|
|
Post by livlovesmusique on Apr 16, 2009 16:06:23 GMT
I agree with Matt, Lee--perfectly stated. I feel the same way about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattcambie on Apr 17, 2009 7:16:00 GMT
going to a gig andlistening to the songs from Radio Wars live really exceed their sound on the album, which is a major plus for them, the reason they sound better live i think is because the new songs (which are too clean cut on the album and dont have enough omph!) sound more raw and a little rougher (debut-esque) when played live.
But a great sounding album is what gets the folks to the live show!
|
|
|
|
Post by lowhappynun on Apr 18, 2009 0:45:03 GMT
I think the production is awful, and it doesn't surprise me in the slightest to learn that Dan Grech-Marguerat strongly imposed himself on the album, even to the point of arguing with Juanita over it. really? thats interesting. i guess grech-marguerat won, then. in which case i cant understand why that was allowed to happen i agree, though. i wasnt a massive fan of the production on the first album: the shoegaze and country aspects of the band's sound seem to have been blunted rather than sharpened. that album just sounded too damn nice in places (setting sun and wishing stone to name the most obvious culprits). were i behind tha boardz i would have envisioned the band's songs as acting like a harmonizer for those two disparate polarities (shoegaze i.e. mbv etc and country i.e. dolly parton etc). like an edgier mazzy star with a better singer and more songs (though i dont want to hate on mazzy star too much). but anyway the first album's production now looks great compared to the second one. despite its (imo) flaws, the atmosphere of the debut was such that the band were repeatedly compared to david lynch. but there is no atmosphere on the second one, zilch, nada, nothing. no character or feeling to the sound of the record at all (this is compounded by the artwork/promo shots for the album which alternate/s between uncertain and bland). the songs just sit there, distant and unfeeling. listen to how absolutely amazing juanita's voice sounds at the start of the bell hit. there's nothing even approaching that on radio wars. the good songs on radio wars (treasure hunt, digital hearts) work really well live (that acoustic session someone posted on here was a real eye-opener) but there's also a bit of a dropoff from the first one in terms of songwriting. let's be kids is bad. how long and it ain't you are not good either (how long would probably be easier to swallow if it didnt rip off its drum pattern from tv on the radio). and the production comes into it again though: i said the debut was too nice in places but it was generally saved by how good the songs were; on the debut, great songs were made a little too sweet by the production. on radio wars, merely good songs like into the chaos and nightingale are turned near-saccharine by the production. aaand, even though i blamed the production for not making juanita's voice sound as good as on the debut, most the songs on radio wars dont really give her a hell of a lot to do anyway im rambling like an **** but....a misstep, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by blade on Apr 18, 2009 23:09:21 GMT
Hello Satinder - it's great to have you here and I think you should make sure you become a regular contributor. If you and Lee get a good exchange of views going here I could sit all night and read what you have to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by blade on Apr 19, 2009 15:43:38 GMT
You rightly mentioned Kings of Leon, and didn't something similar happen with The Killers too? They used to be a rock band but their last single (Human?) sounded to me like the Pet Shop Boys.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowhappynun on Apr 19, 2009 22:58:12 GMT
Yeah. Joel mentions it here: 'He challenged Juanita a lot, which she found frustrating. And there was a lot of swearing'. Maybe it's just because I don't know how things work in recording studios, but as far as I'm concerned, the producer should never have the last word on the music being recorded. I'd love to know exactly what he challenged her over. Because, judging by the list of her favourite musicians on her MySpace page, it's safe to say that pop probably isn't her favourite genre. That doesn't mean she doesn't like pop, of course, but it does seem to suggest that she wouldn't particularly want Radio Wars to sound overly 'poppy.' But then I could be completely wrong. as far as i know, which isnt that far, the role of producer varies greatly depending on various factors: the experience of the band, the promotional budget, their previous records, and just generally what the personalities in the band are like (how well-formed their artistic sensibilities are, how prone they are to abusing substances, their technical ability, etc). an example of a very hands-on-producer-requiring band would be someone like the view, i suppose: a bunch of dissheveled young wasters with no recording experience and who can barely play their instruments. the producer's role in this case extends down to just simply getting an album out of them. an example of someone whose label budget demands a producer who can do what he likes (or does what he's quietly told to do by the label) would be someone like snow patrol, i suppose. an example of a band who more or less can just do what the hell they like with occasional assistance from a producer would be someone like the super furry animals (who have actually self-produced a couple of their records). but howling bells are a band who are following up a very well-received debut with another producer who they seemed to get on very well with (and whose resume gives him much more leverage over a band than grech-marguerat's does). they seem to be sensible, well-versed, intelligent folks and who in juanita appear to have a leader with a lot of drive and ambition. they don't have a big promotional budget behind them (i assume...if they do it isn't working very well). given all of this, i simply cant understand why grech-marguerat was given that much of a say and allowed to change the band's sound THAT much when clearly he doesnt have anything particularly brilliant to bring to the table. pop is fine, im sure if the bells hooked up with timbaland or herbert or dangermouse they'd make a terrific record but what g-m (i am NOT typing out his bloody name again even though this petulant explanatory bracket uses up way more letters than just typing it would have) has done is not even GOOD pop production, its limp and lifeless and bland and even tacky in places. the production on golden web (which is quite a cool song) is near-embarassing. not to mention the two most interesting parts of the band musically (juanita's voice and joel's guitar) are pushed back from their central roles on the debut to almost just being part of the scenery on the second. g-m seems to have approached radio wars as if the howling bells were a boring band who he just wanted to get nine bland MOR radio rock songs out of. as if he was producing the feeling or something. what he's succeeded in doing is just making a interesting band look considerably less interesting than they are. Agreed. I'm particularly glad you mentioned 'The Bell Hit' because, perhaps more so than anything else on the Bells' debut, it's that intro that always leaves me thinking about Radio Wars in negative terms. It demonstrates the atmosphere and appreciation of space and texture that Radio Wars lacks, and like you said, Juanita sounds breathtaking. In my opinion, the only song on Radio Wars in which she even comes close to sounding that good is the much-maligned 'How Long'. yeah...i remember the first time i listened to radio wars, 'how long' really struck me because its the first time on the record that juanita is really allowed to open up her voice (even though i didnt particularly like the song in the end). oh, btw lee, i'm an EngLit graduate. and, i say to thee, young 'un: get out, get out, get out while you can! there's no light at the end of the tunnel! it's all smoke and mirrors! and it's a trap, also! a smoky reflective trap! you'll probably end up teaching! you'll never finish the novel you think you'll finally write! i still serve people coffee and i graduated almost two years ago! |
|
|
|
Post by chrome3d on Apr 20, 2009 8:42:07 GMT
"im sure if the bells hooked up with timbaland or herbert or dangermouse they'd make a terrific record "
I´m sorry but I have to disagree. If they ever decide to do an album with Timbaland (and Timbaland surprisingly agrees) then it´s all over for me. No questions asked. I´ll never look to them as credible artists. I´m pretty sure the end result would be a complete disaster unless that kind of "music" is your music. Just look at Chris Cornell. He will never recover from that hideous monstrosity and everything he ever did is dragged to shame with the touch of Timbaland.
It is an interesting question if the same song material could have survived better in the hands of another producer. Could it have had the same impact as the debut if there had been less gloss on top of the real cake? I felt that some songs were even better than on the debut but some were not. There is more changes in the writing style and this happens probably because there was more song writers. The idea of all of them writing together as opposed to juanita writing them alone is interesting. I think that it´s good that the whole band does things and they should learn to do it if they want to have a longer career.
I always felt that Bells were little too quirky for big mainstream success. The darker edge they still have is not so easily transformed to big time success without dramatic changes but what do I know. Neko Case made it to US top 3 recently so anything is possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by skeffington on Apr 20, 2009 12:00:05 GMT
Yeah. Joel mentions it here: 'He challenged Juanita a lot, which she found frustrating. And there was a lot of swearing'. Maybe it's just because I don't know how things work in recording studios, but as far as I'm concerned, the producer should never have the last word on the music being recorded. I think this is absolutely spot on. There are obviously places where some input or guidance is required but as a general rule producers should leave well alone. Perhaps the Bells should get Steve Albini in to do the next record? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by blade on Apr 21, 2009 21:33:44 GMT
I've just re-read this whole thread and, out of nowhere really, it seems we've become rather down about Radio Wars. Even though it was only officially released in early March, we've all been listening to it since its December leak and only in the last couple of weeks have any really negative comments emerged (OK, they are aimed at the producer more than the band).
Were we all fooling ourselves at first that it was better than it actually was and we didn't really want to say that was the case? Has it taken dozens of listens to decide that it's not so good after all?
Being someone who loves music but has little interest in the technical side of it, I listen to vocals, instruments and lyrics, in that order. I appreciate that production affects the overall sound of the first two, but no amount of over- or under- or misguided production can whitewash them completely.
Radio Wars is still vocally and instrumentally superb (especially the way the drums come to the fore and drive the songs, which I haven't heard so much anywhere before). Occasionally the lyrics, too simplistic and banal in places, let it down, and Joel's guitar should be more prominent sometimes.
The problem is the benchmark we're evaluating it against. If we heard Radio Wars as a new album by a new band we'd think, hey, that's rather good. When you're comparing any record to Howling Bells, the best album in the history of man (and woman) kind, nothing can ever measure up.
|
|
What commercials are those?
