|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
View Poll Results: ? | |||
5/5 | 7 | 28.00% | |
4/5 | 12 | 48.00% | |
3/5 | 3 | 12.00% | |
2/5 | 2 | 8.00% | |
1/5 | 1 | 4.00% | |
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
06-04-2013, 12:41 PM | #11 (permalink) |
Engorged Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,536
|
First time listening now, I'm liking it but I'm not blown away (didn't expect to be). Definitely better than Era Vulgaris, but I'll have to play it a few more times to see if I like it more than Lullabies to Paralyze. I'm not sure how I feel about the production.
__________________
last.fm | my collection on RYM | vinyl instagram @allthatyouseeandhear I'd love to see your signature/links too, but the huge and obnoxious ones have caused me to block all signatures. |
06-05-2013, 01:23 PM | #15 (permalink) |
Your Ad Here
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Twilight Zone
Posts: 876
|
It's a really mellow album and a nice change of pace after the desert-glam rock on Era Vulgaris.
The last two tracks are my favorites and I agree with everyone saying this is the best album since Song for the Deaf. I'd call it a 9/10, so a 5/5 for this thread. |
06-10-2013, 10:57 AM | #17 (permalink) |
killedmyraindog
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Posts: 11,172
|
Really boring on the first run through. It strikes me as being more interested in creating a groove than a song. And I can't put my finger on it, but its weirdly slick. Like what a pot-head album would be like if it went commercial. Its a little too cheery and plastic for me.
Again, first listen. We'll see. I went through this thread and will re-listen to the songs being mentioned as having been the better of the lot.
__________________
I've moved to a new address |
06-12-2013, 01:53 PM | #20 (permalink) | |
( ̄ー ̄)
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,270
|
Quote:
|
|
|