Tim: Don’t know if you remember the Norwegian Eurovision entry, but it’s been remixed by those lovely people at 7th Heaven, and I believe you may enjoy it.
Tom: Your belief is CORRECT. It’s as if Dario G remixed Josh Groban, and added three key changes, and I thoroughly APPROVE.
Tim: Which is strange, because the original when he sang it sounded great on its own.
Tom: Two key changes though. I’m not complaining, but it does crank the melodrama up to 11. The later key change is telegraphed properly, as all overblown key changes should be, but earlier it’s almost like the guy on the keyboards hit the wrong chord, and everyone else was just “okay, we’ll go with that.”
Tim Jeffries, ruining hip hop for other people since 2010!
Tom: I know it’s not the normal style of music we review, but the new single by Tinie Tempah is bloody amazing. It’s released on 27th September, and it’s called Written in the Stars – not to be confused with the old Elton John and Leanne Rimes track. There are three reasons why I like it:
Tinie Tempah actually shouts “let’s go” just before he starts.
The hook is lush. I don’t mean that in the slang sense, I mean that in the same way you’d describe a tree. It’s a genius bit of complicated, layered, melodramatic major-key pop genius with a synthesised string section behind it.
He namedrops Malorie Blackman, the young adult science fiction writer. I had to listen to that line again just to make sure I heard it right.
His earlier stuff seemed gimmicky, but this isn’t: it’s a full grown-up British rap track, and it deserves to go worldwide.
Tim: Good: the music. Perhaps even ‘very good’. The chorus is excellent, and while the rapping isn’t my thing I could happily have this on in the background. Eric Turner is definitely someone I may look into at some point in the future.
Bad: the lyrics. The second half of the first verse and the second verse seem to give a vague ‘look at me, I started low down, but I’ve worked my way up slowly but surely’ autobiographical idea, showing us he’s a good guy, he’s had stuff to work though; let’s think about him and feel for him. This would be great – it could even be slightly motivational for school kids who are feeling down on their luck. Except it can’t, because he starts out by more or less saying ‘look at me, I’m flipping awesome’, Flo Rida-style, which makes him seem like an arrogant prick and kind of destroys any desire I have to get to know him. I’m sure you’re not, Tinie – in fact, you’re probably the lovely guy we see in the rest of the song – but you’ve ruined it. Sorry.
Horrendous: one lyric in particular. ‘Was leaded astray’. I don’t care if it was to make some (not particularly apparent) point about a bad education or something: it’s awful, and no excuse will change that. You’ve had enough dodgy stresses elsewhere that ‘I was led astray’ would work just as well and not be massively annoying.
Like I said, I could more than happily have this on in the background. The music’s brilliant, and I can’t really fault it. If I have to listen to it and pay attention to it, though: sorry, but no.
Tom: Damn. Now you mention it, it’s like the spell is broken. That ‘brap brap’ in the first verse annoys the hell out of me, come to think of it, along with some of the dodgy stresses you mentioned. It’s a shame because the rest of it really is so good.
I tried hunting for other music by the same team, but the producer’s name is simply “Ishi” – which is ungooglable – and I really can’t find anything else about this particular Eric Turner online. That’s annoying because I want an album that sounds like this… only without Tinie Tempah.
Sorry, Tinie.
Tim: Hurrah! Tim Jeffries, ruining hip hop for other people since 2010!
Tim: What we have here is a young bloke called Ola* whose appearance is rather spoiled by a peculiar reverse mullet. He got to the finals of Idol 2005 and (perhaps surprisingly) has been very successful, in Sweden at least, ever since, with all nine solo singles in the Top 5, and six of those going to number 1. Anyway, this song is off his third album, released today.
*To give him his full name, Ola Svensson, really, definitely not to be confused with the palindromically-named, slightly scary and entirely different singer Ola Salo.
Tim: I rather like it – it’s jumpy around, has a summery sort of ‘get up and go’ feel to it, which is nice if you’re feeling a bit lethargic. This is enhanced if you watch the video, in which he demonstrates how amazingly energetic he is by running a lot. And then being hit by a car, and carrying on running. And then smashing through a wall, and realising that that was a bit too much.
Tom: That’s a pleasant enough song, isn’t it? I’m glad it kicked in for the chorus, although – ironically given the video – it never really seemed to go anywhere after that. I have a feeling it’s one of those records that’s got to number one based on ‘existing fanbase’ rather than ‘wow that’s a great song’.
Tim: Its success might also be helped by the B-sides – it’s more of an EP than a single and the three tracks are varied enough for most people to have at least one that they like. One‘s an unusually enjoyable R&B style number, and the other‘s a fairly vigorous dance tune, although after a while it unfortunately succumbs to Robynness. What is it with that at the moment?
Tom: If I’m honest, I’m really hoping that – like Takeshi’s Castle – one of the tech crew substituted a wall that didn’t break away for an earlier take of that final shot.
Tim: Annoying: the multiple times they cut away just before he hits the wall, in a ‘will he stop in time?’ attempt to make it vaguely exciting. Of course he won’t. In this video, there is no way he can not go crashing through that wall. Just get on with it, numbnuts.
Tom: Also, I’m not sure I’d describe Ola Salo as ‘slightly scary’ after his rather fabulous performance at Eurovision 2007.
Tim: Hmm. That’ll teach me to judge by Wikipedia pictures alone. Mind you, I still wouldn’t want him as a babysitter.
Tom: To be fair, “full CRB check” isn’t generally a requirement for being a pop star. Although maybe they include that on boy band auditions now, just to be safe.
With a decent remix or two, this song could be really good.
Tim: This video, released a few days ago but only just up on YouTube, is of the second single by the band Gravitonas, and if you think it sounds familiar you’d be entirely correct – half of the band comes direct from BWO, who took a break about six months ago, and each of them is currently doing their own thing. One’s of them’s done proper heavy rock, another has moved in the opposite direction, whilst Alexander Bard (the terrifyingly beardy one) has pretty much stayed exactly where he was, whilst picking up a friend or two.
Anyway, yes it’s familiar. The instruments and the vocal style are all the same, and the pre-chorus melody is lifted straight from Kings of Tomorrow, but that doesn’t mean it’s bad – like most of BWO’s stuff, it’s enjoyable, pleasant and entirely inoffensive. The only criticism I have is that while it’s got a fairly decent beat that grows throughout, for a song that’s about an enlightenment brought on by dance music (just go with it – it’s best not to think about it too much), that beat’s not nearly big enough. With a decent remix or two, though, this song could be really good.
Tom: The beat’s not big enough?! The beat’s bloody massive. I nearly had to turn down the bass on my headphones. It’s just it never quite kicks in properly. For me, there’s no big hands-in-the-air everybody-sing moment, which for a song about religious enlightenment (in whatever form) is a bit of a letdown. Yes, they’re trying for one when the final chorus kicks in, but the song’s melody is such that it’s hardly going to get everyone belting out the lyrics on the dance floor.
Also, “entirely inoffensive”?
I believe in the magic
Feel the heat of your skin
You can call me fanatic
I’m your soldier of sin
– is not exactly something I’d play to a priest.
Tim: You really think the beat’s huge? I just don’t think it builds up quite enough.
Tom: I’m not sure we have the same definition of ‘massive’. You’re absolutely right about the Kings of Tomorrow rip though.
Tim: The video starts off fairly weird, but soon progresses to disturbingly weird, and by the end of it I’m almost thinking KKK on acid, so probably the less said about that the better.
Tom: Oh man. This could be so good. The first few seconds show such promise – that eighties orchestra-hit sample is ace. And there are so many good things here. The quiet ‘ooh, ooh’s in the background. The chorus, which I caught myself tapping my foot along to on first listen.
Tim: Ooh, I do like that – intro started good, and it kept on going. At about 2:40, I thought it was about to wrap up; I’m very glad that it didn’t, though, because the bit after that is even better than what came before.
Tom: Pity about his voice, really.
Tim: I don’t know, I think his voice is okay – he can handle both the verses and chorus well enough, and combined with the backing track I think it works great.
Tom: Don’t get me wrong – I’m not ruling it out just because it’s rap, or just because it’s a British guy. Example’s last one, Kickstarts, was excellent all the way through, and his voice was a perfect match for it – perhaps because the faster pace of the vocals seemed to fit, or because the background samples were just that bit fuller. But it just doesn’t work for me here.
Tim: I prefer it to Kickstarts because here both the verses and chorus are good, whereas the verses in that never did much for me. It did have a pretty cool video, though.
Tom: This video’s not bad either. Despite a few too many modern things in the background to really sell it as being retro, it still has a charm to it.
Tim: A few points about it, though:
why is he ordering drinks in a police interview room?
I hope the fighting is meant to be blindingly fake, because it is, although there’s enough doubt there for it to be mildly annoying
nice explosion
nice jumping, even if it isn’t necessarily the most efficient way to chase after someone
Tom: The phrase ‘Tesco Value Zach Braff’ is also running through my head. That’s a bit cruel though.
Tim: That is a little bit cruel, yes. And a little bit justified.
Oh, a classic. I bought this when it came out. Is that something to be ashamed of?
Tim: Oh, a classic. I bought this when it came out. Is that something to be ashamed of?
Tom: I think you were probably just stunned by it all. I mean, this is Status Quo. Okay, I can see them allowing the sampling – but also turning up for the video, which is basically “Walk This Way” only featuring people without a septum?
Also, Scooter have been going for decades now. How on earth does their lead sing… er, lead talking guy… look like he’s still in his twenties?
Tim: This is Scooter – it’s only now you’re asking about some sort of supernatural weirdness?
Tom: Fair point. I do love how they got to number 1 in the UK – the new album came with a “bonus disc” which was basically a greatest hits compilation.
Tim: The strange thing about this is that until about thirty seconds before the end, it sounds like two different songs cut up together with no interaction.
Tom: I hadn’t noticed that! You’re exactly right. That explains the end of the video though – it’s only when the hammer slams through the wall that the two songs actually combine.
Tim: Some sort of depth from Scooter. This is officially very odd.
Tim: An interesting take on two blokes fighting for a lady’s attention, and a rather nice tune on the back of it. While it’s true that the end bit doesn’t add anything that wasn’t there previously, it doesn’t matter, because it sets the perfect contrast between most of the song and the Florence-and-the-Machine-esque bridge. (The first part of that, incidentally, reminds me slightly of Red Carpet Extend-O-Matic from the World of Goo soundtrack.)
Tom: Two main thoughts from that video: “she’s ruined that wedding dress” and “ooh, nice dynamic type in the credits”. Those don’t really reflect well on the song.
I know it’s meant to be sung like that, but she sounded out-of-tune, almost like she’s not putting the effort in to hit the notes. The official song of Copenhagen Pride? It’s no Friðrik Ómar track, that’s for sure.
Tim: No, it isn’t Friðrik Ómar, because it’s a completely different type of track – his was party party party, sod any form of meaningful lyrics, whereas hers is all about, well, Forbidden Love, we’re gay, get over it: ‘we’ll love how we want, our time has just begun‘ … ‘don’t taste like forbidden, just tastes like love‘. Two pride stereotypes – partying vs political – and each will appeal to a different group. Personally, I prefer this one – there’s enough danciness in it for some decent remixes to hit the clubs, and there are sure as hell no Lazytown lyrics in there.
Tom: She has completely ruined that wedding dress though.
Tom: It’s time for the worst song of the summer! Actually, that’s an overstatement, nothing could beat that Peter Dickson atrocity, but it comes pretty close.
Tom: If you’re a certain age, then there’s one thing that Mungo Jerry’s “In The Summertime” will remind you of: don’t drink and drive public service announcements. This new version has creatively removed that lyric by putting a dodgy rap over the top of it. “Everybody loves summertime” has to be one of the most insipid lyrics I’ve heard in a long while. Oh, and stop giving yourself shoutouts, people. You’re not famous enough to do that without sounding like a tit.
Tim: My very first thought when this started playing was ‘ooh, this is like Barbie Girl.’ Then it turned out it wasn’t in the slightest, and it all went downhill from there.
Tom: Why are they releasing this in early September, otherwise known as “the start of autumn”?
Tim: It is a bit odd. It might just be me, but a load of songs seem to be like that this year. Alexandra Burke’s was all summery, Inna’s tune would normally have been released mid-June, and there’s this, a dance tune that’s still just on the verge of arriving and continues the season’s weird instrument trend by including a pipe organ.
Tom: Did Mungo Jerry need auto-tuning? No, he didn’t. Did he actually need to turn up for the video? Well, I suspect he needed the money. Speaking of the video, let’s deconstruct this for a minute. First of all, Bluestone is the spitting image of Nathan Barley – I think it’s the glasses – which really set me against him from the start. I realise that’s slightly hypocritical coming from a twenty-something middle-class white guy who’s living in London and earning his living doing web stuff, but there you go.
Second up: panning to the rest of the studio and then flash-cutting so the crew become attractive and female? That’s one of the most insidiously sexist music videos I’ve seen in a long time – it’s not just “look at these attractive women“, it’s “oh wow women can be technical crew! Wait, no they can’t, come out here and dance, ladies“.
Tim: You’re complaining about sexism in the video – did you listen to the lyrics? This is a, well, song, for want of a better word, containing the lines:
When the sunshine come out, the best girls come out,
Chicks dress to impress, like whoa.
So, umm, yeah. I’ll be honest: I don’t think this song has any redeeming features whatsoever. Part of me hopes it actually is some sort of Nathan Barley spin-off in disguise, because at least then there would be an excuse for its existence. As it is, it’s just a soul-draining three minutes of noise.
He’s used “J to the E to the D”, he doesn’t get a second chance.
Tom: Now I’ve got two problems with this.
Tim:Only two?
Tom: Yeah, and strangely, Jedward himself is not one of them.
First of all: it’s the banter. I know they’re a novelty act, but songs should not have banter in the middle of them. It didn’t work for Gareth Gates and the Kumars, it won’t work now.
Tim: True. Is that in the actual song as well, or just the video?
Tom: I’m not going to buy it to find out. He’s used “J to the E to the D”, he doesn’t get a second chance.
Second problem: I can’t tell the difference between this and the Blink 182 version. Or, rather, between this and a cheap rip-off version from a £2 supermarket “compilation” CD. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, new here at all.
Tim: That does, on the other hand, mean that if they stop doing covers they might, at some point in the distant future, pass as something more than a novelty.
Tom: Fortunately, I’ve got an alternative. I defy you to listen to this without starting to sway when the slow bit that builds up to the chorus kicks in.
Play two copies one frame apart next to each other, you get Rick Astley in 3D. No kidding.
Tom: How did we miss this?! Martijn emailed us this, and said “…it’s a Rick Roll. But modern. And awesome.”
Tom: It’s a damn good tune, although it has that ‘in one ear, out the other’ quality; I can’t remember any of the lyrics or even much of the melody even having listened to it a couple of times. Is it listenable? Sure. It is playlistable? Absolutely. Is it a classic? No. Does it need one big ‘oomph’ moment, drums kicking in and ever guitar wailing, when he comes back from the bridge? Yeah, it really does. But never mind: it’s a new Rick Astley single! I wonder if he’d be putting this single out if it hadn’t been for the internet deciding to adore him?
Tim: If I was a little less sensible, I would write ‘Are you sure you’ve got the right video?’ Because this is very definitely not ‘Rick Astley off of Never Gonna Give You Up’. This is an actual modern song – hell, in the video he barely looks old enough to have made songs 25 years ago.
Tom: I swear the man has, up in his attic, a painting of himself that’s steadily getting older.
Tim: If he’s planning a comeback, this is a Good Thing To Do*, because it means he’s brought out a song that mum and dad can listen to and think back to the good old days while the teenage kid hears it playing downstairs and thinks, ‘Ooh, I like this.’ He’s popular with the grown-ups, and the teenager has to work out how he can still be cool if he likes his parents’ music.
Anyway, ‘modern’ isn’t much to say about a track, so here’s something else: like you say, it’s not particularly memorable, but the chorus has a good build-up during it. Or at least, I remember thinking it did, but it’s now been ten minutes since I heard it and I actually can’t really remember how the build-up went. Not at all memorable, then, I suppose. I do remember that I liked it, though, and that’s what mostly matters.
* See also Take That: compare 1995’s How Deep Is Your Love with 2006’s Patience.
Tom: As for the video: they have a Steadicam and they’re not afraid to use it. Is it a callback to Never Gonna Give You Up? Who knows. That constant rotation means, though, that if you play two copies of the video one frame apart next to each other, you get Rick Astley in 3D. No kidding. It’s actually a really convincing effect.
