“Dodgy synths, upsetting autotune and not a huge amount of melody to speak of.”
Tim: Dodgy synths, upsetting autotune and not a huge amount of melody to speak of.
Tom: You’re not selling this.
Tim: No, because by all rights I should hate this track, which is off a British duo and an Icelandic singer.
Tim: And here’s the thing: I really don’t like it, at all.
Tom: Okay, well done, you sold that well. I was expecting you to try and redeem it, which would be a difficult job.
Tim: Admittedly I don’t hate it, but every moment I’m sitting listening to it I’m thinking “I don’t really like this, why am I listening to it?” Except, I never actually get round to switching it off. When a suggested link pops up in the corner to take me to a song that’s probably better, I click on it, stick that new tab in the background, and switch back to get this going again.
Tom: Why?!
Tim: I really know – despite that awful synth, and the dullness of a lot of it, and the uninventive lyrics, I don’t switch it off. And I have no idea why.
“There’s a massive crane parked outside and Bjorn’s forgotten his lens stabiliser.”
Tim: Much as summer has been lovely, it seems futile to deny that winter has arrived whole-heartedly, so shall we have a deep and meaningful ballad to mark that? That’s a rhetorical question, because we shall.
Tom: “I know we booked this room to film in, but there’s a massive crane parked outside and Bjorn’s forgotten his lens stabiliser. Should we reschedule?” “Nah, just film it anyway.”
Anyway, that’s a pleasant enough ballad. What’s it about?
Tim: The title translates to ‘Before You Leave Me’, and the message is basically “I know you’re about to dump me so I’m kind of feeling I should say it first to maintain my dignity.” Thoroughly depressing, then, but at least it’s sung quite nicely so we can still pretty much enjoy the song anyway, right?
Tom:
It’s a slow builder, but at least it does build; for some reason it reminded me of old Celine Dion tracks: both the slow build and, in a very specific musical reference, that final outro note.
Tim: Somehow, I find ballads like this more enjoyable if they’re in foreign, and I’m not entirely sure why – maybe because with calm music the words typically take priority, and so if I don’t understand them I don’t get distracted? Whatever the reason, though, this is very pleasant to hear. First of many, then?
“A wonderful slow-builder, and possibly the best one of theirs that I’ve ever heard.”
Tom: From the title, I’ve got a prediction: you’ll love it, I’ll be indifferent. Tim, start your pitch.
Tim: Well, after SIX YEARS, this wonderful band’s second album finally arrived last Friday, and having had plenty of opportunity to listen to it I can declare it, you’ll be relieved but probably not surprised to hear, absolutely wonderful. From it’s glorious intro, through its superb second track Stay Free and beyond all the way to the Lion King stylings of the closing We Will Live Again, via delights like the Moby-esque Wicked Ways, it is a divine listen. Right now, though, we’ll chat about track 4, because that’s the one they’ve just put a video out for.
Tom: Oh. Huh. That… I like that.
Tim: Really? That actually surprises me, because curiously, it’s not one of the best on the album (at least in my view, anyway), and does have a few drawbacks.
Tom: Ah! Then I think this might be the track that’s designed to appeal to the mainstream — hence it’s the first single.
Tim: Well, the first single was actually Beautiful Life, but timing-wise we’ll go with this.
Tom: This is a wonderful slow-builder, and possibly the best one of theirs that I’ve ever heard. Yes, that includes all the previous attempts of yours to promote their tracks to me. Why isn’t it great for you?
Tim: It takes a while to get going, and while that underlying melody that kicks in halfway through is lovely to listen to, it gets repetitive not long after.
Tom: For me, it feels more like the sort of track that’d fit in nicely on Isles of Wonder. Which is a heck of compliment. Remember that? That was a good year.
Tim: When the single biggest political story was George Osborne getting booed. Simpler and better times. But let’s not get lost in nostalgia – let’s talk about the final chorus, which as with most tracks is where everything really shines, especially with those oooh-ooohs coming along. Having said that: I reiterate that the album as a whole is lovely, so just ignore this negativity, put your feet up for 45 minutes, sit back and just listen to it. You owe it to yourself, you really do.
“Transylvanian Pop Hero’s Take the Cosmic Bus to Success”
Tim: I haven’t even heard the track yet but I feel we need to feature it, almost entirely because of the subject line of the PR e-mail: Transylvanian Pop Hero’s Take the Cosmic Bus to Success.
Tom: [sic], I assume?
Tim: Oh yes, and if anything that just adds to the anticipation. Let’s press play and see if this is worth it.
Tim: And now I am so relieved, because that’s just brilliant, for so many reasons.
Tom: …which would be?
Tim: The style of the video! The bus that opens into a stage! The saxophone that comes from nowhere at all that made me do a double take! The inspiring but not stupidly so lyrics! Even – the idea of a cosmic bus itself. Pausing at space traffic lights! Two moons in a shoot-out! There is just so much to love here, and it’s totally wonderful.
Tom: Okay, so here’s the thing: I listened to this just as an audio track first, without the video. And I’ve got to be honest with you: it’s not a great song. And amidst all those exclamation marks, you haven’t actually said anything about the song either. Apart from that saxophone, and, well, fair enough, but the rest isn’t all that great?
Tim: Maybe not great, but it does have something I like in it – partly the uplifting tone, partly, like I said, the positivity in the lyrics. You’re not into it?
Tom: It’s a middle-of-the-pack Eurovision selection track. There’s nothing actually wrong with it, it’s just that without the video’s.. erm, charm? Yeah, let’s go with charm. Without that, it’s only okay.
Tim: Perhaps. So as long as we have videos: can we have more from Transylvania please?
“2017 is upon us, and so of course we have a dance cover of it.”
Tim: Quick backstory: waaaaaay back when, two thirds of a century ago, there was a dreary American country track called Beautiful Brown Eyes, which was later covered as dansband classic Leende Guldbruna Ögon; not one I know myself, but apparently big enough that it had a TV drama named after it. 2017 is upon us, and so of course we have a dance cover of it.
Tom: That’s a lot of genre shifts, and actually ties into something I want to talk about for this weekend’s flashback. But anyway. What’s it like?
Tim: It’s good! (That went from ‘good.’ to good!’ after the key change, in case you were wondering.)
Tom: I’d go with “nice”. I’m normally someone who likes simple melodies, but this was a bit too nursery-rhyme in places for me — perhaps a bit too much of that “dreary” survived. It’s inoffensive and fun, though, and I’ll take it. Bonus points, as you say, for the drop down in the middle eight and the brutal key change back up.
Tim: I don’t know if you bothered to check out the other versions, but it’s interesting to see how a track develops with changing musical vogues throughout time. Sure, it may be a bit slow to truly fit in with 2017 trends, but what’s going on in that post-chorus is fairly standard for now, almost Alan Walker-esque —
Tom: Careful with that, at no point has anyone rearranged every damn syllable.
Tim: Well indeed, hence the ‘almost’ — but it is actually very pleasant to hear, and far more so than 1951’s drudgery.
Tim: Would you like to hear a new version of Taylor Swift’s tragically under-performing Out of the Woods from Norway’s Dagny?
Tom: Is this a good time to tell my really long joke about Taylor Swift pegging the actor who plays Ian Beale? No? Okay, fine, but the punchline was “are we out of the Woodyatt”, just so you know.
Tim: Probably for the best you didn’t tell the whole thing, then. Here’s the song.
Tim: Good, isn’t it? It’s the chorus that really put me in mind of that similarity within it’s chanted beat by beat repetition of the title and main line, and it works just as well here as it did back then, providing a good hook to dangle the rest of the song around.
Tom: It reminds me of three or four other songs I can’t place, but I think that’s because it’s borrowing — rather than outright ripping off — a lot of good style points. Full marks for that final chorus, too, even if it is a bit, well, out of the woods.
Tim: It does slightly suffer from the comparison, because there’s very little pop music that can match up to 1989-era Taylor, but it’s still a great listen. Lovely.
Tim: I can’t remember, Tom – are you a fan of that thing that’s in vogue right now of a single synth note changing volume up and down throughout the chorus? I ask because if either of our readers really isn’t, they might want to come back tomorrow.
Tom: Oh bloody hell that’s dull. Seriously. I tried to listen three times, and each time I kept drifting away and getting distracted by something else. Is there a single synth note in the chorus? I don’t remember.
Tim: Really? Because I quite like that. That beat’s quite prominent, really, and while it is done fairly well it could still be enough to put some folk off. I personally find it entirely non-problematic, and indeed have a lot of time for this song in general. It’s fairly loud, it’s energetic, and in fact ‘entirely non-problematic’ could be used to sum up the song in general.
Tom: Which I think is part of the problem.
Tim: I don’t know – maybe it is a bit damning with faint praise, I’ll admit, but I promise it’s not meant that way. I do actually entirely like it.
“Starts out with a whole lot more promise than what actually comes out.”
Tim: Nope, not a clue about the name, but never mind that now.
Tom: Well, I imagine they’re someone who flips the bi… oh, you mean the track title. Yeah, no idea.
Tim: Yeah, we’ve seen the band before, though fortunately they’ve ditched the 360º video gimmick.
Tim: Thing is, for me that starts out with a whole lot more promise than what actually comes out.
Tom: Oh good, it’s not just me.
Tim: Right? As the intro builds up, I’m thinking “great, banging dance tune on the way” and it sort of delivers on that, but that’s a big sort of. Come the chorus, it seems we’ve slightly downgraded to a more usual pop rock song, with just a few dancey synthy themes.
Tom: And my brain immediately compares them to Paramore, not just because there’s a female vocalist but because that chorus line sounds a heck of a lot like “That’s What You Get”.
Tim: Thing is, song’s still very good, with great energy, top melody and excellent production. I just, kind of feel cheated, you know?
Tom: Good guitar work though. I hope 80s guitar solos are making a comeback.
Tim: Another new act out of Sweden today, claiming as their influences a-ha, Madonna, Kylie and Pet Shop Boys. Interested?
Tom: Definitely.
Tim: That, I think, is exactly how I would imagine a collaboration of those four acts, so first of all well done for using your inspiration well. Secondly, I didn’t realise how amazing it could sound. Possibly part of it could be an “oh, this actually does sound really good” surprise reaction, as unusually the first chorus did more for me than the second – that first stupid love song line immediately put a massive smile on my face.
Tom: The 80s/early 90s really are back again, again, aren’t they? There are minor irritations here — “feels so freaking wrong” would be better as “feels so wrong”, both because of the minced oath and because the timing grates; the middle eight is pretty poor — but you’re right, this is good.
I’ve been referencing the KLF’s Manual a lot recently, but their advice for a number one was, in short: find a groove that the world liked, rip it off, sing something that sounds good over the top, let professional people make it sound professional. I feel like they’ve followed that here.
Tim: I do have one complaint, though, and it’s this: it needs something for that final chorus. A key change, maybe? I’m not sure, but it really just needs to go somewhere different – if there’s one staple of 80s music that this has very much embraced, it’s the tendency to go on a little bit past its welcome, because by the time that final chorus comes around my reaction was more an “oh, hello again”. I don’t know what it is, but the song needs it.
Tim: So here’s GRANT who’s new out of Sweden, not sure if there’s any justification for the caps lock but there you go. I almost binned it off after halfway through the first verse, but don’t do that.
Tom: I’m going to assume this isn’t a Jedward cover. I can only hope.
Tim: Hope? Mate, that Jedward track’s brilliant. But no, no it isn’t.
Tim: And well just what a song that builds up to. Well, what a great chorus and a heck of a vocal, backed up by an excellent pile of backing singers, really, because from the middle eight onwards this is getting on for being somewhat flawless.
Tom: Yes, I can see why you nearly binned it off. It takes its time to get there, and even that second verse isn’t really much.
Tim: Sure, it’s a bit minor key and miserable to start with, and the first chorus only does a slight amount to perk it up before the next verse drops it back down; the second half, though, doesn’t put a foot wrong, and indeed puts so many feet right that it’s hard not to forgive it the first half.
Tom: My jaw actually dropped a little at That Note. You know the one.
Tim: I know the one, and I will, overall, give it a good thumbs UP. More please.
