Tom: “If some one told me that V.V. Brown would be my favorite thing about 2013 a year ago,” says reader Najinx, “I would have laughed it off as a joke.”
Tim: And if someone said that to me a year ago, I’d have said “Who?” But I’ve heard of her now.
Tom: Alas, I can’t back up Najinx’s enthusiasm – and I don’t think it’s the overly-arty video that’s turned me off, either.
Tim: The video did turn me off a tad; song is… well, alright. Sort of. I can certainly get the enthusiasm, though.
Tom: There are bursts of genius in here – that “don’t patronise me” bit in the chorus is just genius – but the rest of it leaves me somewhat cold.
Is it just not mainstream-pop enough for me, perhaps?
Tim: Could be – like I say, I know several people who might go crazy for this, though I can’t say I’m among them.
Tom: Not again. Fine, I’ll get the mop, you deal with the witnesses.
Tim: What? Oh, no, not that. And I think you’ll find we agreed never to mention it. No, this is a musical problem.
Tim: You see, this song is pretty awful. Just look at the lyrics: the ‘hold your jars’ lines is appalling, the second verse about wanting to be famous after you’ve died because you know how to do a party is risible, and no song with a message should ever come with the line, ‘Hey, I’m a little drunk, but I got something to say’.
Tom: Nothing should ever come with that line.
Tim: The video is also terrible, even managing to outdo the Walks Like Rihanna one: Nathan’s behaviour in particular, with a ‘hey, I’m pointing at you because I’m pretending to know you!’ and an ‘oh, look at you sexy lady distracting my piano playing’, and then there’s all of then pretending to be friends with the old people because that’s what cool people do.
Tom: It sounds like a pub singalong song, so they’ve probably picked the right tone for it. But 37 seconds into the video, have a look at — er — whoever that guy on the end of the line is. What on earth has he just noticed?
Tim: Blimey, that’s a good spot (and that’s Nathan. Come on Tom, know your boybands). Guessing: the cameraman getting bored and falling off his stool?
But anyway, despite all that, I really like this. I don’t particularly want to, but I love it. The melody really get s me going, the lazy nanana-ing in the chorus just makes me want to join in and the whole ‘we own the night’ just makes me feel great. And that annoys me. But you know what? I don’t actually care.
Tom: His third album did… OK, I guess? Number 1 in France, but only number 24 on the UK charts. And partly this is due to it being a calmer, more stripped-down Mika, with less of the flamboyance that everyone remember from, well, that one big song he had.
It was with a bit of surprise that I stumbled across this single, released earlier this year. And here’s the odd thing: it’s not off the album.
The trouble is, that track isn’t really a big radio winner. It’s not bad, but it ain’t going to get airplay. The solution: throw out the songwriter, get a Nickelodeon pop starlet to sing with you instead, and go back to first-album Mika syrupy-sweetness.
Tim: Ooh, and speed it up a bit. That helps a lot. And your thoughts on this version?
Tom: I CANNOT GET THIS OUT OF MY HEAD.
Tim: Ah.
Tom: It’s a brilliant pop song. The return for that final chorus is just glorious.
Tim: It really is – it could come straight off the first album, with the happy pop attitude that was so prominent. (And back then in general, now I think about it, with Alphabeat around as well. Why isn’t pop so happy any more?)
Tom: So the question is: this could clearly sell a heck of a lot more records that Mika’s recent, less poppy style. I wonder how much of a battle is going on behind the scenes between the man making the music and the suits selling singles?
Tim: Ah, artistic integrity. Awful stuff. Just, make the tracks that sell, and that people like, and be done with it.
Tom: Comeback album after a “hiatus”. Third single. Pretentious concept video. To repeat some shtick from yesterday: it’ll be awful, right?
Tom: NO. It’s a great song. Whatever genre they’re in now — alt-rock? emo? Who knows — they’re nailing it.
Tim: They really are, its great. Strange how there are some bands that I like even though if they were just a tiny little bit elsewhere musically I’d hate. My Chemical Romance is the same – emo-rock that’s got just the right small degree of pop to it that makes it work really well for me.
Tom: The album’s been well received — it made it to number 1 on the US album chart. Given the troubles they’ve had in the past (do consult Wikipedia), I’d say this is one of the most triumphant comebacks of recent years.
Tim: High praise indeed, but you may not be far off.
Tim: The third single, and second best track, from their latest album, with one of the most pretentious titles a song has ever had.
Tom: That is an astounding title. And bloody hell – is that a “6” I see in the “minutes” on the video?
Tim: Oh yes – strap yourself in.
Tom: Oh my word, that opening. That first minute. And then… oh wow. This is classic Pet Shop Boys. It’s amazing. And as I write this, I’m only three minutes into it.
Tim: What I like about this is the way it goes pretty much everywhere, with long, slow introduction than standard synth pop in the way that they do it, heavy beats later on through the chorus, and a breakdown near the end that sticks way out from the rest of the song.
It never really settles down into one thing in particular – even when you think the heavy chanting at the end is a fabulous way to end it, it suddenly goes all dreamy and elsewhere.
Tom: I do wonder if that’s there deliberately to make it “loop” in folks’ heads. After that outro, I want the main hook to come back… and so I hit play again.
Tim: Wonderful consequence of that: even at nearly seven minutes, the song doesn’t sound like its going on too long.
Tom: In a song like this, there are always going to be sections that don’t seem to work as well — and for me, they’re generally the bits where it deviates from “normality”. That glitchy middle eight seems wrong to me — but then, it does make that final chorus just glorious.
Tim: It also helps that the hook is fantastic. It seems really familiar – I don’t know if I’ve heard it before elsewhere or if I’ve just been listening to this a stupid number of times, but either way I like it.
Tom: Also, I have to mention the ludicrously pretentious lyrics. I’m not sure what else you could put there, though; somehow, I think generic lyrics about love would be worse. The fact the song works as an instrumental, though, is a testament to its strength.
Tim: Fans will be pleased to know that it’s been put right at the top of the Radio 2 playlist – quite how they’ll chop it down into a sensible-length radio edit I have no idea – so it’ll hopefully get quite a bit more attention than their other recent ones have, because it really deserves to.
Tim: POP MUSIC EMERGENCY, declared Gaga yesterday evening, as it became apparent that leaking seven seconds of her new song at a time wasn’t enough to stop people talking about someone else’s track. So out of nowhere, one of the biggest pop stars around yesterday decided to properly launch the much-awaited first single from her new album; here it is.
Tom: Oh. How very… 2000s.
Tim: Was pretty much my first thought. It at least doesn’t waste time not going anywhere, that’s for sure, though to be honest I’m not sure that works in its favour – for me, it never seems to be quite as big and massive as it probably could be.
Tom: It does seem to be a day for diva disappointment, doesn’t it?
Tim: For you, certainly. And for me, possibly. The crowd noise at the end is very welcome, but when your whole song’s about living for applause you want it to be properly massive throughout, no?
Tom: The first single off a new album needs to a Born This Way, an Edge of Glory, a Yoü and I. This is… none of those.
Tim: It really isn’t. It’s not bad, of course – not by any means at all, but I can’t help being somewhat disappointed. It would admittedly have taken a hell of a lot to beat some of the tracks from Born This Way or The Fame Monster. On the other hand, maybe it’s stylistic – this sounds like a track for her first album, as you implied up at the top, and I never enjoyed that quite as much as the next two.
Tom: I’ve liked most of her songs, but this is very much an “album track” as far as I can tell.
Tim: If I’m honest, then, I don’t I like it as much as I do Katy Perry’s. Sorry, but then perhaps you shouldn’t have insulted music bloggers. (Not bitter at all, by the way.)
Tom: Speak for yourself: I’ll keep listening to the Pet Shop Boys’ new single. We’ll get to that in a day or two.
Tim: Tomorrow, perhaps, and if you’re wondering about the world’s schedule for the rest of the week, I’m reliably informed it involves new tracks from Britney and Adele, and then a new Rihanna album on Friday. YOU’RE WELCOME.
“What the hell is that breakfast, anyway? Muesli, yoghurt and bacon?”
Tim: One of the biggest pop stars around yesterday decided to properly launch the much-awaited first single from her new album..
Tom: Ooh, Lady Gaga?
Tim: Now now, don’t get ahead of yourself – here it is.
Tim: An interesting take on a lyric video; you may recognise it as it has been done before, but not by anybodyanywhere near as famous. One problem with it, though – the implication is that that phone’s battery will have a good 50% left by the evening. NOT A CHANCE LOVE.
Tom: I actually found the video really distracting: trying to decipher all the not-quite-emoji put me off the song entirely. So by the time it got to breakfast I’d switched to another tab.
And what the hell is that breakfast, anyway? Muesli, yoghurt and bacon?
Tim: Good grief, I’d not seen that – how very very odd. The tune itself, though? Rather good indeed, I’m pleased to say. Takes a while for the first verse to get anywhere, but once the chorus hits it really is wonderful.
Tom: Ooh, now that’s where I disagree. I don’t think there’s that much to it at all. The “hear me roar” is the message, but it’s not backed up by much at all.
Tim: You really think? The verses I agree with, but the chorus sends it to power-pop, catchy, inspiring banger mode. If we’re honest, this would also fit a key change perfectly, but there isn’t one so oh well. We’ll just have to make do with what we’ve got, but since what we’ve got is quite good anyway that’s not such a problem.
Tom: A key change would help, but really? This has gone as far as it’s ever going to go by about 60 seconds in.
Tim: Hmm. Here, it seems, we differ. Also, bonus fact: Harry Styles claims to have a phobia of the Marimba ringtone that is heard at the beginning of this video. No idea why.
Tom: I was worried that the whole track would be based around that ringtone. Someone’ll do it, sooner or later.
Tim: You may or may not recall this band’s hit from 2008, Shake It, which was really rather successful. It was followed by a very listenable album, and then a somewhat hostile break-up.
One of them (the oddly named Mason Musso) has decided to start making music again, and has seen no reason why he shouldn’t keep the band’s name going, so here we are.
Tom: Which will no doubt cause some disputes down the line, but never mind. Also: why the abbreviation? Because I’m just pronouncing it as “E-titty”. I… I don’t know what that would be.
Tom: Bloody hell. That’s an astonishing video.
Tim: Isn’t it just?
Tom: I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything on YouTube quite as intense, as startling, as fast as that — particularly not with as much artistic merit behind it either. Absolutely amazing. And as for the song…
Tim: This is electropop at it’s poppiest, and it’s great. Don’t really know what to say beyond that, because it just pushes all my buttons almost perfectly. The two-step pre-chorus is a tad unsettling when it first strikes, but once you know it’s there it becomes alright and blends in fairly well.
Tom: I can only agree. This is brilliant electropop.
Tim: I like this a lot, I really do, and I hope he doesn’t fall apart with himself this this time.
“It’s Clunky Product Placement In A Music Video Time!”
Tom: It’s Clunky Product Placement In A Music Video Time!
Tim: Three things re the product placement: I think that’s the first time I’ve seen multiple brands in one video, it seems I don’t mind product placement so much when it’s for brands I admire, and is there really much of a Venn diagram intersection between BMW sports car buyers and Kelly Clarkson video watchers?
Tom: And, sad to say, it’s another by-the-numbers Kelly Clarkson track. Or am I being uncharitable?
Tim: Presumably, you’re comparing it to…
Tom: It’s just that Stronger was such a hit that it’s hard not to compare everything after to it — particularly when they feel as similar as this one. Even the video seems very much based on something that’s gone before.
Tim: Hmm. To that, I’d say this: most pop stars have at least one career high, that they will inevitably struggle to repeat. For some artists, their fans will disagree on which exact one (Live While We’re Young. or Little Things? The Silence, or Bad Boys?); for Kelly Clarkson, though, pretty much everybody reckons that Stronger was amazing. Two options, then: tell the fans ‘that’s that, let’s go miles elsewhere now’, or try to repeat the success. Here, the latter.
Tom: There’s nothing particularly wrong with it: it’s just very familiar territory.
Tim: True, but unless it’s completely new territory, it’s always going to be.
Tom: The video’s been out for ages, but the UK single launch isn’t until next week. And as ever, Tim, the question with a Jason Derulo track is: Will he say his own name at the start?
Tom: Ooh. You see, with that opening line, I was all ready to dismiss this as generic auto-tuned nonsense. And yes, it is generic auto-tuned nonsense, but it’s good generic auto-tuned nonsense.
Well, okay, fine, it’s good nonsense. The auto-tune’s still crap.
Tim: Obviously. But there’s something interesting here – not about this track in particular, but more about pop homogenisation. Right when it started, I thought, ‘Huh. Sounds like an Eric Saade track.’ And right throughout, it could easily have been lifted right from Saade vol. 2. Is that a shame? That who was once europop’s most promising young hopes is now indistinguishable from Jason Derulo?
Tom: But you’ve got to agree that the pre-chorus is beautiful, right? It’ll do nicely on the dancefloor this — particularly when those ‘whoa-oh-oh-oh-ohs’ come in just before the middle eight.
Tim: Yes, and actually I think it’s great. It’s good modern pop music, a decent example of the genre. I like it a lot, much as I’d like it if it came from a certain Swede.
