Tim: You know how people sometimes say how Madeon’s ridiculously young, at only 18, to have such success as a dance producer? Well, this kid is twelve. TWELVE.
Tim: And that dance backing is good, which means we have another one of those annoyingly talented kids hanging around make me feel all grumpy.
Tom: True, and as generic teen-pop goes, there’s nothing wrong with this. In fact, pitch the voice down an octave and it’d sound surprisingly mature.
Tim: That’s true, yes. But TWELVE.
Tom: Turns out I’m now old enough that there’s a good chance that anyone under 20 gets classified as an “annoyingly talented kid” by me now. We’re getting old, Tim.
Tim: NO. You don’t have be old to be annoyed by a successful twelve year old.
Fortunately, though, I can take solace in the fact that the lyric video there is utter shite (the list I could write of things that are wrong with it would probably fill up the internet), so at least he’s not good at that as well. And he sings ‘ya’ in a stupid way. Not that I’m trying to find flaws or anything, obviously.
“I’m fairly sure that Ke$ha has just turned into a parody of herself.”
Tom: This single’s been out for a while now, but it’ll be getting a publicity push now as the new album’s being released soon.
And I’m fairly sure that Ke$ha has just turned into a parody of herself.
Tom: I mean, if some high-budget YouTube channel made that video as a Ke$ha parody, it’d go down pretty well. But no, that’s actually her. All of which would be laughable if the damn song wasn’t so catchy.
Tim: It is catchy. It’s not a song I particularly want to catch, but it’s one that once you’ve been exposed it’s just…there. A sort of musical norovirus, really.
Tom: Wow. That’s a metaphor for the ages, there. But I don’t know what I was expecting from Ke$ha: a new lyrical direction? Hardly. A change into darker, more grown-up themes? Nah. Dubstep? Well, possibly. But no: we’ve got more of the same, and you know what? I’ve got no problem with that at all.
Tim: No – the verses are boring, the chorus really is quite good. The days off work, compared to the verses’ vomiting.
Tom: That said, if any of those folks in animal suits get near me, I’m running away as fast as I can.
Tim: Are you kidding? They’re AMAZING. Although I suppose I am speaking as someone who’s previously had a job dressing up as a whale, so I’m not entirely impartial.
Tom: I’ve taken to just shouting “MUUUUUURS” in the manner of an aggressive cow every time I see he’s got a new single out.
Tim: I’m sure that brings you joy.
Tom: But hold on. This one is a bit unconventional by both Murs’ standards and the pop charts. It’s all… orchestral.
Tim: I LIKE that lyric video. And the song, I suppose.
Tom: It might well stick around for one chorus too much, but I can’t say I really mind with that gorgeous backing.
Tim: I don’t think it sticks around too long at all, actually – it’s a good track, and I’ve got no problems with it.
Tom: The only downside is that they’re probably filming a video for it right now, and it’s going to involve Olly Murs swaggering around in a military hat.
Tim: Well, look on the bright side – that’ll give you an opportunity to bring out your leprechaun line again.
Tim: If I remember rightly, you were amazed last year when you heard Waterline and realised that it was good. So was I, a bit. But last weekend, for no particular reason other than curiosity, I listened to Jedward’s album from last year, and found that it’s actually quite good all round. Take this, for example.
Tom: For all the fuss about Jedward being irritating, I can’t deny that they’re good. We’ve discussed this before: put them in a studio, give them decent producers, and then just let them be themselves at the fans… well, they ain’t my kind of thing, but they make decent pop.
Tim: First off, I’m aware the lyrics aren’t the best – “Do you have a boyfriend, you look like you need one” may be the worst line ever imagined – but that aside this is actually great, and I love it.
Tom: I ain’t going that far, because once you parse the lyrics of this song as being sung loudly and drunkenly at someone who really just wants the singer to go the hell away it starts being a bit unpleasant.
Tim: That…that’s actually not a bad point. Erm. Dammit, yes. But still, if you don’t imagine the singee’s viewpoint to be that then it’s fine.
Tom: Plus, frankly, anything that includes DTMF dialling tones in the background seems just a bit too kitsch, and that seems to bleed into the rest of the track in a kind of mid-2000s Busted-but-worse way. But you’re right, it’s not bad.
Tim: It’s very good pop rock, written by people who know what they’re doing (that key change is sterling work) and, credit where it’s due, performed by people who have somehow got the right mix of popstar-ness and bellendry to make it work. WELL DONE TO THEM.
Tim: Tom, you may not like how I’m going to introduce this, but I don’t care: I first heard this on last week’s episode of Glee, and thought it was strange – it was presented almost as a separate music video rather than fitting into the show like normal.
Tom: You’re right, I don’t like how you’re introducing that. Doesn’t Glee mostly just cover Big Pop Tunes, though?
Tim: Almost exclusively, yes, but I didn’t recognise this, and I realised I wanted to look it up.
Tim: So I looked for the original and found this. They’re a new band, who describe themselves as doing theatrical pop, and I reckon that fits almost perfectly.
Tom: I can see where they’re coming from there – it sounds like it’s a track from a musical. I suppose that’s basically what Glee used it as.
Tim: More or less, yeah – an uplifting closing track to one of the occasional very good episodes it has. It’s a lovely piano song, and even if you’re not listening to the lyrics you pretty much what it’s about. Structurally it’s unusual – aside from the one line “I will give the world to you” there’s no real chorus – just a big build-up in front of each verse. Much as I’m generally opposed to any variation from the standard formula, I have to admit that it works brilliantly here, as it places a lot of focus on that upbeat power-chord melody that really makes this song.
Tom: It’s basically a piano-led, instrumental chorus. I can live with that – particularly when it’s this deliberately, massively, heftily uplifting. If it weren’t this damn good, it’s come off as trite – but it is this damn good.
Tim: It really is. It’s worth noting, as you did earlier, that it’s very, very rare that Glee features new music or bands – the only previous example was We Are Young, and, well, look what happened to that. Based on this track, I do hope success isn’t far off for this band.
Let’s analyse quite how this was both the funniest and most awful thing on TV.
Tim: It’s Danny from The Voice, rapping!
Tom: Oh, blimey. I think you’d get more support if you said “It’s chlamydia!”.
Tim: You say that, and you’re probably right – the studio version’s fairly terrible; discussing that wouldn’t be nearly as much fun, though, as discussing last Friday’s live performance with Graham Norton, which can safely be described as horrifically terrible..
Tim: Now, let’s analyse quite how this was both the funniest and most awful thing on TV that week. Sure, there’s his ‘rapping’, whose agressive tone really, really doesn’t work with the nice guy image he worked up on The Voice.
Tom: At some point he turns into his own hype man too, as his guitarist takes over lead vocal duties, and he’s rejected to… well, dancer?
Tim: Well, exactly. Mostly it’s the, well, choreography, if you can call it that, because what a train wreck that was. Right from the start we have a dilemma in his mind: “should I use my arms as props and demo objects? Or should I wave them around to demonstrate emotion? Oh, bollocks, I’ve pretended I’ve got a tattoo now, so I’ll have to keep going with that, except there’s nothing in the rest of the song that really works like that. Can I grab the mike like I normally do? No, that’ll be obvious that I was unprepared. Well, I guess it’d better be emotion then. Let’s make it INTENSE. Oh, and here’s the chorus, phew! I can be a proper singer and hold the microphone. Hmm. Arms seem to have a habit of waving now; that’ll wear off, though.”
Tom: Hang on, readers, Tim’s off on one.
Tim: “Right, second verse, this isn’t me, I can stand back and relax. Aah, this is nice. OH SHIT, I’m the lead singer, of course I can’t bloody relax! What was I thinking?! Oh GOD, this is awful. Right, let’s just stand here and repeat some of the words for a bit, see if I can string that out. Yep, we’re okay. Although is this a bit dull? Erm, maybe I can wave a bit, and CLAPPING. That works! Right, still dull, I need to do something. I know, I’ll walk around a bit. Check on the drummer, how’s he do— yep, you’re fine. Bass guitar? Also good. Bit more clapping, then. Aaaand, here’s the chorus, made it. Jesus Christ, why did I ever do this. Oh GOD, and now my arms have got a life of their own, I CAN’T STOP THEM WAVING. HELP ME.”
Ladies and gentlemen, that was guest writer Danny from The Voice.
“This could be brilliant if it weren’t for those wubs.”
Tom: How many people will still remember the Week 5 rejects from 2011 X Factor, I wonder?
Tim: Bloody hell, that was quick – a video uploaded less than a week after the show finished.
Tom: 2011, Tim. Which doesn’t say much for your memory.
Tim: Oh, thank God – I was wondering how I’d managed to forget them in less than three months. Erm, but still, pretty much no-one.
Tom: And a quick warning: someone’s pushed the WUB WUB WUB button on their production console.
Tom: This could be brilliant if it weren’t for those wubs.
Tim: Oh. Oh, I like that. And actually, I disagree. Certainly for the first part, if it wasn’t for those, this would be standard boyband dirge without decent writers. With them, there is at least a distinctive sound.
Tom: There’s the timpani roll during the bridge, the euphoric build, everything gearing up for a triumphant final chorus… and instead we get some WUBs, some only-vaguely-harmonised lyrics and and a slow outro.
Tim: There, I completely agree – that closing part is practically a crime against pop. I still stand by my first point, but God, what a let down that is.
Tom: Also: “We’re like missiles in the sky. We go up, up, up […] we blow up, up, up.” Not quite sure about that metaphor, lads.
Tom: Second single from this Derby-based duo: we covered their previous one and thought that, while the lyrics weren’t that good, the combination of old instrumentation and modern production values worked very well.
Tom: So here’s the thing: this time, that exact same combination doesn’t work for me. Perhaps it’s the extra tempo, or the modern vocal style, but it almost seems like someone’s tried to recreate music from a few decades ago… and missed.
Tim: Hmm. My view’s pretty much as it was before; nice enough, but not really what I’d ever listen to.
Tom: I loved this for the first 90 seconds or so, and then I thought “okay, that’s probably enough now”. Is it just that I’m used to glitzy, no-attention-span, three-hooks-before-the-chorus modern pop?
Tim: Probably. I certainly am, and as far as I’m concerned that’s a perfectly valid type of music to be used to. Better than valid, in fact – brilliant.
Tom: The vocals are pitch-perfect; the song is competent; it just hasn’t quite pulled together yet. I still reckon there’s a cracking single in there waiting to come out, though.
Tim: Again, probably. I, though, will for now stick with Miss Inga, and be very happy that way.
Tom: As I listened to the first verse of this, I wrote this opening line: “Calvin Harris needs to get himself a new synth patch.”
Tom: …and then the proper chorus kicked in. Not the pump-up “We live, we die” pre-pre-chorus, not the downbeat pre-chorus, but the actual full-on Calvin Harris jump-up-and-dance chorus, and I figured that maybe he can keep using his usual one for a bit longer yet.
Tim: Pre-pre-what now? Get your terminology right, boy: a chorus is strictly vocal; the hook you are discussing is in fact the post-chorus. Dearie me.
Tom: Can I just call it the “good bit”?
Tim: Oh, I suppose so. But you’re right – could be varied, but it’s actually pretty good anyway.
Tom: Yes. The chorus on this is brilliant, and here’s the thing – I’m not sure it’d seem quite as good if it didn’t have those lacklustre verses to compare it with.
Tim: Lacklustre in musical or lyrical sense? Because I think they should get points for grouping together Cyndi Lauper, Lady GaGa and Blondie. Once you throw in Danny DeVito you’re pretty much begging for a Brit Award for the most peculiar cultural references in a song.
Tim: The second single off the upcoming album Heartthrob, this is a tad quieter than Closer, but, I think you’ll agree, none the worse for it.
Tom: Years and years ago, the local radio breakfast show where I lived had a jingle they’d play sometimes: “And now, a song with a long twinkly piano intro!” I’m not sure why that came back to me. Perhaps it’s because this intro is particularly twinkly.
Tim: It is, and right from there you know you’re in for a gentle ride, and for the verses at least that’s true. The chorus dials things up a notch, though, and has a great rhythm and vibe to it that’s really quite something.
Tom: It didn’t come together for me until the middle eight, but when it did – yes. This’ll do nicely.
Tim: Not keen on the ending – while the chorus line is lovely at the start, repeated over and over to fade doesn’t quite work so well for me.
Tom: Yep, I’d agree with that. Repeat to fade seems to be making a comeback recently, usually with an extra bit of instrumentation shoved in there; I wish it’d go away again.
Tim: Still, it’s a lovely number, and one that’s got me looking forward to the album, as has another track they stuck on the internet last week.
