Tom: Okay, the song’s called ‘Lightning’. Guess what they put in their music video?
Tim: Puppies!
Tom: Lens flares and bar lighting, actually.
Tim: Close enough.
Tim: GRR. SEE MY MASCULINITY.
Tom: Yet again, you’ve got the “We are The Wanted, and We Are Men” vibe to the video, because that means heterosexual men can watch it without worrying about their erections.
Tim: There’s still that one of them – think it’s Nathan – who looks about twelve, though, and has Glee walk-on part written all over him.
Tom: Good track, though – and I can’t explain why, because it’s generic Wanted fare.
Tim: Think you’ve explained why just there – generic, yes, but generic boyband stuff and boyband managers/songwriters know how to make god tunes. Not musical masterpieces, but good catchy by the book number, with lyrics, melodies and synth hooks that just work. This is one of them.
Tom: Was I distracted by scantily clad women? Possibly. But even without the video, I found myself really liking it.
Tom: 150 million views on YouTube, still in rotation on the radio. Why am I talking about this? Because it’s exceptional.
Tim: Bugger me, that’s a big teddy bear.
Tom: Now there’s a sentence that’s not been said before. Anyway – twice now, while listening to the radio, I’ve wondered ‘ooh, what’s this song?’ and put it through Shazam. That’s rare for me – I’ve only used Shazam a dozen or so times in the last year.*
* I was almost disappointed, when it came up a second time, that Shazam didn’t say “you’ve already tagged this, you idiot, and then promptly forgotten it”.
Tim: Ah, well if you want to have fun with AI, you want to get yourself Siri.
Tom: Okay, we get it, you work at an Apple store.
Clearly something in the song really works for me; while I might like other songs on the radio, I don’t like them enough to find out what they are – twice – so I can download them later. It’s a textbook pop song, really; happy, entertaining, and a proper singalong hook.
Tim: Part of it is the unexpectedness of it – you’re sort of thinking it’ll be along the lines of Do It Like A Dude, or whatever that other crap one was, but it’s actually good. (Think I might have made this point before – I remember saying California King Bed was a fantastic prime example.)
Tom: And here’s the bit that really gets me: a rap bit that works. B.o.B is damn good at what he does, and he’s mellow enough to fit with the rest of the song. Put Flo Rida in here, and it’d be bloody awful.
Tim: I have a new-found annoyance about rap bits in songs: ever since Tulisa became an X Factor judge, it has seemingly become compulsory to rewrite the words if you’re performing it yourself (or even add new ones to originally good songs). I find this HORRIFICALLY irritating.
Tom: My word. That’s the first I’ve seen of this year’s X Factor. It’s… it’s terrible.
Tom: It’s not officially ‘released’ until Hallowe’en, but it’s been getting tremendous amounts of airplay.
Tim: I just had to watch a thirty second advert for Run For Your Life. I’m already in a negative frame of mind.
Tom: AdBlock, Tim. Anyway – this song? It’s a weird one.
Tim: Weird is an excellent word to use here.
Tom: The best comparison I have for this is the Black Eyed Peas’ “Dirty Bit” – the regular part of it isn’t all that bad, but as soon as it goes into a strange, discordant breakdown it just becomes too strange.
Tim: To be honest, I’m too engrossed trying to work out what’s moving where in the video to listen properly, and the music seems a bit secondary. Without the video – standard Beyoncé fare, it seems.
Tom: Is this even danceable? I’m not sure. It does go on a bit, certainly, and this is the first time I’ve thought that a video was just too overproduced. That final, realistic smile – the last shot in the video – really does come as a relief.
Very good, but that energy just doesn’t quite translate.
Tom: I saw City Stereo live last week, and – my word – they deserved to be so much more than the first support act. Live, they are stunning, with every bit of stage presence that you’d expect from a band that have supported McFly in the past.
Tim: Hmm, not bad.
Tom: If they’re not live, though; they seem a lot more generic, somehow. Still very good, but that energy that I saw on stage – that converted a dull early-night crowd to enthusiastic cheering – just doesn’t quite translate. Most pop-punk bands can sound like this with a decent producer, but to sing and play that well live on stage takes some serious talent.
Also, I feel I should mention the gratuitous partial nudity in the video. I’m not complaining at all, just mentioning it.
Tim: When have you ever complained about partial nudity?
Tom: In a music video? Not since Robbie Williams in Rock DJ, I reckon. Put me right off my lunch.
Tim: A couple of weeks back, The Sound of Arrows announced their first album is finally on the way. To celebrate this, here’s a track produced by them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1uv7FnN6SI
Tim: Obviously not as good as an actual track by them, but it certainly shows their influences. Regardless, it’s her (whom I suppose we should call the Queen) we should be concentrating on, and this track, which is a bit more spacey than her usual.
Tom: “Spacey” in at least two ways, I think – the kind of space-age synth influence, and the floatiness of it. Both of which I rather like, particularly the unusual, very trebley breakdown before the chorus.
Tim: It’s nice, almost Robyn-esque – gently flowing, melodic, a beat that’s not too overstated. A tune that one could dance to or relax to, depending on how energetic they’re feeling, and that is what I like about it.
Tom: Last time, as you’ll recall, she produced the most irritating record since the Fast Food Rockers. This time, she…
Tom: …sounds a bit like M.I.A.?
Tim: Her hairstyle makes it look like she’s had a close encounter with a lightsaber.
Tom: I mean, I’m stunned. It sounds good. It’s not irritating. It’s like she’s grown up and produced a decent second album, all in the space of a couple of months.
Tim: It is strange, because you’re right, this is quite listenable. Still not great, and if she wants to sound like M.I.A. she does still need the requisite weird sound effects replacing random words.
Tom: Mike Posner, as ever, appears to be a smug dick – but at least his contribution is brief. Does he have a sweater tucked into his trousers? Is he, in fact, Gyles Brandreth in disguise?
Tim: I don’t know, but I’d quite like to see him in Dictionary Corner. Don’t know why, though – just a weird image in my mind, really.
Tom: So here’s my question: is this actually good, or was the bar set so low that anything even half-decent, or quarter-decent, would impress me?
Tim: Both, I reckon. Although the da-da-da-da-dum-dum thing is a really crap ending.
Tom: The headline from this one: Nicki Minaj in “Not Completely Annoying” shocker.
Tim: And, the MTV Award for ‘Most Hairstyles in a Single Video’ goes to…
Tom: For the uninitiated: Nicki Minaj is the high-pitched voice behind that damned ‘Super Bass’ track that plagued the summer. This new one’s a lot different though – and it’s a hell of a lot calmer. But the star here is Rihanna, clearly – I’m not sure there’s been a track she’s featured on before that’s shown off her voice quite so well.
Tim: Are you kidding me? What, you never heard California King Bed (an absolutely stunning track, by the way)? Though I suppose if you’re limiting it to ‘feat. Rihanna’ tracks, you may have a point, but you’ve still got Love the Way You Lie, where she’s doing a hell of a lot more than here, where she’s only really been given the fly-yy-yy-yy-yyy.
Tom: Yep, just ‘featured’ ones – and I know she generally knocks it out the park every time, but there’s something her vocals on this particular track that just floored me. It’s a bit of a shame about the rap part, though.
Tim: Almost a given, really.
Tom: “I represent an entire generation”? No you don’t, Nicki.
Tim: It’s less than a month since we last featured them, but the new single is worth discussing as soon as possible. Why? You’ll see.
Tim: Answer: because it’s good. We have, let’s be honest, been very disappointed by The Saturdays recently. In June, we had Notorious, and last month was All Fired Up. Both fairly clubby, beat-heavy, and closer to dance music than decent pop music like what we like here. But this is good. More like the early stuff that was on Chasing Lights, such as Issues. I’ll pause now so you can make some sort of misheard lyrics/tissues joke here.
Tom: “Me and my arse, we need tissues” is generally what I sing at that point.
Tim: Right, now that’s done I’m going to list reasons why this is good, starting with: the calm singing at the beginning that says in no uncertain terms “this is a ballad”.
Tom: To interrupt you there – I found that opening a bit weird. I’m so used to their heavy, club-type tracks that it took me a minute to fix my expectations. Once my brain figured out that it was a ballad, though, I did really start enjoying that song.
Tim: The pause and quiet few words before the chorus beat hits.
Tom: Technically called ‘the drop’.
Tim: The by-and-large lack of autotune.
Tom: Or at least, the lack of obvious stylistic autotune.
Tim: The screamy beginning to the closing section.
Tom: Emotion!
Tim: The lack of Flo Rida (still bitter about that).
Tom: Oh please, you just wanted to bitch about it.
Tim: Yes, and I always will. Until the end of time. Final musing: it’s off the upcoming album On Your Radar, much as All Fired Up and Notorious were. I’m intrigued as to what the general state of that album will be.
Tom: Three singles released before the album? That’s how you cash in nowadays with downloads, I suppose – get as many people as possible to double-dip, particularly if they’re likely to get the album bought for them at Christmas.
Tim: UPDATE of 15th October now there’s a proper video rather than the previous audio only. It is worth pointing out that it is set OUTDOORS in the COUNTRYSIDE, and there are HORSES to prove it. That is all.
How about something joyful from a couple of months back?
Tom: How about something joyful from a couple of months back?
Tim: My first thought comes directly from the nerdy part of me that’s into typography: I feel a bit sorry for Anna, lumbered with a monospaced font while the others all get fancy writing.
Tom: Blimey, I’m a typography geek and I didn’t even spot that. Anyway: The Feeling. Purveyors of jaunty bubblegum tunes that wouldn’t even count as ‘indie’ if they were a more well-known band. And what a jaunty tune this is.
Tim: Jaunty is an excellent and sadly underused word. And appropriate for describing this song.
Tom: “We threw a party. It was a lot of fun. We should do it again.”
Tim: Ah, see that’s wrong. It’s sad, it really is, but one of the immutable laws of the universe is that any attempt to emulate a previously good night will never ever be as good.
Tim: Ooh, Education. Children, I want you all to go and study that, as you may be tested on it later.
Done? Good. Relating it to this situation – the original party is already being built to be better than it was (amazing though it may well have been), and it just won’t live up to the promises – at least some of the best people won’t be there, the atmosphere won’t be quite the same, and worst of all, the highlights won’t be spontaneous, and therefore not as fun. Sorry.
Tom: Ah, but the chorus is “should’ve been there, should’ve been there”. Which is odd, because the rest of the song is in… huh. Actually, I’m not sure what tense it’s in. It’s all over the place. Can we stop over-analysing this, please? It’s too lovely for that.
There’s nothing deep to this track, and I don’t mind that one bit. In fact, it’s a pop song that isn’t about love or relationships – and that’s a rare thing indeed.
Tim: Yes. And despite my views on the song’s philosophy, it’s still good fun to listen to.
Tom: Is this a comeback attempt, or have they just slipped off my radar lately?
Tom: The first part of this seems to go nowhere until that synth line kicks in, and then… well, it’s like an old Sugababes album took a few downers and decided to take a rest for a while. And then – just to kick it while it’s down – a dubstep middle eight arrives in an attempt to break up any dancability.
Tim: I don’t mind the dubstep bit, but you’re right that it does take a bit too long to get going.
Tom: Timothy Jeffries! You “don’t mind” the dubstep bit? What happened to your railing against all things dubstep? I remember you calling me out when I said I didn’t mind a dubstep track a while ago.
Tim: Well, as the somewhat disappointing early breakfast fill-in DJ on Radio 1 said when I was half-asleep this morning whilst defending her record of the week (the execrable Nero reworking of The Jets’ Crush on You), “it works it way in, and that’s what dubstep does.” (She did, however, then go on to play What Makes You Beautiful, so she’s somewhat forgiven.)
Tom: It’s got the same vibe as ‘About You Now’, only much slower.
Tim: Much slower, to the extent that it’s, unfortunately, not remotely in the same league.
Tom: Can you imagine a dancefloor bouncing to this? The last chorus almost recovers to ‘enthusiastic’, but it’s not quite there.
