Saturday Flashback: DJ Sammy – Heaven

Arguably the defining song of the Eurotrance genre

Tim: I know we’ve had two “ten years ago” posts already this year, so sorry for the lack of originality, but we surely can’t not feature this, arguably the defining song of the Eurotrance genre, which a decade ago entered the UK chart right up at number 1. So sit back, try not to pay too much attention to the weird video that came with it, and enjoy it.

Tim: Vastly better than Bryan Adams’s version of the song, of course, but then cover versions rarely beat the originals, so that’s only to be expected.

Tom: Eh? That doesn’t make sense – the Bryan Adams version is from 1985…

Tim: Oh, God, you haven’t been brainwashed by his lot as well, have you? Look, follow the logic: in a lot of songs, it is entirely possible, from as early on as the first chorus, to see exactly where it’s going, yes? So therefore, by extrapolation, in the land of music it’s entirely possible to predict the future, and thus have a song being covered BEFORE the original was actually written, as happened here. DJ Sammy wrote the brilliant original, and Bryan Adams did a fairly dull cover of it seventeen years earlier. FLAWLESS LOGIC.

Tom: Right.

Tim: Now this has everything a decent dance track should have, and it should rightly be celebrated here and now.

Tom: Yep, there’s a reason that it’s still a standard – and still getting re-edited into new cash-in compilation CDs – ten years later. It’s one of the tracks that can tie most of a generation together: they’ll recognise it even if they don’t know where it’s from.

Tim: It’s also notable for being the song that gave birth to the idea of the Candlelight Remix; whether that’s a good thing or not is debatable, but it didn’t stop Cascada doing the same thing several years later. And actually, I’ve just listened to both of those and it was a brilliant idea, so well done to whoever did that. In fact, well to everybody involved in this, because it’s just brilliant all over.

Eric Saade – Miss Unknown

It’s so middle-of-the-road, almost generic.

Tim: Yesterday’s was a disappointment; let’s see what today’s brings. But I’ll warn you: while that official lyric video was vaguely creative, today’s one, while still official, has made the typical 14-year-old fan’s error of prioritising fitting in as many LiveText transitions as possible over even basic proofreading.

Tom: Oh, man. I’m no professional designer, but that is bloody awful there. So many errors, so many bizarre choices. (An electricity pylon? Really?)

Tim: Fortunately, though, that lyric video doesn’t put me off it all that much; unfortunately, the music does a good enough job of doing it that the video’s become somewhat irrelevant.

Tom: I find it difficult to write anything about it. It’s so middle-of-the-road, almost generic: for someone who’s put out cracking tracks before, this is just meh.

Tim: It is – it’s just dull. I don’t know if I was expecting too much, both from this and yesterday’s, but this barely sounds special enough for an album track. There’s still a bunkload of autotune on there, though at least not quite so much; the multitude of ‘eh-eh-eh-eh-eh-etc’ towards the end of the chorus are only vaguely less irritating that INJU5TICE’s ‘eh-oh-oh’s; it fades out without anything special happening towards the end; the lyrics are massively banal; anything else I’ve missed?

Tom: I don’t think there’s anything else there to miss.

Eric Saade – Marching (In The Name Of Love)

OH GOD THE AUTOTUNE.

Tim: Two new songs from Eric Saade dropped last week.

Tom: Well, pick them up then.

Tim: Very well, I shall. Let’s start with this one, and we’ll get to the other tomorrow. Sound good?

Tom: Crikey, that’s a long build. 90 seconds of lead-in to a not-particularly-heavy beat that doesn’t last all that long. It’s almost begging for some kind of dubstep remix, particularly with that much autotune on it.

Tim: Oh, the autotune. OH GOD THE AUTOTUNE. Why? He’s a very competent singer, he doesn’t need it for that. It can’t be to sound current, because that phase seems to have finally (and thankfully) died out. It’s just horrible, and I don’t understand why.

Tom: Maybe it just wasn’t that interesting without it? It almost sounds like a track from a soundtrack album: it’s trying to be all uplifting and euphoric, but it just seems like it’s trying too hard.

Tim: And as for the rest, it’s, well, alright – it’s a decent chorus (though the intro to it does get uncomfortably close to having a Flo Rida-esque “look at me, I’m so brilliant” vibe) and a nice dance bit following it. I just wish it didn’t sound quite so 2009.

Little Mix – DNA

“They could share a stage with Nightwish.”

Tom: So if Credibility Cardle’s been forgotten, what about last year’s starlets? Wings was popular but a bit all-over-the-place. The second single is…

Tom: Ooh. Well. Several thoughts from this video: first of all, if they’re going to rip off the Sin City movie, at least they’re doing it well. Second of all: their target audience isn’t going to know what the hell they’re doing developing printed photos.

Tim: True, and true.

Tom: And as for the song: well, they’ve got a sound that, as far as I know, no other mainstream group’s doing. There’s some proper full-on orchestral harmonising going on there: if they went much further down that road they could share a stage with Nightwish. It’s good, if not what I expected from an X Factor girl group. They’re meant to do cheap pop hits to dance to, surely?

Tim: Well, you’d think, but with these voices – especially the opening two – that would be a huge waste. They sound incredibly mature, if that’s the right word, for a group of young girls who’ve barely hit twenty. This sounds like a group who’ve been going five years, not one, and I’m very impressed. If they’re doing stuff like this I’m very glad they won.

Tom: Not that I’m complaining: I’m not sure it’s going to be a regular on my playlist, but it certainly deserves to hit the charts.

Darwich feat. Anna David – Solstorm

“Middle of the end of year compilation CD dance music.”

Tim: Is your Danish not quite up to scratch? But do you still want to know what your favourite song’s lyrics translate to? Well, never fear – EMOJI’S HERE!

Tom: Oh, blimey. For those not up to speed, these are the little glyph icons that you can get if you mess about with the settings on your iPhone. Still, at least it’s an original approach to a lyric video.

Tim: Let’s be honest: a record label called KASHCOW is never likely to prioritise deeply thought-out, meaningful lyrics that took a week to come up with with soulful music behind them that someone’s spent days pondering over.

Tom: At least they’re honest and up-front about it.

Tim: Exactly. What they do instead is scribble three minutes worth of generic Danish ‘I love you, isn’t this brilliant’ words and spend a couple of hours fiddling around in Logic Studio. Let’s not, therefore, complain that this is bog-standard, as it comes, middle of the end of year compilation CD dance music.

Tom: It is, isn’t it? It’s the filler in the middle of the “DANCE CHOONZ 2013” CDs that are being peddled all over the airwaves now that the run-up to Christmas is starting.

Tim: Let’s instead enjoy it, because it has got exactly what it needs to make it sell – a catchy and somewhat irritating chorus, a decent backing track with just enough of a melody to it to make it original, and a lyric video in a style that I’m genuinely surprised no-one’s thought to do before. Well done Kashcow, for thoroughly living up to your ideology. Though I’m disappointed you didn’t fit this one in somewhere.

Ask Embla – Cry Baby

Very much a Decent Track.

Tim: The second single from a duo composed of two fairly prolific songwriters – Ina Wroldsen is responsible for, amongst many others, pretty much every hit The Saturdays have had, while Arnthor Birgisson has written lots of other great stuff as well.

Tom: Which is just as well, given what happened the last time we had a duet singing “Cry Baby”.

Tim: Oh, you really didn’t need to link to that, you know.

But here, fortunately, a decent track, is pretty much a given. So can they do it justice vocally?

Tim: Hmmm, not so much, unfortunately.

Tom: That’s a shame, because as you said in the introduction: that is very much a Decent Track. Maybe not decent enough to set the charts on fire, but enough to make them smoulder a little. Sorry, that’s a terrible metaphor.

Tim: Not so bad – I like the idea of a smouldering chart, brimming over with greatness. This might, might make it, but there seems to be a fair dollop of autotune on there, and whilst it’s still a great track, I can’t help feeling it might have been better with other people singing. It’s understandable that they want to do a bit more – after all, the vast majority of music-buyers don’t give anywhere near as much credit to the writers as is deserved, and if you’re writing songs, singing them is a fairly logical next step. It’s just, like I said when we talked about Jedward, it’s two different skill sets, and there’s only so much that autotune can do to rectify it.

Tom: And there is a hell of a lot of autotune on there – not enough that it can be counted as a Cher-style stylistic tweak, but enough that it’s bloody noticeable.

Tim: Still a great track, though, so I really hope they’re not quitting their day job for this.

Saturday Flashback: Aimee Mann – Nobody Does It Better

“Can I get away with calling that voice ‘sexy’?”

Tom: In 1997, David Arnold – who’s gone on to make the music for Skyfall, among others – produced “Shaken and Stirred”, a CD of James Bond covers. There are some gems in there: Jarvis Cocker breathing his way through All Time High and the Propellerheads’ astonishingly good nine-minute electronica reworking of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.

Tim: Both worth a listen.

Tom: But there’s one wonderful, standout track that I loved on first listen and which, I suspect, will never get old for me.

Tom: Do ignore the video – it’s fan-made – and concentrate on that astonishing voice. Can I get away with calling that voice “sexy”? I’ve never used that description in all the time we’ve been writing this. Perhaps “sultry” would be more accurate.

Tim: I think those words are entirely appropriate – feel free to use them.

Tom: Even the extended coda, the over-the-top sitar instrumentation, and all the other ridiculous things can’t turn me away from this song. I can see why others might dislike it, but my word, something in it just worked for me.

Tim: It’s not my favourite, but I can see why you’d like it. Besides, it’s always nice to discover new things, and since I’ve got nothing better to do this evening I think I might listen to the rest of that album.

Loreen – Crying Out The Pain

Tim: This is the new single for Swedish people from Loreen; internationally she’s just released My Heart Is Refusing Me, but that’s not on YouTube. Fortunately, this is.

Tom: That sounds a lot like Euphoria. That’s not a bad thing, mind.

Tim: Along with Euphoria, that’s three tracks so far, and together they paint Loreen as having a Thing: half-sung, half-whispered vocals over quiet synths for the verses, and then going all out for the chorus. And I like that, kind of, even if it does mean I’ll sometime skip over the first thirty seconds.

Tom: I got into an argument with someone the other night about finishing books: I maintain it’s absolutely fine to give up on a book if you’re not enjoying it, while they said that, once you’ve got a bit into it, you have to carry on to the end – or at least pretend to yourself that you’re going to.

The reason I mention this is: skipping the first 30 seconds of something like ‘Euphoria’ is just wrong. The build-up’s part of the track, and an important part. It’s like skipping into a Pink Floyd album half way through. You just don’t do it.

Tim: Perhaps not, but if I’m getting ready to go out, say, or just want to hear some properly BANGING BEATS, the early bits of the song aren’t right for it. (Though I agree with you about the book thing.)

Anyway, the whole concept does serve to emphasise what a lovely lovely voice she has, really, and that’s a good thing. Will it get boring? Possibly, after a while, and I’m hoping the entire album (October 29th) isn’t like this, but for the time being I’m very happy with what I’m hearing.

Amy Macdonald – 4th of July

“I heard this, and thought it sounded Swedish.”

Tom: Over the couple of years we’ve been writing this tripe, Tim, I’ve started to get a taste for varying European accents — and the music that tends to come out of the Scandinavian nations. I heard this, and thought it sounded Swedish. And I’m wrong: because Amy Macdonald is very, very Scottish.

Tim: Yes, she is.

Tom: Let’s ignore the inopportune timing of the song, because that’s too easy a joke. Normally, I’d wonder if a track like this was worth writing about: it pretty much fits our generic-song formula.

Tim: It does, but it’s pretty excited and energetic and almost inducing of finger-clicking, which is always nice to hear. And that’s before you get to the fanfares in the background.

Tom: But that voice, and that triumphant backing: it’s a cut above. I’m not sure what it reminds me of, particularly in its closing few seconds, but it’s something rather wonderful.

Tim: I don’t think it reminds me of anything – just generally good, upbeat celebratory songs. Which is only logical, since that’s what it is.

Alexander Rybak – Leave Me Alone

“I wanted to dance.”

Tom: Our reader Roger writes in with this, Eurovision winner Alexander Rybak’s new track. Roger writes: “I think this is (one of) his best after Fairytale. Really like those disharmonies.”

I was expecting to dislike this track, because I didn’t like Fairytale all that much. Instead, I wanted to dance, which is awkward because I was on a train when I wrote this.

Tim: That’s quite a different sound from what we all know. And not a bad one at all, actually.

Tom: I see what Roger means about the disharmonies – those odd fiddle-tweaks at the end of the instrumental parts. I think the song would be improved without them, but at the cost of being less memorable.

Tim: I don’t know, I’m with Roger and quite like them – they’re interesting, unusual and I think they work.

Tom: They act as an attention-grabber, and I can live with that when the thing they’re drawing attention to is this good.

Tim: They do, and it is this good.