Tim: So I’ll be honest, and say that the first verse did more or less nothing for me; I let it play, though (mostly because I’m very tired right now and couldn’t be bothered to stop it).
Tom: Now I’m surprised you thought that: the first verse (or, at least, the spy-movie-soundtrack instrumentation below it) properly intrigued me. And then it led into a good chorus, too.
Tim: I was actually delighted by that chorus, which makes the slightly abrasive verses entirely worth sticking through. Powerful, punchy, aggressive, brassy, and just all round rather good.
Tom: I’m sure I know that chord progression, and that whole backing line, from somewhere in the 90s, but I can’t place it now.
Tim: I like it. Still not sure about the overall style, but with a chorus this good, I’m more than happy to look past that.
“There’s really not a huge amount that’s of interest on here.
Tom: “My first music video for 10 years!” starts the YouTube description enthusiastically, just under the bit where it says something close to “25,000 views”. Harsh.
Tom: I haven’t heard piano synths like that in a while. They’re good, if a bit retro — well, heck, all the production is a bit retro.
Tim: Yeah – most artists might like to update their sounds slightly, to keep vaguely in line with modern trends. Not Dannii, though.
Tom: Nothing wrong with that, mind, it’s just that — with the exception of the piano bit — the rest of the melody lines just aren’t up to much.
Tim: Can’t deny that, sadly – there’s really not a huge amount that’s of interest on here.
Tom: She’s hitting the notes just fine, they’re just not particularly nice notes to listen to.
Tim: Oh, that’s very harsh. It’s not offensive – I just don’t think I’d choose to listen to it.
“This has quite the post-chorus, so listen out for that.”
Tim: New one off MØ, and it’s winter outside, and winter in the video, so let’s naturally set out getting a teensy bit tropical. And this has quite the post-chorus, so listen out for that.
Tim: And that’s a song.
Tom: A ringing endorsement, there. It starts out like almost it’s trying to be a Bond theme, decides not to for the chorus, and then goes somewhere else that’s both interesting and — to me, at least — a bit disappointing.
Tim: I like it, I think – or at least, having listened to it a few times now to write this I’m at least on board with it. That post-chorus did take me a bit by surprise, which I think was what prompted the repeated listens – it’s a while since we’ve a prominent brass line in a dance track, or at least one that I can think of, and it certainly works as a USP for this.
Tom: It’s… well, it’s not bad, I suppose? It’s not that I actively dislike it, I just can’t find anything to particularly like. Like you said, it has a USP at least.
Tim: Definitely more than the video, anyway, which is probably trying to have some sort of narrative but which really comes across as just a tad weird. But it’s mostly okay.
Tim: We’ve remarked previously that Rihanna’s Umbrella doesn’t have its own unique backing, but does in fact share it with (the much much better) Symphonies by Dan Black and, indeed, anyone else who’s ever used Apple’s “Vintage Funk Kit 03“.
Tim: And I don’t quite know how it took me so long to recognise that, given that it’s their third most successful song ever.
Tom: The thing is, neither did I. Maybe it’s the change in tempo, or maybe there’s a change in emphasis. Pity the poor live drummers who’ll have to just repeat that Apple drum loop over and over again, though.
Tom: Wankelmut. Dixgård. I think it’s the diacritic that makes that.
Tim: Well, yes – I could barely type the names of the artists involved here without giggling, but please, try to maintain some sense of adulthood as we hear the track I described yesterday as ‘a song that’s probably better’.
Tim: And it is. I mean obviously it is, yesterday’s was technically awful, but this is enjoyable. Wankelmut’s proper name is Jacob, and he’s a dance producer off Germany, while Mr Dixgård is from Sweden, frontman of a rock band call Mando Diao.
And the vocals are good – it’s the second track we’ve had this week consisting of a dance beat with a throaty guy singing on top of it, and both times it works pretty well, to the extent that I’m almost surprised it hasn’t been done more often.
Tom: This reminds me, in a weird way, of Culture Beat’s Mr Vain. I mean, we’re a generation later so you’ve got completely different instruments and the now-required instrumental-sample chorus in place of the rap bit, but I think you can trace the influences: shouty vocals, repetitive lyrics, entirely danceable.
Tim: As far as the narrative of the song goes, well, it really doesn’t reflect well at all on Björn. At best he comes across as desperate, but more realistically he’s getting on for some kind of predator and that’s really not a good look right now. On the other hand, at least he’s not singing about roofies being great, so, y’know, let’s move on.
Tom: There are a lot of songs that haven’t aged well.
Tim: Musically it’s sound.
Tom: Well, yes, it is. Oh, sorry, yes, never mind, know what you mean.
Tim: Decent beat, decent melody, and the aforementioned strong vocals – so the main thing to take away from this: can we have more of this type, please?
“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.
Tim: A week or so Kygo quietly stuck a new album online, eight tracks each featuring a somewhat well known artist, much as Avicii did a couple of months back (though curiously enough, his Just Jesso feature which you described as “letting a toddler play with the volume control” didn’t make the cut). Here’s the title track, which also happens to be one of the best, as I see it.
Tom: Oh, that is good. That’s sounds a bit like… maybe like The Who? That’s not a comparison I expected to make.
Tim: It’s not remotely standard Kygo stuff – for that, you could do worse than check out the also very good Stranger Things, with OneRepublic – but it does have some very good piano dance work, with one heck of a post-chorus.
Tom: Objectively, there’s very little going on here: everything’s a bit repetitive. But compare it to yesterday’s mess: this here is an example of how to make a Big Track. Even that post-chorus stands out, like you said.
Tim: Not sure I’ve heard one before that is in itself a build and subsequent drop, but it sure enough works here. The vocal line is nice and emphatic, giving it everything the lyrics and backing music demand, and when those secondary vocals come along at the end that’s just a nice layer of icing on top of the already very tasty cake. Nice that he’s back on form.
Tim: Oh. Oh, there are some interesting words there. And vocal effects. And a half-arsed attitude to the tropical genre. And that haircut, mate, you’re not Manchester in the 90s.
Tom: I made a list of all the lyrics that annoyed me in the first verse. The “Baby / lately” rhyme. “Real real nice real nice things”, which is just stuttering so it vaguely fits the rhythm that’s needed. “Real real real real real”, which is just lazy. The words “iPhone, iPhone rings”, followed by what actually sounds like him imitating an iPhone.
Tim: Yeah, it was the iPhone one that really got me. Just, eurgh.
Tom: I mean, there’s the autotune too, but by this point I was ready to give up the song as a bad job, but that pre-chorus was just a little bit promising. Then I heard the chorus, and its seemingly-endless repetition, and basically gave up. If you’re going to repeat just one chorus line, make sure you’ve got more than one note in it.
Tim: Oh no that’s not fair – it goes at least one note up at the end of the last line each time, let’s give him that.
Tom: My two signs of a good pop song: first, do I want to hear it again? Here, obviously, no. But second, can I sing the chorus after one listen? And here, yes I can. So while I don’t like it, I don’t think it’s good… I suspect it might do well anyway.
“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?
Tom: I’ve been driving through the midwest of America lately, and country music — or, rather, the mainstream country-pop that’s played by commercial radio stations — has been my soundtrack. It seemed right.
Tim: Makes sense, particularly as I now have a lovely image of you with aviator sunglasses and a sheriff’s stetson on your head.
Tom: No comment. But there’s something I’ve noticed, Tim, and I think it’s most obvious with this song. They’re singing “love bombs” not “F-bombs” in the chorus in the radio edit, by the way, that surprised me in this version.
Tom: This could be schlager.
Tim: Huh – yeah, you’re not wrong there. It’s certainly a heck of a lot more upbeat and interesting than that Sam Hunt track you brought to the table last week.
Tom: It’s three and a half minutes long. Verse, chorus, verse, chorus, middle eight, hammer the chorus home twice more, outro. All it’s missing is a key change — and, as far as I can tell, in country that’s replaced by a Southern accent, a guitar twang, and a wholesome message.
It was meant to be latin-pop. Then it turned into country. It doesn’t matter about the style: it could be any pop genre. The only thing that means this is being played on “KSKS Country” and not “100% NL” is that they’re using guitars and not synthesisers.
Tim: See, the thing that sticks out most in that paragraph is the bit about latin-pop – after all, we’ve seen any number of rock and guitar pop track redone as dance tracks. Hell, you could barely turn on a radio in the mid ’00s without hearing Cascada or DJ Sammy within half an hour. Never really imagined it with other genres. Though now I do, I guess we’ve also had Nica & Joe, and also Gregorian if that counts, and, yeah, many more.
Tom: I’m not saying all country-pop’s good, or that it’s even our genre. But sometimes, the Golden Rules of Pop shine through, and this is one of those times.
