Coldplay's 'new' direction...

What's an indie saddo, then? A saddo that listens to "indie" music?

...

a saddo who hasn't quite made it yet

saddo is stupido

i figured it was the same thing as 'sadsack' or pretty much any other pejorative with 'sad' as the root word

yeah it's not exackly a tough one to work out

I just wasn't sure if said saddoes were sad because they listened to indie, because they liked sad indie, or because they liked Coldplay (who may be considered indie in the UK, for all I know).

I actually kind of like the song, not like I consider it to be among their best, but I kinda find it OK.

And I think partly it is because, as a Coldplay fan, I am relived because they still don't change their style too much. Like, I do like the input from Eno on them, and it may have a positive effect on them (sure did on the previous album), but only until a certain level. It is important that the songwriting style is being kept intact, that the songs are still built up in roughly the same "classic" way, but Eno may still have a lot of great input on the arrangements, which may surely benefit from more details, more "air" and more fantasy.

The new single is a sign that Coldplay still sound like Coldplay, that is important to me. Then, hopefully, like last time around, there will be many better songs on the album.

(Two bands that are natural to compare to Coldplay are Keane and Travis, and they have changed their style a bit too much lately, so that is also why I worry about too much of a new direction)

What's great here is that you can pretty much just change the dates in the URL and recycle it every couple of years:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/jun/06/coldplay-reject-plagiarism-claims-single

kinda different deals, though...Satriani accused them of plagiarizing him with "Viva," but the band disagreed and his court case was dismissed. with "Teardrop" the band deliberately acknowledged that they drew on someone else's composition and shared songwriting credit before the song was released or anyone noted a similarity.

Which one was the Kraftwerk one? "Talk"?

Satriani accused them of plagiarizing him with "Viva," but the band disagreed and his court case was dismissed.

didn't they settle out of court?

the stuff i've read about it is a little confusing -- the case was dismissed BUT there was a settlement? does 'settlement' always mean money changed hands or is it also an agree to disagree thing?

"Talk" was pretty much the same deal as the new song, deliberate homage and they obtained Kraftwerk's permission before releasing it. the internet loves to scream 'plagiarism' before reading liner notes, basically.

That kind of sampling started in the mid 80s already. However, it seems a bit weird when a more traditional song oriented pop band does it (I am fully aware Lightning Seeds and OMD have done similar things before though)

hilariously incoherent passage from the band's wiki:

One of the goals for making the band's next album was to write tracks with greater use of experimenting with acoustic instruments, manipulation, and electronics by having or not having to revisit the style from Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends. With Chris Martin deciding to not release a solo album, it was rumoured the fifth album would be their last, but Martin later denied this fact. Upon re-entering "The Bakery," the time to write and record songs were thought outside the box by the band to be more ambivalent than what they wanted.

When the album was still in the production stages, a person referred to as "Roadie #42" noticed the album is not finalized, though it's to be finished in the "skin and bones phase" (the same person noted Coldplay completed some of the "killer tunes").

oh my god, it just keeps getting better

The new matierial were eventually gabbered by postponing dates, as the band released only one single in 2010; "Christmas Lights" debuted in December of that year, but neithertheless the music video was briefly removed from Youtube due to breach of copyright claims from the IFPI.

neithertheless

The new matierial were eventually gabbered

wd be an improvement lol

Gabbered? Hopefully they haven't done gabba? :)

and we all hope they have!

I will say, for a top rock band, it's weird for Coldplay to more than once explicitly base a song around a previously existing song, credit or no. And that's not even including the Satch coincidence. Like, there's that Stones/kd lang song, and the REM/Leonard Cohen song, but after that I draw a blank and can only think of litigated examples (such as Elastica).

More to the point, at least "Talk" is a good song. This new one is a turd.

Strawberry Swing is their best.

yeah that song is great

Two crappy singles out, and the NYTimes puff piece that has Chris Martin claiming he did a lot of listening to Springsteen, Dylan and the Beatles - or specifically, "Darkness on the Edge of Town," "Blonde on Blonde" and "Sgt. Pepper's" - , plus news that Eno did not produce, makes me dread the new one even more. I thought "Viva la Vida" won over a lot of weary critics, but this one seems to be their resigned to their fate record.

the NYTimes puff piece that has Chris Martin claiming he did a lot of listening to Springsteen, Dylan and the Beatles

Fucking dullards. Living down to every expectation I ever had of them, once again.

it took the Boys to uncork the fizz in "Viva La Vida."

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y8JyDbwmRg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y8JyDbwmRg

'42' off the last album was bloody brilliant.

Fucking dullards. Living down to every expectation I ever had of them, once again.

Its always amazing to see what exactly pushes Ned's aggro button, since it so rarely ever happens!

the NYTimes puff piece that has Chris Martin claiming he did a lot of listening to Springsteen, Dylan and the Beatles

_________________________________________

Fucking dullards. Living down to every expectation I ever had of them, once again.

― Ned Raggett, Thursday, October 13, 2011

(a) lol
(b) not sure why ned says this makes coldplay "fucking dullards," and i do love acoustic springsteen, but i'll agree that this is a terrible set of "influences" for this boring band.

Not just the Beatles, "Sgt. Pepper's!!!!"

ugh, that is even worse.

i really enjoy all of viva la vida

the singles on this new one are pretty unfortunate though

i should check out the beatles

'42' off the last album was bloody brilliant.

i like that song. also "death and all of his friends," which i think is really beautiful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_wcRxGbqdU

pet shop boys are heroes

And think of the unabashed audacity of listing three formidable masterpieces (or in the case of "Sgt. Pepper's," "masterpieces") from such massive acts as your primary influences. It's the total opposite of Radiohead, who lists more esoteric electronic or experimental influences, or even Wilco, which name-drops all sorts of surprising stuff. It's Chris Martin listing Bob Dylan, Springsteen, and the Fucking Beatles. That's like saying you're influenced by bread, water and air, only not as poetic. Which would be fitting.

I hate the risk of taking on the Captain Save-A-Coldplay here, but, ffs, its not like Chris Martin is the first musician to ever specifically cite those influences.

Yes, but it's not something you want to boast, as if you've discovered Cathay.

It's the specificity of the influences that I find so weird. Like, Springsteen, Dylan and the Beatles should all be pretty implicit in many act's vocabulary.

And actually, it's pretty rare to find artists these days who will just outright be all "I drew a lot of inspiration from Bob Dylan and the Beatles." And even Springsteen you mostly got during the big wave of indie appreciation. Anyway, just odd, pointless things to mention, because we all know the new Coldplay will sound nothing like Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen or the Beatles

If Coldplay's creative force were anybody but Chris Martin I'd accept the guilelessness with which he no doubt made the admission; but Chris Martin is the type of person who drops these influences to journalists whose publications would applaud the mention of the Beatles and Springsteen as a sign that the eternal verities still hold true for The Next Generation of rock stars.

In other words, they're U2 in 1988.

Fair enough, I guess I didn't read/hear the interview in question, so I didn't realize he was "boasting".

It's innately boastful. "So, who influenced our new album? Only three of the most popular and important bands of all time, that's all! I will be sure to put Bruce Springsteen, Bob Dylan and the Beatles on the guest list the next time we play the O2, so they can see how much they've taught us!"

Wow, you really get worked up by this. Have you never read an interview ever with a musician about their recent album?

Fair enough, I guess I didn't read/hear the interview in question, so I didn't realize he was "boasting".

When is he not. And since you wonder about my aggro buttons, fuck a world that makes this Chris Martin famous when the Chris Martin in Kinski up in Seattle deserves it far more.

I mean, every band ever (you get my point) does this thing of listing influences when they are hyping a new album. Is it really any more boastful because the references are quote-unquote canon, more so than if it was pandering to critics with like Eno and Can references?

(xpost)

And Ned, fair play to that!

Like I 100%