Years & Years

savage garden makes the most sense of any comparison lol

ok this album

"Gold" is on repeat over here.

"shine" is just the best song in the world basically

'King' sounds like Bros produced by Hot Chip

come on guys, this music is crap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFXlWfzW9Uo

come on guys, this music is crap.

i'm convinced

i own two savage garden albums and haven't the slightest idea which song(s) y'all are thinking of when comparing years & years to them

"shine" is just the best song in the world basically

― insufficiently familiar with xgau's work to comment intelligently (BradNelson), Friday, July 10, 2015 8:14 AM (8 hours ago)

i am almost beginning to agree with this tho

This is another case of Tove Lo-ism for me. By definition, it should be my thing, but it's not and I actually kind of actively dislike it.

Can't get over how amazing "Memo" is, and how accurately Ollie captures that sense of desire rendering you vulnerable and ashamed that is... If not unique to the gay experience then certainly uniquely framed by it.

"Without" is just so fucking gorgeous.

come on guys, this music is crap.

― cod latin (dog latin), Friday, 10 July 2015 15:20 (Yesterday) Permalink

yes everyone is lining up correctly

Can't get over how amazing "Memo" is, and how accurately Ollie captures that sense of desire rendering you vulnerable and ashamed that is... If not unique to the gay experience then certainly uniquely framed by it.

― Tim F, Saturday, July 11, 2015 5:35 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I mean three out of the five singles to date have been about this to some extent so it's obviously an idee fixe but I think "Memo" captures it most nakedly and powerfully.

fav of the new records is "Ties"

Mine is probably "Worship" which I hadn't heard before.

Are these guys this year's The 1975?

their style is more in my zone personally but the parallels def seem obvious

coming in peace here to observe that the posters on the london underground for both bands have been strikingly similar in style & layout - the comparison occurred to me when i first saw the y&y poster - later, i saw this thread and the savage garden comparisons etc and listened to a song or two and all was confirmed

another similarity being ownership of extremely commonplace & generic one-word songtitles, an aesthetic decision i don't really condone but one i think i understand

and the cipher is complete

Are these guys this year's The 1975?

Ha! Now it all makes sense! They suck too!!

Deej is right, the battle lines forming here only make me more confident of my opinion.

ah you can't make disagreeing with dog latin into some kind of point of character

why not apart from laziness

i mean i guess you can, but not in such a specific context

to be clear i just meant that it really is just the fight over The 1975 all over again.

Come on dude even Imago is feeling sheepish about vocally hating on them.

I just spent about five minutes with what I vaguely assumed was a Savage Garden melody in my head and then actually paid attention and realised it was actually 74-75 by the Connells. Now I can't really remember what Savage Garden actually sounded like and having read this entire thread I'm none the wiser about Years and Years either.

Not trying to be combative, more saying that it seems like the strong objections are coming from similar people and expressed in similar terms, and one knows where one stands on one situation it's easy to apply the precedent to another.

It's almost comforting, really, to the extremely limited extent that knowing where one stands in an internet discussion about music taste can be described a "comforting".

Years & Years sound like about 20 other things, many of which have been mentioned in this thread & none of which are particularly evocative or convincing artists to suggest an ilxor check this group out, so you fall back on "...except better than that sounds" over & over

weird wording but i assume u guys are used to that from my unedited ilx posts by now

^^^^

and as I have said before I think this fact is precisely one of the band's appeals (as it was with the 1975) - the sense that they're almost "redeeming" a lot of qualities that typically are executed quite dubiously.

but then I don't expect everyone to share my sense of creeping exhaustion with needing to define things by reference to a virtuous closed circle of good taste, which tends to reduce talking about music to the question of who can concoct the most enticing PR copy.

Gonna try to start liking this band now, pull the rug from everyone

I listened to some of this and found it largely insipid but it really does serve to illustrate quite how long it takes for a sound to translation from blog buzz to genuine mainstream.

Like you could have concocted a Hot Chip / Cut Copy song with vaguely Booka Shade-esque production in 2006 and it would have made sounded not dissimilar to this while being totally on-point and making zero splash in the real world, but fast forward nine years and one Sam Smith and bob's yer uncle.

Yeah, it's always been that way. It's just easier to track point A to point Z now because it's in your face all the time and never goes away unless you shut off the internet.

Matt's historical analysis is broadly correct although I think whether it's a mark against the later music comes down to whether that process of mainstream integration is simply weakening the music's force or recasting it.

e.g. In 2000 I thought that Kylie's "Spinning Around" was the "last word" in filter-disco's infiltration of pop in a fairly insipid way, whereas a year and a half later "Love at First Sight" took the same idea and turned it into a new pinnacle.

most of this just kinda passes me by but "Memo" is indeed really nice

For a change u guys should just agree w us bc we are always right

pleased the "this year's the 1975" observation (and ensuing argument) have already happened

also strangely comforted that kitsune still exists and continues to release on-brand music

Gonna try to start liking this band now, pull the rug from everyone

― The Bends by Radiohead (imago), Sunday, July 12, 2015 12:08 AM (12 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

your internal taste chess is 0.000000001% as interesting to other people as you seem to assume

I only said that coz my taste was commented upon, jeez. idc really, the hunt for good music uber alles

chessthetics

idrc about your taste in music & its vacillations either obv although i will rep for your taste in tennis & its players (ever considered being an actual tennis journalist, u'd be great)

years & years have some cool synth parts, on reflection & dancepop probably needs more openly gay content (i'm not rly qualified to say for certain though)

not my thread so this will be my last post, think of it as an olive branch and an assurance that i won't go all dumb snob come the eoys (rly. it's just too exhausting) ok made it all about me again lol peace enjoy the sounds

for some reason "shine" reminds me of kate bush

anyway

I have been enjoying 'King', however the context for that is hearing it on family car journeys where it appears on Now 90 as a welcome respite between the twin horrors of Ed Sheeran and Maroon 5. That synth riff thing makes it the best song for Tarzan impersonations since Baltimora.

years & years have some cool synth parts, on reflection & dancepop probably needs more openly gay content

I thought "King" was somewhere between "likeable" and "nothing special," but I'm nonetheless interested in them for this very reason. But is the album significantly better than, say, Neon Trees?

Really loving writing about this album.

album is really good!

I went to see Years & Years live around the time of the first album and really enjoyed it - the music was good, he was a great performer despite his obvious limitations as a singer, and it really did feel like a celebration of queer identity.

What we saw of the BBC New Years & Years special was rubbish and I was surprised at how much I didn't enjoy it. The actual sound was terrible which didn't help, but it feels like all the things that made them so exciting and interesting to begin with have been lost at the expense of trying to make Olly Alexander into a superstar.

i suspect that it becoming a defacto olly solo project with the second album (and officially with the third) didn't really do anyone any favours at all

i hardly watch any TV but every time i do he seems to be on. it really seems he is well on his way to being a household name in the uk.

I'm not sure it's working with the music though. Apparently his new single has been one of the most played songs on radio over the last few weeks yet it's still not been able to get any higher than 94. It will be interesting to see if it jumps up the charts now the Christmas songs are all disappearing, somehow I doubt it. The lead single, Starstruck got a massive push too and didn't reach the top 30. I'm not sure why these songs aren't connecting with the public. They're not great, but seem like the kind of songs that would do well right now.

Totally agree with Boxedjoy about the BBC special. Very disappointing. They really won me round on the Christmas TOTP performances back in 2015, but this didn't have any of that charm or warmth.

yup, i don't think he is becoming a household name for his music. i'm guessing the majority of people who know of him now have never even heard of years & years.

I think if he is becoming a household name it's more to do with It's A Sin than anything Y&Y have released in the past few years.

i guess they figured the years & years name had some brand equity but it's pretty bizarre the way he uses that name for music, even tho he's well known by his real name for acting, just seems confusing. like when he did the royal albert hall xmas special they did this whole intro about how "he" was in "it's a sin" and then introduced "him" as "years & years." i feel like they should've either kept the group together as an olly solo project in everything but name (which is basically what paramore is for hayley williams) or just let him go by his name for his music

as for the music itself, i think it's prob furthering his goals of becoming a very famous person who does different kinds of art including pop that hits the charts but might not be huge smashes. there was something about the sound & writing of the first album that felt like a band working towards a specific kind of artist goal but that all mostly seems to have been abandoned after that. who knows how that one was made, honestly -- who drove it creatively etc, what the motivations were w/ the music after that, what new voices got in the mix or were given more weight. i liked "starstruck" but it just didn't stick for me & the stuff after felt very generic & less personal. the lyrics feel deemphasized w/ the kind of pop he's making now. oh well, happy for him anyway. the first album still means a lot to me

he truly was inescapable on british TV around xmas, i think i saw his face like 9 days in a row. feel like he'll be around as a british celeb for a very long time popping up on TV as a game show panelist or competition judge, shit like that, if he doesn't actually become a real deal TV & film actor who doesn't need to do that kinda stuff (tho honestly it seems like he enjoys shit like that i.e. being on celeb gogglebox so i bet he'll fill that role regardless)

I'm disappointed he's turned into the Ed Sheeran of/for the twink set

i feel like they should've either kept the group together as an olly solo project in everything but name (which is basically what paramore is for hayley williams)

eh paramore isn't really a good comparison because there's always been other major creative forces besides hayley (for the last decade taylor has been just as key to the band as her) & then even the hayley solo albums still strangely had taylor heavily involved everywhere.

the first years & years album had everything credited to the three of them + a few other producers they worked with, but the second album, while they were still a 'band' only had the other two co-write/produce two tracks (one of which was a bonus track), with the other tracks all just being credited to olly + a wider range of pop producers. those two 'band' tracks were among the most reminiscent of the debut's house-pop sound too, he tried to branch out away from that sound on a lot of tracks but the further away he got the worse the results were. & now of course it's officially a solo project. it's definitely an awkward transition where the second album was a creative shift to being nearly an olly solo album but they didn't commit to that then & now he's sticking with the name even though he's already very famous under his real name. one of the original years & years guys is still in the touring band apparently though, just no creative involvement anymore?

like i would say a better comparison for keeping the band but becoming a solo project in all-but-name is maroon 5?

Otm

jordan are you british now?

first record is still so wonderful

Yeah.

The second is half wonderful, and I love its bonus tracks.

Thoughts on the new album? I'm underwhelmed. He's becoming more conventional or is more distracted.