The Strokes: Is This It poll

Hard to Explain, BTW

The Strokes: Is This It Shit poll

Ah... that's more like it.

Not voting as, for my ears' sake, I dare not attempt to remember any of these songs.

In retrospect, the crossover success of the Strokes and their sort of bland rock music pretty much set the stage for Kings of Leon's similar success in recent years. Massive dud, this band.

I mean, "Sex on Fire" is totally a Strokes song in disguise.

Without the hooks, muffled vocals, and awesomeness.

this is literally impossible for me

It is impossible for me as well, as I believe I've only ever heard "Last Nite", and that maybe only twice.

Funny, I was just about to say "Sex on Fire" is a Strokes song + a good hook.

The Strokes are possibly the most one-dimensional band of the decade, with each song being a slight variation on the song that came directly before it. Plus shitty sounding drums and a singer who sings every song like a dirge regardless of its tempo.

They are this generation's "The Knack"?

the tunes on this album are good though. i once towed the standard contrarian line about how this was soulless hype, but it convinced me otherwise-- unlike forgettable "critic's choice" bullshit like, oh, let's say Burial, Shearwater, MIA, Dizzee Rascal, Fleet Foxes... oh god-- I could go on all day.

"last nite," but four or five songs are v v close (someday, is this it, modern age, NYC cops)

i wanna see these voting results disaggregated by voter-nationality. british people just cannot shut up about "hard to explain," which i think is relatively boring.

The Strokes are possibly the most one-dimensional band of the decade, with each song being a slight variation on the song that came directly before it. Plus shitty sounding drums and a singer who sings every song like a dirge regardless of its tempo.

Which is why they've made only three albums.

"hard to explain," which i think is relatively boring.

― 69, Wednesday, July 8, 2009 12:27 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark

i love every song on this album but this is probably my least favorite - never got the hype at all

there are soooo many bands this decade who are totally one-dimensional with each song being a slight variation on the song that came directly before it. i can actually tell the songs on this record from each other, which is more than i can say for a lot of those other bands.

Is This It completely and totally destroys any other rock album made this decade. People always talk about Loveless being the death knell of rock, but I nominate Is This It. When it was released, everybody was all like, "Awesome! Rock is back! The Strokes are gonna save rock and roll!" but it just didn't happen. For one thing, the album couldn't have been promoted any worse. It wasn't just the "NYC Cops" thing; the import was released like six months before the U.S. version, so everybody pretty much already got ahold of it before then, so it entered the charts at like number 75 or something like that and in next few weeks it couldn't meander any higher than I think 33. And instead The Vines (ugh) got all the hype and the "Rock Is Back!" Rolling Stone cover, but they fucking suck, so nobody cared. Then two years later, the Strokes themselves came back with Room on Fire, which if you ask me is right up there with Second Coming and La Cucaracha in the "Awesome! My favorite band just made a new album....... wait a minute! This sucks!" category. The end. Goodnight rock and roll!

Favorite song? I'd have to go with "Someday," because it's my preferred Is This It song to play to neophytes, who then get this odd look on their faces like, "You mean there actually IS some good new rock music out there??"

And please do not compare this fine album to the wretched Kings of Leon, whom I detest very much.

and tbh they switched up the sounds on some songs pretty successfully on 'room on fire' - 1251, under control, end is no end, the way it is - so i dont think it really matters that everything on 'is this it' sounds the same - it's their first album! - that's what it's supposed to sound like, basically

new entry in the snrub canon

what they really needed on subsequent albums was a new producer. Ric Ocasek might have been a good choice. I wonder what Steve Albini would have done to their sound.

How do people feel about Strokes v. Exploding Hearts?

Even in 2001, I didn't get what was such a revelation about this record (why it was "saving" rock). It's undynamic in every way, flat and lifeless and just a drag to listen to.

And the first two Kings of Leon albums are the same way, but I'll actually rep for the third and fourth ones. They're a much better band now than they were at the beginning.

this cover really is so fucked up, never saw this before

http://www.heavenly100.com/images/artists/the%20vines/rolling%20stone%20cover%20jpg

Strokes v. Exploding Hearts

Exploding Hearts by a bajillion light years!

they switched up the sounds on some songs pretty successfully on 'room on fire' - 1251, under control, end is no end, the way it is

I'll agree with this somewhat. Room on Fire is the best of their three albums fo sho.

BOUND, GAGGED and LOVING IT
The People Who Pay To Be Kidnapped

bound gagged and loving it hahaha xp

bound>>gagged>>>kidnapped>>>>>>>>>>is this it

I love the Exploding Hearts; they were full of great songs, lots of dynamic range, and fun teenage energy. RIP!
The Strokes are kind of a different band though; they are more understated and controlled. Certainly, this can be seen as a bad thing, but I choose to see it as music for a different mood.

Even in 2001, I didn't get what was such a revelation about this record (why it was "saving" rock)

Nobody said this seriously besides the crackhead designers of rock mag covers.

Also, WTF was up with the Television and Velvet Underground comparisons when The Strokes first popped on the scene? Couldn't be more rong

People always talk about Loveless being the death knell of rock

The kind of death knells that knock over straw men.

They are this generation's "The Knack"?

― Philip Nunez, Wednesday, July 8, 2009 7:23 PM (24 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

they wish

Bee OK, Wednesday, July 8, 2009 2:18 AM (17 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
Other messages have been posted since you last looked... Please review and if you want to change your message, do so before posting.

Also, WTF was up with the Television and Velvet Underground comparisons when The Strokes first popped on the scene? Couldn't be more rong

― Johnny Fever, Wednesday, July 8, 2009 7:49 PM (29 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

ummmm because they sound a lot like television, i guess.

i didn't understand the VU thing at all until i heard the pre-album version of "Modern Age" with the super Lou Reedalike vox, but the album itself not so much

ummmm because they sound a lot like television, i guess.

I don't hear it at all. Television is really wiry, and The Strokes have all the nuance of a cinder block.

A collection of fan responses to Is This It would make a dandy addendum to this thread:

Poll: Bandwagonesque v. Nevermind v. Loveless

yeah "the modern age" kinda has that muffled, methodical chug of early VU songs

they sound absolutely nothing like VU though; that comparison always seemed really lazy and misguided ('they're from NEW YORK!!!'), and i think it made people have wrong expectations about them. i don't remember ever hearing the strokes champion themselves as saviors of rock or whatever, but all the hype made us hate them all the more when they didn't do it-- even though they never claimed they were on such a mission. that's why it was hard for some of us to swallow "Is This It" without having some cultural prejudice about it, or want to hate it out of instinct.

yeah but, like i said, their first singles that got them all the early press had SUPER lou reed-y vocals, it's not some shock that set the tone for a lot of their coverage.

my local alt-rock station always plays the pre-Is This It version of "Last Night" and I just HATE the way it's sung on that version -- not real into Casablancas but he definitely toned down his worst tendencies by the time they cut the LP.

what does "lou reed-y vocals" mean? tuneless?

I was 27 when ITI was released and I liked it a lot – it made my top ten, and "Someday" and "The Modern Age" were always played at a Miami club called Revolver. I knew it was an accident: that they were a really good minor band with one more album left in them. Rooms On Fire turned out to be their Candy-O: they had their shit down. I don't want to hear them again but they summon good times.

idk, they sound enough like television to me. not hearing the similarities "at all" sounds like some narcissism in respect of small differences ish to me. it would be ok if they hadn't been hyped as a big deal, changing the face of indie rock (well, ok as in easier to ignore), but they were. they aren't bad, just really minor.

i don't get the VU comparison so much, but the television sound is pretty hard to ignore.

listen to the EP version of "Modern Age" and tell me he's not doing a straight up LR impression

'The thing that blew my mind first hearing the Strokes was that they were the closest I had heard rock come to classical,' she says. 'Their music is extraordinarily orderly and composed. It's almost

i guess to some extent sonically they're like Television, but TV was just so supple and jazzy and had such amazing little virtuoso moments even between the guitar solos, the Strokes are so steady and chug-chug-chug that i can't really think of those bands in the same category at all

not hearing the similarities "at all" sounds like some narcissism in respect of small differences ish to me.

Well I mean if you're counting the fact both bands share guitars, bass and drums, then yeah...I guess I do hear the similarities. I've never been a big Television fan either, but the comparison is apples to doo doo.

they're The Cars, dude.

not really, even after they openly courted that comparison on the 2nd album

listen to the EP version of "Modern Age" and tell me he's not doing a straight up LR impression

yeah, you got me there; at times it sounds ridiculously like Lou Reed. That was the first indication of any relation to VU I've ever heard. but yet, this VU shit still factored into nearly ever review I read of the album, which doesn't sound like this.

here it is for those of you who want to play along at home
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRZyKYOX0Cc

Oh dang, I'd forgotten how much more BANG the ep versions had of those songs. If they'd have released just that and then nothing ever again, I'd be on the other side of this whole argument.

seems to me like the main difference is the production

Yeah, the sound of the albums is a big part of why I don't like them much. They have the worst drum sound I've ever heard, ever.

Well, I'd wish you'd laugh a while longer, but it was nice to have a cordial enriching discussion while you weren't here.

It was fun learning Last Night with my band and realizing that I just play one chord during the intro and chorus. The parts of that song sound very weird individually

xp

omg the riff debate is back!! yesssss

yeah the "one chord" thing is everywhere on their first lp (I don't remember for the following ones).
like on "hard to explain" alone they use it during the pre-chorus AND the chorus !

someday

used to hate Last Nite when it was ubiquitous, now I love it and would probably be my vote

if only for the chorus

it's a fucking incredible song

honestly embarrassed to say I finally heard the album for the first time a couple of weeks ago. its good

+1 love this record

room on fire is good too. would have taken 10 more records in this same vein

first track got robbed. that sick bass line.