Melody Maker's review of Kula Shaker's "K"

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (125 of them)

b-b-but ... if i had cloth ears and liked that kinda stuff, i'd still know from NK's review that i was just gonna love the patronising retro stylings of mid-90s kula shaker.

Then you wouldn't know if they were good or bad, as that reviewer obviously would have slaughtered whoever tried the same thing, regardless of the quality of the songs.

For instance: Oasis and Stereophonics are doing virtually the same thing. But Oasis have written a bunch of truly magnificent melodies, while Stereophonics' melodies are mostly just crap, performed by a crap singer with an extremely annoying voice. That distinction will disappear in a review written by a reviewer who hates even the good stuff within that genre.

Geir Hongro, Monday, 24 September 2007 21:21 (ten years ago) Permalink

Does that mean that you can pretty much STFU about any and all music that isn't white-boy-melodies-r-us?

onimo, Monday, 24 September 2007 22:36 (ten years ago) Permalink

That distinction will disappear in a review written by a reviewer who hates even the good stuff within that genre

yes, absolutely: and i have been that reviewer. but then i'd far, far rather read someone monstering oasis/stereophonics/kula shaker/etc than i would listen to any of their music :)

i guess my point is that there's still journalistic validity in a completely biased review -- as long as it's entertaining and not just bile for the sake of it. (although, where kula shaker are concerned, i'd forgive anyone for bile for the sake of it.)

grimly fiendish, Monday, 24 September 2007 22:49 (ten years ago) Permalink

(reads this entire thread)

Yawn. ILX has gotten so boring lately.

Mr. Snrub, Monday, 24 September 2007 23:00 (ten years ago) Permalink

sign my petition to get a Geir Hongro quote into Bartlett's

ciderpress, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 01:40 (ten years ago) Permalink

i guess my point is that there's still journalistic validity in a completely biased review -- as long as it's entertaining and not just bile for the sake of it.

If I wrote a really entertaining and very biased review, slaughtering an otherwise critically acclaimed hip-hop album because it didn't have any great newly composed tunes and had way too little melody and way too much rhythm, then it would be really great and useful? For hip-hop fans even?

Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 09:57 (ten years ago) Permalink

High time we made a stand and shook up
The views of the common man
DJ'ss the man we love the most
Could you be, could you be squeaky clean
And smash any hope of democracy?
As the headline says youre free to choose
Theres an egg on your face and mud on your shoes
One of these days theyre gonna call it the blues

And anything is possible when your'e
Sowing the seeds of love
Anything is possible
Sowing the seeds of love

I spy tears in their eyes
They look to the skies for some kind
Of divine intervention
Food goes to waste!
So nice to eat, so nice to taste
Politician grannie with you
r high ideals
Have you no idea how the majority feels?
So without love and a promised land
Were fools to the rules of a government plan
Kick out the style: bring back the jam

Anything is possible when...

Sowing the seeds
The birds and the bees
My girlfriend and me in love
Feel the pain
Talk about it
If youre a worried man
Then shout about it
Open hearts
Feel about it
Open minds
Think about it
Everyone
Read about it
Everyone
Scream about it!
Everyone
Everyone
Everyone
Read about it
Read about it
Read it in the books in the crannies
And the nooks there are books to read

Dom Passantino, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 09:58 (ten years ago) Permalink

depends on your definition of 'entertaining' really.

To take your point slightly, what you really want in this situation is someone who can say "I really like white guitar based melodic poo, so understand me chillun, when I say that this Kula Shaker album is a pile of crap and even Cast are better"

sort of thing.. right?

(post certified sarcasm-free)

Mark G, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 10:01 (ten years ago) Permalink

To take your point slightly, what you really want in this situation is someone who can say "I really like white guitar based melodic poo, so understand me chillun, when I say that this Kula Shaker album is a pile of crap and even Cast are better"

sort of thing.. right?

Yes. (Except Cast isn't better) ;)

Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 10:09 (ten years ago) Permalink

How come you never see white guitar based melodic poo anymore

DJ Mencap, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 10:17 (ten years ago) Permalink

If I wrote a really entertaining and very biased review, slaughtering an otherwise critically acclaimed hip-hop album because it didn't have any great newly composed tunes and had way too little melody and way too much rhythm, then it would be really great and useful? For hip-hop fans even?

if it was entertaining then it would be entertaining. but i somehow doubt it would be.

stevie, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 10:57 (ten years ago) Permalink

oh come on, the work of geir hongro appearing in the national press would be entertainment enough surely.

acrobat, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 11:08 (ten years ago) Permalink

Remembering the horrible reign of the v similar Tom Cox as Guardian pop critic I can tell thee no.

Raw Patrick, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 11:33 (ten years ago) Permalink

Geir Hongro's Tribes Of Pop

DJ Mencap, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 11:47 (ten years ago) Permalink

If I wrote a really entertaining and very biased review ...

it might not be "great" or "useful", but if it was well-written and entertaining and made me laugh, or even get wildly angry, then yeah, job well done.

grimly fiendish, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 14:50 (ten years ago) Permalink

Geir Hongro, if all that matters is tune, why don't bands just play the lead melody one note at a time on a keyboard with no arrangement or production at all? Surely these indie bands you big up and love so much have a sound that adds to their appeal? For you anyway...

max r, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 17:20 (ten years ago) Permalink

Why would anyone listen to any of those Britpop acts when you could listen to any of the superior acts from the 60s and 70s that they ripped off? Pulp were pretty good, though.

max r, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 20:43 (ten years ago) Permalink

The tune isn't all that matters, it is just what matters the most. Plus the belonging chords matter just as much, which means it needs at least a backing instrument that is able to play chords.

Why would anyone listen to any of those Britpop acts when you could listen to any of the superior acts from the 60s and 70s that they ripped off?

Because the world needs new songs. Not the same old songs, but new ones. In the same style, but with new melodies. After a while, you get sick of humming the old songs, and you need new songs to hum.

Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 21:18 (ten years ago) Permalink

what happens once robert pollard has written a song with every possible melody? (eta: 2015)

ciderpress, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 21:23 (ten years ago) Permalink

Before anyone has managed to write a song with every possible melody, Sufjan Stevens has released a concept album covered every single American state. And with non-concept albums in-between even.

Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 21:42 (ten years ago) Permalink

"Because the world needs new songs. Not the same old songs, but new ones. In the same style, but with new melodies. After a while, you get sick of humming the old songs, and you need new songs to hum."

But why not new styles as well? What's the difference?

max r, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 22:35 (ten years ago) Permalink

Nothing wrong with new styles as long as the contain hummable songs. The new styles of the past 20 have been too much about rhythm and repetition though, not enough about melody and harmony.

Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 22:36 (ten years ago) Permalink

Plus entirely new styles are not needed. One should rather mix the styles already existing, creating new conglomerations of already known stylistic elements.

Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 22:37 (ten years ago) Permalink

Eh? Don't you think your criteria for what makes a song enjoyable or worthwhile is bit limited, Mr Grongo?

max r, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 22:40 (ten years ago) Permalink

It's the only criteria that mattered until 1920 in classical music, and until the late 80s in popular music.

Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 22:54 (ten years ago) Permalink

That's nonsense. Classical composers were always experimenting with different orchestral arrangements, new instruments, etc...
And there's been experimentation with production techniques in pop since at least the late 60s.

max r, Tuesday, 25 September 2007 23:03 (ten years ago) Permalink

I was going to send this thread around to some friends b/c of the interesting review but then the thread got derailed. still derailed i see.

Billy Pilgrim, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 00:45 (ten years ago) Permalink

That's nonsense. Classical composers were always experimenting with different orchestral arrangements, new instruments, etc...
And there's been experimentation with production techniques in pop since at least the late 60s.

But melodies were always an important part of 60s pop and 19 century classical music, even if there were other elements too the melody was always there at the bottom.

Geir Hongro, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 09:09 (ten years ago) Permalink

geir do you like harry warren?

Pashmina, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 10:43 (ten years ago) Permalink

i regret reviving this thread.

fucking geir.

-- That one guy that hit it and quit it, Monday, September 24, 2007 2:48 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Link

That one guy that hit it and quit it, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 10:46 (ten years ago) Permalink

Votes for imagebombing?

Dom Passantino, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 10:47 (ten years ago) Permalink

there should be a 'killfile last 100 posts' function

Just got offed, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 10:48 (ten years ago) Permalink

ilm has been silent for 17 minutes, as the LBZC plots its next move

Just got offed, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 11:09 (ten years ago) Permalink

http://www.scaredmonkeys.com/fun-images/PotKettle_small.jpg

roffle roffle, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 11:14 (ten years ago) Permalink

I couldn't find a .jpg of three pots and one kettle, sorry.

roffle roffle, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 11:15 (ten years ago) Permalink

TS mr idée fixe vs the holy trinity of lazy, adolescent snark.

(ha, xposts)

Pashmina, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 11:20 (ten years ago) Permalink

That looks like a Yello video that never was.

NickB, Wednesday, 26 September 2007 11:24 (ten years ago) Permalink

one month passes...

Personally I think their comeback album is indeed better than any of their two 90s albums. They have stripped away all of the "indie" elements and gone fully fledged hippie-pop with quite a hint of 70s softrock/pomp pop. Which fits them greatly.

Geir Hongro, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 01:55 (ten years ago) Permalink

I like "Tattva."

Mr. Snrub, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 02:28 (ten years ago) Permalink

four months pass...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqncFetwku0

Yeah, they sucked

Dom Passantino, Tuesday, 18 March 2008 23:18 (nine years ago) Permalink

I'm happy to say that KulaShaker never graced my stereo - I thought they were bollocks.

this DG guy OTM

DG, Tuesday, 18 March 2008 23:25 (nine years ago) Permalink

Mr Snrub OTM 2 posts ago

Noodle Vague, Tuesday, 18 March 2008 23:30 (nine years ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.