DISCLAIMER: The following blog post is a work of opinion. Any of the comments in this post about one song "ripping off" another song are not to be taken as serious allegations or statements of fact.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
It's another Showdown and this time, it's NOT about Cover Versions!
Ever noticed how some songs have remarkably similar riffs or chord sequences to others? How about those songs where you swear that there must have been a little bit of cheeky plagiarism involved? This blog post will examine whether the songs that may have creatively borrowed elements from others are greater than the original track they may be paying homage to/shamelessly ripping off.
Obviously, the original song deserves credit for being original and IF any of these songs are actually responsible for stealing, the thieves should be fucking ashamed. However, since I'm not absolutely 100% certain that any of these homages/rip offs are homages/rip offs, I'm going to judge each of the songs in these rounds as individual tracks linked only by similarities of varying magnitudes.
Right, let's get this started & hope I don't get sued!
ROUND ONE: Tom Petty vs. The White Stripes
Mary Jane's Last Dance - I love this song and wish I could hear the version that actually ends instead of fading out during the solo. Released for the first time on a Greatest Hits compilation in the 90's, this song about drugs, death or whatever you want it to be (according to guitarist Mike Campbell) stands toe to toe with some of Petty's signature songs in my opinion. The section of this song I'm comparing to the next one is a guitar riff around the 2:30 mark after the second chorus.
Fell In Love With A Girl - Some of you may be wondering why I picked this song as opposed to "Dani California" - Red Hot Chili Peppers, a song that actually gained notoriety after a radio station accused it of stealing the chord progression and vocal delivery from Tom Petty. Simply put, Jack White's vocal melody around the 45 second mark has always bothered me due to its similarity to Petty's guitar riff. Also, not that I'm fanning the flames or anything but a riff in "Blue Orchid" also first played around 45 seconds reminds me of the bassline from "Richard III" - Supergrass around 1:26 in...but that comparison is a little bit forced, even for me.
VERDICT - I don't think Jack White was paying homage to Tom Petty but I do believe White listens to Petty and has heard the song before. In my opinion, I believe White possibly borrowed the riff without realising but even if he didn't, I'd still award the win to Tom Petty for writing the better song.
ROUND TWO: Spirit vs. Led Zeppelin
Taurus - Still the subject of an ongoing court case, the opening acoustic guitar arpeggios do sound a fuck of a lot like the ones from Led Zeppelin's and quite possibly Classic Rock's most adored song. As far as the rest of the song goes, it's completely different to the rest of Led Zepp's track but other songs by Page and Plant do echo the psychedelic sound from this instrumental.
Stairway To Heaven - You might think the solo is overrated and you might think Led Zeppelin have created far better songs but come on, those first few notes are fucking perfect and the song deserves its place in Rock history for that AND Bonham's respective intros. It does sound a little stolen but at least the rest of the song stands apart. Just as well really, I don't want to hate Stairway as much as Robert Plant does.
VERDICT - OK, first of all, I believe Led Zepp did a bit of cheeky riff pinching. The fact that it sounds just tweaked enough to legally use makes me picture the band sat around a vinyl player with a guitar listening to Spirit thinking of ways they can get away with it, not to mention an entire fucking Wikipedia article dedicated to listing songs Led Zeppelin have creatively rearranged/covered. That being said, I'm giving the win to Led Zeppelin because we all know we'd rather rock out to "Stairway To Haven" over "Taurus", although I think Spirit deserve a writing credit at the very least.
ROUND THREE: Tommy Tutone vs. Bruce Springsteen
867-5309/Jenny - The song about a prostitute that ruined some poor sod's phone number. It took me a few listens to get into this track but it's reached the point now where I've created my own dance for the chorus involving a complex sequence of hand and finger movements. Anyway, I like this song & the chord progression that Springsteen copied. It's a standard little Pop Rock number, nothing else to say.
Radio Nowhere - This used to be the only Bruce Springsteen song I actually liked and then I heard the song that he fucking ripped off. You only have to listen to the first few seconds (which is all I ever recommend listening to of any Bruce Springsteen song as he usually hasn't opened his mouth by that point) to hear the similarity.
VERDICT - Springsteen's song came out in the late 2000's and by that point, you could argue that he'd made enough of a career to rely on greatest hits instead of stealing others. Plus, Tommy Tutone were actually honoured to have their only hit plagiarised by The Boss so for being good sports and writing a better song, Tommy Tutone get the win here.
ROUND FOUR: Queen vs. Muse
Bohemian Rhapsody - Widely hailed as Queen's best track boasting some of the most instantly quotable lyrics of any Classic Rock song. If I'm laying my cards on the table, I can take it or leave it. The first two and a half minutes before Brian May wakes up are too dull for me but once the song gets to the Wayne's World part, I'm hooked. In fact, it's that headbanging part with the epic riff that I believe Muse were heavily inspired by when they wrote their greatest song.
Knights Of Cydonia - I heard this song before Guitar Hero III: Legends Of Rock but I reckon it's fair to say that game made me fall in love with it...that and the music video. Either way, it's not as pompous as some of Muse's other material; it's just a great Rock song that also features vocal harmonies during a section with minimal music before building up to a climactic final section lead by a heavy riff. I wonder where they got that idea...
VERDICT - Unlike previous songs, it's not a specific riff or chord progression that Muse reworked into their own tune. It's more a case of them being inspired to borrow the same structure from another hugely popular Rock hit which, in my eyes, is more of them taking inspiration than writing a homage or rip off. Also, I easily prefer "Knights Of Cydonia" so the win goes to Muse.
ROUND FIVE: Rod Stewart vs. Wolfmother
Every Picture Tells A Story - Fun fact, my girlfriend and I actually made this "our song". Unlike her though, I'm not a big Rod Stewart fan. I find his voice a little grating but I'll admit that it fits bloody well in this song. Great mix of instruments and notable for being one of the few, if not only, songs I can think of that introduces the chorus in the outro fade out. It's also a fine song to drive to, provided you find the right roads on a warm summer afternoon.
Best Of A Bad Situation - Christ, where do I start? You may remember I briefly compared this to Rod Stewart in my recent review of the new album but once you actually dissect it, the similarities just keep on coming. The sudden introduction of vocals and the acoustic melody? Referencing falling in love with Asian culture? "Spent some time feeling sore" as opposed to "inferior"? "She wouldn't give me the time of day"? Even the song's title references a line in Rod Stewart's track ("Make the best out of the bad, just laugh it off"), come on!
VERDICT - If Andrew Stockdale comes out and says the comparisons are coincidental, he's full of shit. There are far too many references to "Every Picture Tells A Story" for this to be an accident but at the same time, I wouldn't call it a rip off. It sounds like he's tried to write an unofficial sequel to that song and is either banking on people not knowing enough about Classic Rock to get away with it or is hoping those who have heard it have positive connotations with it and enjoy it even more as a result. Either way, it's a win for Rod Stewart purely on the basis that Rodders did this song first, even though I do like Wolfmother's track a lot.
ROUND SIX: Killing Joke vs. Nirvana
Eighties - A punchy example of early Pop Punk before the rise of Green Day and the like. It's a good track, although a little repetitive for me to enjoy it as much as other hits of the time. I'm surprised they managed to drag the song out for nearly four minutes, if I'm honest. I guess that's what happens when you have a killer riff that will inspire a certain young Grunge frontman in years to come.
Come As You Are - "Hey Dave, reckon if I slow down the riff for this song and add a couple of notes here and there we could get away with calling it our own track?" That might sound like a bit of an unrealistic conversation but considering the band were aware of similarities between this song and "Eighties" before they released it as a single, I can't imagine it going any differently. Killing Joke heard similarities too and were rightfully pissed off at Nirvana for this plagiarism.
VERDICT - Oh, definitely Killing Joke. Even if Nirvana didn't directly steal the riff, they knew their song was too similar to "Eighties" and did nothing about it...well, they cashed in on it I guess but that was it.
ROUND SEVEN: The Gun vs. Judas Priest
Race With The Devil - You might know this better as a cover by Girlschool but the songs are still more or less the same, minus a few extra solos here and there. This song has a section around the 1:09 point where the guitars and brass play a few chords whilst the vocalist manically laughs. It's probably my least favourite part of the song but I'm bringing it up because there's another song that has a remarkably familiar sound.
Hell Bent For Leather - Remember that intro before the main riff that's also played before and after the solo? Remember how it sounds almost exactly like the chord progression in "Race With The Devil"? Well take my word for it, it does! I guess this is overkill but the first half of the riff that's played after Rob Halford sings "Hell bent, hell bent for leather" sounds a lot like the last quarter of the riff from "Stormtroopin'" - Ted Nugent too.
VERDICT - Whilst there's no doubt in my mind that Judas Priest took heavy inspiration from The Gun (especially since Judas Priest have actually covered "Race With The Devil"!), I do prefer "Hell Bent For Leather" as a song so Judas Priest get the win this round, although they also get a disapproving glare from me.
ROUND EIGHT: Eagles Of Death Metal vs. Pearl Jam
Speaking In Tongues - Solid riff, great solo, wacky vocals and a suitable finish. It's songs like this that make me like this band, even if their last album was dull. It was also released two years before the next song so it's probable that any similarities were unintentional...that being said, they still exist so they're suitable for this blog post.
World Wide Suicide - Same drumming, same fade-in intro and a hell of a similar chord sequence. Yes, both of these bands are Alternative and both of them probably have the same fans but is this a homage or rip off? In my opinion, it's neither. Both songs are similar and that's about it.
VERDICT - Tricky decision. I actually want to give the win to both Eagles Of Death Metal and Pearl Jam for creating two great songs that sort of sound like each other. Before I move onto the penultimate round, I just want to give a quick shout out to the album "World Wide Suicide" comes from, also titled Pearl Jam. It's a fantastic Alternative album and whilst it's a completely different style of music to the Grunge tunes the band used to write, I would personally rate that record equal to if not higher than Ten.
ROUND NINE: Iggy Pop vs. Jet
Lust For Life - One of the few well known Iggy Pop songs that isn't terrible and even then it gets repetitive pretty fast. It's still great to listen to the first couple of minutes though, especially that drum rhythm paired with the bass.
Are You Gonna Be My Girl? - Admit it, you ALL saw this one coming. Drum intro? Yup. Catchy bassline? Got it. Any other similarity? Well, there's not too much of them but come on, they couldn't have done much more to make you think of "Lust For Life" when hearing this song if they tried. They've also got another song called "She's A Genius" that sounds a hell of a lot like "My Sharona" - The Knack so this band don't have the best reputation when it comes to coming up with "original" music, even if they do have a bunch of other songs.
VERDICT - I like both songs but I only dislike Iggy Pop's music having listened to one of his double disc compilation albums (I'm indifferent to Jet's). Personal opinions aside though, I do prefer the Iggy Pop song so he gets the win. Plus, his came first and whilst I'm sure Jet didn't actively copy "Lust For Life", their lack of creativity resulted in writing a song sounding just like it.
ROUND TEN: Lynyrd Skynyrd vs. Blackfoot
Free Bird - We all know how the solo goes for "Free Bird" by now, right? We all know those first few notes and most of us will probably know how the rest of the solo goes too. The guitar duel builds up as the song progresses with each musician giving it their all to create one of the most iconic guitar solos there will ever be. You'd have to be a fool to try and copy it and pass it off as your own.
Highway Song - This is Blackfoot's obligatory 7+ minute epic that all Southern Rock bands worth their salt have to record. However, the difference between this and "Fall Of The Peacemakers" - Molly Hatchet or "Ramble Tamble" - Creedence Clearwater Revival is that those songs don't copy the solo from the most well known Southern Rock epic of all time. You listen to the first few notes of "Highway Song" after the vocalist stops singing and tell me Blackfoot had no idea what they were doing when they wrote that track. Still not convinced? Listen to the rest of the solo and count the number of times you think "This sounds like Skynyrd".
VERDICT - I love both songs but Jesus, you'd have to be fucking crackers to think I wasn't giving this one to Lynyrd Skynyrd, not just for coming first but for creating the better song. Admittedly, I enjoy the softer half of "Highway Song" more than the softer half of "Free Bird" but there's no contest when it comes to the main event.
Do you agree with my comparisons? How about ones I've missed? If there are any songs you think were subtle homages or just plain rip offs of others, let me know on Twitter or in the comments. Next time, I might review the new Anthrax album or I might come up with another random post like this. I haven't done a video game one in a while so I might have a go at one of those soon. Either way, there's stuff in the works!
Friday 26 February 2016
Saturday 20 February 2016
Heavy Crown - Last In Line
Sorry guys, still no Hidden City review. Instead of choosing an album I preferred to review like I did last week, I've done the exact opposite and reviewed one that I strongly disliked. Oh, and I probably won't review it next week either so don't hold your breath...in fact, that's a pretty solid summary of Hidden City in itself. Anyway, time for this slightly longer and arguably less positive review.
At first, I had high hopes for this album, as would anyone who loves Heavy Metal. The original lineup to Dio (minus the awesome vocalist/guy the band was named after, of course) writing and recording a new album together after 30 years or so. It should've been fantastic, as Holy Diver and The Last In Line (the album this band have named themselves after) are great and I don't believe that it was Ronnie James Dio alone who made those albums what they are...at least, I didn't until I listened to Heavy Crown.
Kicking off this damp record is "Devil In Me", a limp opener that starts off with promise but rapidly becomes a flop as soon as the drums come in. The way I see it, there are two ways you can make a slow Metal song. You can either make it epic by adding powerful drums, thunderous guitar riffs and maybe some accompanying strings OR you can make it flat and hope the riffs or lyrics are catchy enough to be enjoyable. This song does neither, making it a mediocre track but an appropriate album opener as the rest of the album follows the same patterns.
Most of the songs sound like they could've been salvaged if there was someone in the band with a suitable creative vision but I'm guessing that person was supposed to be Vivian Campbell, the guitarist who joined Dio after most of the best songs on Holy Diver had been written. I'm not saying he's a bad songwriter and I would never call him a bad guitarist but he's definitely no Ronnie James Dio when it comes to making iconic Metal. It's pretty clear after listening to this album and reading through his discography that he's aged into more of a Hard Rock guitarist, especially with songs like "Burn This House Down" that contain a minimal amount of guitar throughout the verses or "In Flames", a bonus track placed halfway through the album for some fucking reason.
There are some good points though. At least Campbell's guitarwork is still tight, albeit uninspired and unlikely to win any new fans of the genre. Also, new vocalist Andrew Freeman has the right kind of rough pipes for a Metal album and recently deceased bassist Jimmy Bain did the job of Hard Rock/Metal bass player well, although he was no Steve Harris or Geddy Lee. I'm aware this isn't really something that should influence the album's quality in a review but it should be said that this band haven't released a stupid amount of special editions of this record either, so this isn't just a cynical cash grab. They actually wanted to release a collection of their music for people to enjoy but were sadly held back by themselves.
The tragedy in this is that literally getting the band back together, especially one as notable in the world of Metal as Dio's old band, can only set expectations high. I don't believe that they wanted to exploit this reunion to get better sales, as I've barely heard this album being publicised in comparison to other comeback albums such as Def Leppard's Def Leppard, but it doesn't do them any favours. As I said before, there are tracks that are almost great like "Orange Glow" and "I Am Revolution" but just lack that spark that sets them apart from superior modern Heavy Metal revival bands like Jake E. Lee's Red Dragon Cartel. If I had to blame one singular factor for this, I'd point the finger at Vinny Appice.
His drumming sounds soulless and restrained, even during faster tracks such as "Martyr" and "Already Dead", resulting in an album that lacks any of the power that proper Metal deserves. However, I could also blame the album's average sound on the overall depreciation in Campbell's creative and technical talent but I feel like he's done quite well considering he beat cancer not that long ago. Maybe this is an album that grows on you over time but judging by the straight forward nature of each track and complete absence of any Prog Metal elements, I reckon it's a safer bet to assume this is just a dud record and not a future classic in 20 years.
Just to reiterate, Heavy Crown is a solid effort. The band have tried and I guess that's more admirable than if they'd accidentally created a better album by phoning it in. Sadly, I don't believe in a world where trying and failing deserves better praise than not trying and succeeding so I have to give this a rating of 3/10. I wouldn't even recommend this to Hard Rock fans who want to get into Metal as the songs are so bland that it's probably more likely to turn them off the genre.
Ironically, Last In Line's debut is probably their last in line as they're wondering whether they should continue without the bassist. Personally, I have no problem with that as I can't say I'm looking forward to any future release they may or may not produce unless they recruit a visionary bass playing frontman sent by God as reparation for taking Lemmy from us.
At first, I had high hopes for this album, as would anyone who loves Heavy Metal. The original lineup to Dio (minus the awesome vocalist/guy the band was named after, of course) writing and recording a new album together after 30 years or so. It should've been fantastic, as Holy Diver and The Last In Line (the album this band have named themselves after) are great and I don't believe that it was Ronnie James Dio alone who made those albums what they are...at least, I didn't until I listened to Heavy Crown.
Kicking off this damp record is "Devil In Me", a limp opener that starts off with promise but rapidly becomes a flop as soon as the drums come in. The way I see it, there are two ways you can make a slow Metal song. You can either make it epic by adding powerful drums, thunderous guitar riffs and maybe some accompanying strings OR you can make it flat and hope the riffs or lyrics are catchy enough to be enjoyable. This song does neither, making it a mediocre track but an appropriate album opener as the rest of the album follows the same patterns.
Most of the songs sound like they could've been salvaged if there was someone in the band with a suitable creative vision but I'm guessing that person was supposed to be Vivian Campbell, the guitarist who joined Dio after most of the best songs on Holy Diver had been written. I'm not saying he's a bad songwriter and I would never call him a bad guitarist but he's definitely no Ronnie James Dio when it comes to making iconic Metal. It's pretty clear after listening to this album and reading through his discography that he's aged into more of a Hard Rock guitarist, especially with songs like "Burn This House Down" that contain a minimal amount of guitar throughout the verses or "In Flames", a bonus track placed halfway through the album for some fucking reason.
There are some good points though. At least Campbell's guitarwork is still tight, albeit uninspired and unlikely to win any new fans of the genre. Also, new vocalist Andrew Freeman has the right kind of rough pipes for a Metal album and recently deceased bassist Jimmy Bain did the job of Hard Rock/Metal bass player well, although he was no Steve Harris or Geddy Lee. I'm aware this isn't really something that should influence the album's quality in a review but it should be said that this band haven't released a stupid amount of special editions of this record either, so this isn't just a cynical cash grab. They actually wanted to release a collection of their music for people to enjoy but were sadly held back by themselves.
The tragedy in this is that literally getting the band back together, especially one as notable in the world of Metal as Dio's old band, can only set expectations high. I don't believe that they wanted to exploit this reunion to get better sales, as I've barely heard this album being publicised in comparison to other comeback albums such as Def Leppard's Def Leppard, but it doesn't do them any favours. As I said before, there are tracks that are almost great like "Orange Glow" and "I Am Revolution" but just lack that spark that sets them apart from superior modern Heavy Metal revival bands like Jake E. Lee's Red Dragon Cartel. If I had to blame one singular factor for this, I'd point the finger at Vinny Appice.
His drumming sounds soulless and restrained, even during faster tracks such as "Martyr" and "Already Dead", resulting in an album that lacks any of the power that proper Metal deserves. However, I could also blame the album's average sound on the overall depreciation in Campbell's creative and technical talent but I feel like he's done quite well considering he beat cancer not that long ago. Maybe this is an album that grows on you over time but judging by the straight forward nature of each track and complete absence of any Prog Metal elements, I reckon it's a safer bet to assume this is just a dud record and not a future classic in 20 years.
Just to reiterate, Heavy Crown is a solid effort. The band have tried and I guess that's more admirable than if they'd accidentally created a better album by phoning it in. Sadly, I don't believe in a world where trying and failing deserves better praise than not trying and succeeding so I have to give this a rating of 3/10. I wouldn't even recommend this to Hard Rock fans who want to get into Metal as the songs are so bland that it's probably more likely to turn them off the genre.
Ironically, Last In Line's debut is probably their last in line as they're wondering whether they should continue without the bassist. Personally, I have no problem with that as I can't say I'm looking forward to any future release they may or may not produce unless they recruit a visionary bass playing frontman sent by God as reparation for taking Lemmy from us.
Friday 12 February 2016
Victorious - Wolfmother
Two new albums of interest have been released in the last week via streaming services: Hidden City - The Cult and Victorious - Wolfmother. Rather than try to compare two clearly different albums without technically reviewing either of them, I've decided to focus this week's time and attention on the album that I actually preferred listening to. I may or may not review Hidden City but if you want me to, let me know.
It's fair to say I was already excited for this album after listening to the first two tracks released from it but now I've given the whole thing a listen, I'm glad to say my excitement was well founded. Victorious is exactly what you should expect from a Wolfmother record and fits right in with the band's short but strong back catalogue. Distorted guitar? Fuzzy bass? Heavy drumming? Apocalyptic organ riffing? Falsetto vocals? That's five checks!
Unfortunately, despite bigging it up in that opening paragraph, the album starts off on a fairly weak note in the form of "The Love That You Give". Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad track. It's solid, yes, but not spectacular or powerful enough to warrant the first place on the tracklist. To me, this 4th record is the band's triumphant return to making Wolfmother albums (even if it is mostly Andrew Stockdale, but then wasn't that always the case with Wolfmother?) and after hearing "Victorious" again, that would've been a far more suitable album opener.
It's punchy both musically and lyrically, it's got the classic galloping rhythm and it has enough epic riffs to challenge the average Black Sabbath song. It's the perfect way to announce to the world that these Aussie bastards are back, not a two and a half minute filler track that could've been omitted from the album without any real decline in overall quality. Luckily, that's the only major problem in my eyes although I should probably address something that most music snobs will consider a flaw when applied to this band.
Their "sound".
For some reason, Wolfmother get an unjustified amount of shit for sounding like a 70's retro act. Personally, I feel like that's an easy label to pin on the band and scathing comparisons between some of Wolfmother's better known songs and Hard Rock tracks from 40 years ago tend to be tenuous at best. Their music may be based around heavy riffs and falsetto vocals but those are just two staples of Rock music that the band happen to use; that argument could be applied to practically any modern Rock band with the right tropes at your disposal.
Also, why is it bad to sound good? It's like teenagers calling those older groups "Dinosaur Bands". Guess what? Dinosaurs are fucking awesome.
The reason I bring this up before I get too off-topic is because this album isn't just cheap nostalgia for fans cursing the fact that they were born too late to see Led Zeppelin in their prime. In fact, some of the songs are downright modern, reminding me of what I'd imagine The White Stripes would sound like if they were actually awesome ("Baroness") or the kind of contemporary-Alternative tune you'd hear during the credits of an award winning bittersweet Indie flick ("Pretty Peggy"); the latter of those two examples being a welcome break from the clashing drums and dynamic guitars but hardly experimental by the band's standards when you remember songs like "Vagabond".
I've always felt like Wolfmother were influenced by 70's styles but the actual sound of their music is a great blend of old and new. There are tracks on this album that may borrow inspiration from RBR (Riff-Based-Rock) or Classic Rock artists such as Budgie or Rod Stewart ("The Simple Life" and "Best Of A Bad Situation" respectively) but if you travelled back in time with these tracks on vinyl and played it for someone in 1976, it'd be like showing a Victorian shopkeeper a copy of Alan Moore's Watchmen.
Aside from one relatively forgettable psychedelic Hard Rocker ("Happy Face"), the rest of the album consists of songs that could've easily been written and recorded during any of the previous studio sessions, which is great news for fans. Overall, the album also feels more focused due to the slightly reduced number of tracks. The hit-to-meh ratio is stronger and if Stockdale decides to take another lengthy break and gradually release practically every song as a single like he did with the band's debut, I reckon he could get away with it based on the radio-friendly nature of each track.
At this point in the band's career, I think it's fair to say you know if you like Wolfmother or not. Victorious isn't a turning point in the band's sound or quality of written material but if you've bought the album because you know you like Wolfmother's music, you won't be disappointed with what you get. If I had to rate this for Wolfmother and Hard Rock fans, it's an easy 9/10. If you listened to "Victorious" and "City Lights" and liked what you heard, the rest of the album will almost certainly be right up your street as well.
However, on a non-personal and purely neutral level, the quality of this music doesn't push any boundaries or have the same wow factor that earlier tracks like "Woman" or "Dimension" did when they first dropped so I feel like rating it that high (or higher than critically acclaimed albums I've talked about on here in the past) pisses all over any kind of scale I use to score albums, hence my rating of 7/10. It's an album that rocks, plain and simple. It might not be perfect but it'll give me joy when listening to it, just like the first two albums and hopefully many more to come!
It's fair to say I was already excited for this album after listening to the first two tracks released from it but now I've given the whole thing a listen, I'm glad to say my excitement was well founded. Victorious is exactly what you should expect from a Wolfmother record and fits right in with the band's short but strong back catalogue. Distorted guitar? Fuzzy bass? Heavy drumming? Apocalyptic organ riffing? Falsetto vocals? That's five checks!
Unfortunately, despite bigging it up in that opening paragraph, the album starts off on a fairly weak note in the form of "The Love That You Give". Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad track. It's solid, yes, but not spectacular or powerful enough to warrant the first place on the tracklist. To me, this 4th record is the band's triumphant return to making Wolfmother albums (even if it is mostly Andrew Stockdale, but then wasn't that always the case with Wolfmother?) and after hearing "Victorious" again, that would've been a far more suitable album opener.
It's punchy both musically and lyrically, it's got the classic galloping rhythm and it has enough epic riffs to challenge the average Black Sabbath song. It's the perfect way to announce to the world that these Aussie bastards are back, not a two and a half minute filler track that could've been omitted from the album without any real decline in overall quality. Luckily, that's the only major problem in my eyes although I should probably address something that most music snobs will consider a flaw when applied to this band.
Their "sound".
For some reason, Wolfmother get an unjustified amount of shit for sounding like a 70's retro act. Personally, I feel like that's an easy label to pin on the band and scathing comparisons between some of Wolfmother's better known songs and Hard Rock tracks from 40 years ago tend to be tenuous at best. Their music may be based around heavy riffs and falsetto vocals but those are just two staples of Rock music that the band happen to use; that argument could be applied to practically any modern Rock band with the right tropes at your disposal.
Also, why is it bad to sound good? It's like teenagers calling those older groups "Dinosaur Bands". Guess what? Dinosaurs are fucking awesome.
The reason I bring this up before I get too off-topic is because this album isn't just cheap nostalgia for fans cursing the fact that they were born too late to see Led Zeppelin in their prime. In fact, some of the songs are downright modern, reminding me of what I'd imagine The White Stripes would sound like if they were actually awesome ("Baroness") or the kind of contemporary-Alternative tune you'd hear during the credits of an award winning bittersweet Indie flick ("Pretty Peggy"); the latter of those two examples being a welcome break from the clashing drums and dynamic guitars but hardly experimental by the band's standards when you remember songs like "Vagabond".
I've always felt like Wolfmother were influenced by 70's styles but the actual sound of their music is a great blend of old and new. There are tracks on this album that may borrow inspiration from RBR (Riff-Based-Rock) or Classic Rock artists such as Budgie or Rod Stewart ("The Simple Life" and "Best Of A Bad Situation" respectively) but if you travelled back in time with these tracks on vinyl and played it for someone in 1976, it'd be like showing a Victorian shopkeeper a copy of Alan Moore's Watchmen.
Aside from one relatively forgettable psychedelic Hard Rocker ("Happy Face"), the rest of the album consists of songs that could've easily been written and recorded during any of the previous studio sessions, which is great news for fans. Overall, the album also feels more focused due to the slightly reduced number of tracks. The hit-to-meh ratio is stronger and if Stockdale decides to take another lengthy break and gradually release practically every song as a single like he did with the band's debut, I reckon he could get away with it based on the radio-friendly nature of each track.
At this point in the band's career, I think it's fair to say you know if you like Wolfmother or not. Victorious isn't a turning point in the band's sound or quality of written material but if you've bought the album because you know you like Wolfmother's music, you won't be disappointed with what you get. If I had to rate this for Wolfmother and Hard Rock fans, it's an easy 9/10. If you listened to "Victorious" and "City Lights" and liked what you heard, the rest of the album will almost certainly be right up your street as well.
However, on a non-personal and purely neutral level, the quality of this music doesn't push any boundaries or have the same wow factor that earlier tracks like "Woman" or "Dimension" did when they first dropped so I feel like rating it that high (or higher than critically acclaimed albums I've talked about on here in the past) pisses all over any kind of scale I use to score albums, hence my rating of 7/10. It's an album that rocks, plain and simple. It might not be perfect but it'll give me joy when listening to it, just like the first two albums and hopefully many more to come!
Saturday 6 February 2016
Live Shows: Dos & Don'ts
Part of supporting your favourite bands comes down to seeing them play live whenever they go on a certain tour, whether it's to promote a new album or just to remind everyone that the frontman isn't dead yet. Most of the time, bands get it spot on. They come out, they rock the house and leave to play again another day. However, there are a few bands that manage to successfully fuck it up and it pains me to say that it's often the older bands that think they're too famous to make mistakes.
This blog post is designed to highlight the parts of live gigs that bands SHOULD and SHOULDN'T be allowed to get away with. As always, it's all opinion based but it'd be great if some bands guilty of the Don'ts take these on board before their next performance. Let me know if you're one of those bands or if you just agree/disagree with that I've said.
DO engage in banter with the audience between songs
It's not exactly the main reason people go to gigs but it's a great break in between songs if the band has a frontman with charisma. It can be as simple as telling them brief stories about songs or asking if any of them have been to one of their gigs before, as long as it's not just "Here's one of our songs. Here's another song. Thank you for having us. Here's our latest single". I would say that the banter should be kept outside of the songs but I saw The Darkness recently and they frequently stopped tracks to tell jokes and piss about with the audience. It actually made the show more entertaining than if they just came out and played a set, so I guess it can work on occasion. However, I doubt it'd go down well at a Genesis or Opeth gig.
DO pick a good warm-up band
I'm sure I've mentioned it on this blog before but I have a theory that only "old" bands have good warm-up acts. Any time I go to see a band that started around the 70's or 80's, they always get a great warm-up. Iron Maiden got Sweet Savage, Deep Purple got Cheap Trick, Judas Priest got Saxon. However, whenever I see a band that became popular within the last 10 years or so, the warm-up is ALWAYS terrible. The Darkness got some twats playing the same boring Blues song over and over, Tenacious D got an annoying cunt dressed as a Sasquatch who thought he was incredible, Muse got about three different Indie acts who rocked about as hard as a used snot rag.
I'm not saying that bands like Royal Blood could get AC/DC as their opening act but surely there are better bands than all the ones that seem to be picked. I should also mention that sometimes older bands do pick shitty warm-ups, like the one before Motley Crue and Alice Cooper. I suppose the message here should probably be Don't Pick Bands Your Kids Like/You're Mates With If They Sound Nothing Like Your Music.
DO play an encore
I suppose I should add "unless the audience fucking hate you" but assuming the show goes well and the audience give you well deserved applause at the end, an encore is a must for any headline act. Not sure how many songs to perform? It's always 2 or 3, but here's a handy guide detailing the quantity of tracks played and a translation of what it represents:
No songs/encore: "We couldn't be fucked to do the thing that's kind of expected from every band by now because we don't care about you as a paying audience".
1 song: "There, we've done your precious encore. Now fuck off so we can go home".
2-3 songs: "Thank you, have a great night! We certainly did!"
4+ songs: "We could've included these in the main show but decided to include crap off our recent albums instead and had to put a bunch of tracks you wanted to hear after the main show finished".
2nd encore: "AREN'T WE THE GREATEST BAND IN THE WORLD?! TELL US HOW GREAT WE ARE SO WE CAN MASTURBATE SOME MORE!!"
DON'T neglect fan favourites
I can understand the reasoning behind bands choosing to omit some of their signature songs after decades of playing them. However, these bands need to remember that some of their fans will be experiencing them playing live for the first time. Sure, the venue will contain seasoned concert-goers but some of those will be bringing their kids along and some of them may even be adults who have recently discovered their music thanks to Spotify or some other music streaming service. They may have better songs but part of seeing a band live IS hearing at least one of their big songs performed there in person.
Bands that decide to cut songs that audiences love to hear just because they're bored of playing them or want to swap them out for new singles that they're plugging have forgotten the main reason they're playing live in the first place, or at least the reason they should be playing. It's understandable if the band doesn't enjoy playing 30-year old songs anymore but I'm pretty sure they can stomach one song in a 90 minute set.
DON'T make the audience do all the work
We've all heard anecdotes about bands/frontmen who get the audience to sing along for the majority of the chorus, the kind of egotistical twats who can only get off when they hear a stadium full of fans chanting their name or lyrics. In fact, it's probable that most of us have been to those gigs. For me, it was a Judas Priest gig where Rob Halford sung literally none of "Breaking The Law". I paid to hear a talented Metal vocalist sing the song, not a stadium full of drunk wankers! Don't get me wrong, I have no issue with the vocalist pointing the mic towards the crowd every now and then, especially if the audience are as loud as the band anyway. My problem is vocalists who do it for every bloody line.
DON'T get cute with your performance
I'll admit that I could be in the minority here but when I see a band live, I want to hear them playing the song off the album. I don't want to hear them playing a new solo, I don't want to hear them trying something new with the vocals and I definitely don't want to hear a fucking acoustic rendition just so the drummer can have a piss. There are some examples where adding some backing vocalists or maybe speeding the tempo up slightly can improve the song but when bands actively think "Hey, let's try something different with this one" and experiment by mixing another song into the middle of it (e.g. Whitesnake covering Deep Purple's "Burn" with "Stormbringer" clumsily wedged in the middle or David Coverdale/Glen Hughes screeching "AH! AH! AH! AH!" before the solos), it sounds less like a band performing for a crowd and more like a band performing for themselves so they don't get bored.
Coming soon: REVIEWS! There's quite a few albums coming out this month so if you want to read lots of reviews on here, keep checking back every weekend! If you want me to write other posts, request some on Twitter or the comment section!
This blog post is designed to highlight the parts of live gigs that bands SHOULD and SHOULDN'T be allowed to get away with. As always, it's all opinion based but it'd be great if some bands guilty of the Don'ts take these on board before their next performance. Let me know if you're one of those bands or if you just agree/disagree with that I've said.
DO engage in banter with the audience between songs
It's not exactly the main reason people go to gigs but it's a great break in between songs if the band has a frontman with charisma. It can be as simple as telling them brief stories about songs or asking if any of them have been to one of their gigs before, as long as it's not just "Here's one of our songs. Here's another song. Thank you for having us. Here's our latest single". I would say that the banter should be kept outside of the songs but I saw The Darkness recently and they frequently stopped tracks to tell jokes and piss about with the audience. It actually made the show more entertaining than if they just came out and played a set, so I guess it can work on occasion. However, I doubt it'd go down well at a Genesis or Opeth gig.
DO pick a good warm-up band
I'm sure I've mentioned it on this blog before but I have a theory that only "old" bands have good warm-up acts. Any time I go to see a band that started around the 70's or 80's, they always get a great warm-up. Iron Maiden got Sweet Savage, Deep Purple got Cheap Trick, Judas Priest got Saxon. However, whenever I see a band that became popular within the last 10 years or so, the warm-up is ALWAYS terrible. The Darkness got some twats playing the same boring Blues song over and over, Tenacious D got an annoying cunt dressed as a Sasquatch who thought he was incredible, Muse got about three different Indie acts who rocked about as hard as a used snot rag.
I'm not saying that bands like Royal Blood could get AC/DC as their opening act but surely there are better bands than all the ones that seem to be picked. I should also mention that sometimes older bands do pick shitty warm-ups, like the one before Motley Crue and Alice Cooper. I suppose the message here should probably be Don't Pick Bands Your Kids Like/You're Mates With If They Sound Nothing Like Your Music.
DO play an encore
I suppose I should add "unless the audience fucking hate you" but assuming the show goes well and the audience give you well deserved applause at the end, an encore is a must for any headline act. Not sure how many songs to perform? It's always 2 or 3, but here's a handy guide detailing the quantity of tracks played and a translation of what it represents:
No songs/encore: "We couldn't be fucked to do the thing that's kind of expected from every band by now because we don't care about you as a paying audience".
1 song: "There, we've done your precious encore. Now fuck off so we can go home".
2-3 songs: "Thank you, have a great night! We certainly did!"
4+ songs: "We could've included these in the main show but decided to include crap off our recent albums instead and had to put a bunch of tracks you wanted to hear after the main show finished".
2nd encore: "AREN'T WE THE GREATEST BAND IN THE WORLD?! TELL US HOW GREAT WE ARE SO WE CAN MASTURBATE SOME MORE!!"
DON'T neglect fan favourites
I can understand the reasoning behind bands choosing to omit some of their signature songs after decades of playing them. However, these bands need to remember that some of their fans will be experiencing them playing live for the first time. Sure, the venue will contain seasoned concert-goers but some of those will be bringing their kids along and some of them may even be adults who have recently discovered their music thanks to Spotify or some other music streaming service. They may have better songs but part of seeing a band live IS hearing at least one of their big songs performed there in person.
Bands that decide to cut songs that audiences love to hear just because they're bored of playing them or want to swap them out for new singles that they're plugging have forgotten the main reason they're playing live in the first place, or at least the reason they should be playing. It's understandable if the band doesn't enjoy playing 30-year old songs anymore but I'm pretty sure they can stomach one song in a 90 minute set.
DON'T make the audience do all the work
We've all heard anecdotes about bands/frontmen who get the audience to sing along for the majority of the chorus, the kind of egotistical twats who can only get off when they hear a stadium full of fans chanting their name or lyrics. In fact, it's probable that most of us have been to those gigs. For me, it was a Judas Priest gig where Rob Halford sung literally none of "Breaking The Law". I paid to hear a talented Metal vocalist sing the song, not a stadium full of drunk wankers! Don't get me wrong, I have no issue with the vocalist pointing the mic towards the crowd every now and then, especially if the audience are as loud as the band anyway. My problem is vocalists who do it for every bloody line.
DON'T get cute with your performance
I'll admit that I could be in the minority here but when I see a band live, I want to hear them playing the song off the album. I don't want to hear them playing a new solo, I don't want to hear them trying something new with the vocals and I definitely don't want to hear a fucking acoustic rendition just so the drummer can have a piss. There are some examples where adding some backing vocalists or maybe speeding the tempo up slightly can improve the song but when bands actively think "Hey, let's try something different with this one" and experiment by mixing another song into the middle of it (e.g. Whitesnake covering Deep Purple's "Burn" with "Stormbringer" clumsily wedged in the middle or David Coverdale/Glen Hughes screeching "AH! AH! AH! AH!" before the solos), it sounds less like a band performing for a crowd and more like a band performing for themselves so they don't get bored.
Coming soon: REVIEWS! There's quite a few albums coming out this month so if you want to read lots of reviews on here, keep checking back every weekend! If you want me to write other posts, request some on Twitter or the comment section!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)