Peter. Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 My first impression is not to like it. The intro is BHAR-esque "Thunderstruck" sound-alike and the song feels way too literal classic rock. Have to wait for the studio version, though. With the songs we've heard from this album, and the last two albums, it just feels like Muse are the world's most gifted imitators, channelling their current fancies in way too literal ways. Which sucks, because with Matt's songwriting gifts and their talent as musicians they could be so much more as their earlier records indicated. tru dat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 I agree with Sade. But the video from Newport made me warm up to the song a bit. I disagree. As I said before, it sounds to me more like what it would've been like if Muse had kept gradually progressing their sound from BHaR instead of experimenting with a grab bag of genres on the last 2 albums. How is it a progression from the BH&R sound? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 I agree with Sade. But the video from Newport made me warm up to the song a bit. How is it a progression from the BH&R sound? Well the verses sound very Absolutiony to me, and the solo and chorus while having some new things in there remind me more of BHaR than something completely out of left field. I'm sure the vocal distortion on the chorus contributes to it feeling more Musey to me, but that may or may not be on the album. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Another way I think about it is that I don't think I would've been shocked to hear this song if it was the first song released after BHaR, but I couldn't say the same for USoE and Uprising especially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattestro Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 My first impression is not to like it. The intro is BHAR-esque "Thunderstruck" sound-alike and the song feels way too literal classic rock. Have to wait for the studio version, though. With the songs we've heard from this album, and the last two albums, it just feels like Muse are the world's most gifted imitators, channelling their current fancies in way too literal ways. Which sucks, because with Matt's songwriting gifts and their talent as musicians they could be so much more as their earlier records indicated. Partly agree with this, the influences for T2L were way too obvious and most of TR felt like a collection of covers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hat Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Well the verses sound very Absolutiony to me, and the solo and chorus while having some new things in there remind me more of BHaR than something completely out of left field. I'm sure the vocal distortion on the chorus contributes to it feeling more Musey to me, but that may or may not be on the album. So something that reminds you of two previous albums sounds like a progression? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 So something that reminds you of two previous albums sounds like a progression? Did you read my second post? I explained further what I mean. Familiarity is a part of it, yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectrum IV Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 How is it a progression from the BH&R sound? It has BH&R's prominent major tonality, increasingly progressive song structures and stronger technical showmanship, along with an absence of the last two albums' reliance on non-core instruments as driving factors and T2L's tendency towards shorter, more simplified writing. I agree that so far, it sounds like they've jumped back onto the road BH&R would've let them down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Where does BH&R show "stronger technical showmanship"? And the fact that it's played on "core instruments" (assuming this means guitar, bass and drums) doesn't make it sound like a progression from BH&R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hat Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Did you read my second post? I explained further what I mean. Familiarity is a part of it, yep. Saying it wouldn't surprise you after BH&R doesn't exactly take away from my point that what you're saying is "Abso+BH&R=progression from BH&R". Especially not when Muse have shocked fans since album 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectrum IV Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Where does BH&R show "stronger technical showmanship"? TaB, MotP, Invincible, Assassin, Knights, Glorious. Arguably Hoodoo, though I think B&H still holds the crown for pretentious ivory bashing. And the fact that it's played on "core instruments" (assuming this means guitar, bass and drums) doesn't make it sound like a progression from BH&R. No but it marks a deliberate step away from the last two albums, which given the other reasons I gave, puts them back in the direction they were heading beforehand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 TaB, MotP, Invincible, Assassin, Knights, Glorious. Arguably Hoodoo, though I think B&H still holds the crown for pretentious ivory bashing. I don't see how those songs imply stronger tecnical showmanship than Abso. No but it marks a deliberate step away from the last two albums, which given the other reasons I gave, puts them back in the direction they were heading beforehand. But BH&R, alongside the proggy bits, also veered towards a poppier/more electronic sound compared to Abso and OoS. And Reapers is classic-rock inspired riffs over one another with a big wanky solo in between. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangeseas Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 I can see why you dislike progressive metal, if you call that a wanky solo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Saying it wouldn't surprise you after BH&R doesn't exactly take away from my point that what you're saying is "Abso+BH&R=progression from BH&R". Especially not when Muse have shocked fans since album 2. I don't mean that Abso+BHaR automatically equals progression. It's those familiar elements combined with new ones that contribute to making the overall feel of the song sound like more of a natural evolution of the Muse sound than most of the stuff on TR and T2L. And then there's Matt talking about going back to basics with regards to song writing and specifically calling out the last 2 albums as being different from that. Anyways as with anything else, it's just my opinion and I can understand those who disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 I can see why you dislike progressive metal, if you call that a wanky solo. Yeah well, it's wanky just for Muse standards, sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hat Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 I don't mean that Abso+BHaR automatically equals progression. It's those familiar elements combined with new ones that contribute to making the overall feel of the song sound like more of a natural evolution of the Muse sound than most of the stuff on TR and T2L. And then there's Matt talking about going back to basics with regards to song writing and specifically calling out the last 2 albums as being different from that. Anyways as with anything else, it's just my opinion and I can understand those who disagree. TR IS a natural progression from BH&R imo. BH&R had one foot in the music that was defined as "classic Muse", and another in random genres. Then came TR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 TR IS a natural progression from BH&R imo. BH&R had one foot in the music that was defined as "classic Muse", and another in random genres. Then came TR. I can see that. I guess I'm glad that they seem to be putting a foot back in the direction of the classic Muse sound. I'm really excited at the prospect of a cohesive album as opposed to a collection of singles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobiiiaaas Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectrum IV Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 (edited) I don't see how those songs imply stronger tecnical showmanship than Abso. Just to clarify before I elaborate, I said showmanship, not expertise. Two very different things. Anyway: TaB explodes into synth spam with a million harmonies before a massive wall of wailing and feedback; MotP sounds like someone plugged Matt's guitar into a pinball machine; Assassin has sixteenth chugging and fast, unstable thrash rhythms coming out of Dom's ass; Glorious has a few hundred guitars mashing together to create atmosphere; etc. Do you really think none of that is significantly "showier" than Abso? But BH&R, alongside the proggy bits, also veered towards a poppier/more electronic sound compared to Abso and OoS. And Reapers is classic-rock inspired riffs over one another with a big wanky solo in between. It didn't really rely on these external instruments and studio trickery to drive songs in live performances though. Something like Bliss, though the synth arps are a big part of the song, can be played with a simple arpeggiator and isn't a huge deal. Compare to something like Madness where Matt pretends to have his voice sampled; Follow Me where Morgan is doing most of the work (including Chris' parts) while Matt's kneeling on the ground; GL where Chris doesn't even play his part any more; Survival on the Rome DVD, where most of the vocals are playback; etc. It's less to do with daring to utilise "non-core" instruments, and more to do with the band getting lazy and complacent in their success, and relying on choirs, orchestras, electronics and a hefty dose of bullshit to make their songs interesting enough to listen to. And in writing this I have proven myself wrong, because BH&R makes use of the same bullshit. I'll shut up now. Edited March 21, 2015 by Espectro Cuatro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattestro Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 MotP sounds like someone plugged Matt's guitar into a pinball machine Best description ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Survival's vocals were mostly playback in Rome? This is news to me. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what that means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Just to clarify before I elaborate, I said showmanship, not expertise. Two very different things. Anyway: TaB explodes into synth spam with a million harmonies before a massive wall of wailing and feedback; MotP sounds like someone plugged Matt's guitar into a pinball machine; Assassin has sixteenth chugging and fast, unstable thrash rhythms coming out of Dom's ass; Glorious has a few hundred guitars mashing together to create atmosphere; etc. Do you really think none of that is significantly "showier" than Abso? Ok this I can agree with, at least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectrum IV Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Survival's vocals were mostly playback in Rome? This is news to me. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what that means. The choir was playback and he didn't actually hit the final note. They overdubbed the studio vocals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 The choir was playback and he didn't actually hit the final note. They overdubbed the studio vocals. Well that's disappointing if true. Did they do that just for the DVD or did they actually playback the final note during the performance itself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryoma-kun Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Well that's disappointing if true. Did they do that just for the DVD or did they actually playback the final note during the performance itself? Just for the DVD. Still a ridiculous thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now