So based on only the first 2 tracks, I would say that the Decemberists have reached that saturation point, where the songs are thematically and lyrically redundant to prior albums and the instrumentalization just becomes increasingly "accessible." (Even a couple guitar hooks are ones I have heard them use before.) There is a difference between having a signature style and just recycling the parts of you that were great. There's only so much reprocessing that can be done before you go from recycled to biodegradable to atomically unstable.
Way to go, folk-rock Weezer. At least you made more than 2 albums before you started eating your own tail.
I remember being blown away by the Billy Liar single. Which I bought on a whim at a Media Play, based entirely on the sweet cover. I remember the anti-folk instruments with his reedy, overinvolved house-of-cards lyrical constructs, and voraciously hunting down everything of theirs I could get my hands on, and constantly being astounded by his storytelling prowess. Catchy and fascinating and nostalgic and moderately educational. Maybe I'm just being a snooty music nerd (only the first two albums are really good, y'know?) but I defy you to listen to "the King is Dead" stacked up against, say, "Picaresque" and tell me a) that the band is the same, and b) that (conversely) you can't hear lyrical and musical redundancies. I think that sentence may implode from it's own convoluted double-negativism, but my point remains.
(At this point in the review I'm 7 tracks in, so if my ire continues to escalate, bear with me.)
Sounds different -more "accessible" (read: sellout), but what they keep is just more of the same rather than part of the whole. It is pretty catchy and overall enjoyable, but it only sounds -to me- enough like the Decemberists of yore to make me want to listen to one of their real albums.
No comments:
Post a Comment