And the alarming thing is that it keeps happening - the scratchy fuzz across most of 'Shit In Your Cut', the warped hissing glitches of 'Pistol (A. Which would have been a nice touch if the sound remotely fit the rest of the mix, but really, they only serve to make the record sound a lot more rigid than it should. Continuing in the tradition of their last album, the production is still fairly polished, with cleaner textures and continuing the tradition of more baroque instrumentation in terms of horns and strings, but with some glitchier electronic effects, like the filmy static on the title track. So before I get to the subject matter of this album, let's talk about the instrumentation and production, where I'll probably have the most positive things to say about this album. Coupled with the layers of sarcasm and even less subtlety than usual, it's the sort of record that I end up appreciating a fair bit more than I actually like. I'm not going to say it's bad - in terms of composition, there's more going on that I like in comparison with their last record - but it's also a stiffer, slightly more predictable album that revisits a lot of themes Modest Mouse has already trodden well in the past and doesn't really add much to their usual blend of existential confusion and depression. So does Strangers To Ourselves hold up to their best? ![]() Yeah, I know I'm a little late to the punch here, but going through that entire discography in depth took a long time. But now, eight years later, we have a new Modest Mouse album and I'm finally getting a chance to cover it. Well, from that, Modest Mouse seemed to drop off the face of the earth, with only an extended EP in 2009 to mark any sort of progress. And the thing is that it wasn't bad music, it just didn't seem to have that same spark. ![]() To me, some of that trademark raw, fluid power had been eased back, even with the added talents of The Smiths' guitarist Johnny Marr. And sure, it was decent, but I don't know if it was the much cleaner production, slightly more commercial focus, or songwriting that just felt a few shades less sharp than their best, but it didn't click with me as well. Their 2007 follow-up, We Were Dead Before The Ship Sank, to their 2004 major break-out wasn't bad, taking a loose nautical theme for their typical brand of manic depression and confusion. ![]() That was the story of Modest Mouse, and it seemed like for four albums since their debut in the mid-90s they could do no wrong. Suddenly, you're not just critically acclaimed, but you have an earworm of a hit and dropping an album that goes platinum, something you never would have expected. And then somehow on your next album from said major label, a single somehow catches fire not just on rock radio but everywhere. There are a fair number of fans who prefer your sophomore release, but they can at least respect the cohesion and added polish that comes with time and more ambition. And your fans tense immediately - would you lose your sound in favour of something that was popular? Would you sell out?īut somehow against all odds, you use the major label influence and budget to only further refine your sound and improve the mix, and your newest release is even more critically acclaimed. And while they might be a little disjointed and indulgent on that first album, your second release cleans things up significantly, refines the storytelling, and ends up creating a critically acclaimed gem, one that actually manages to snag the appeal of a major label. You start out with a ramshackle, rough-edged sound that catches the ear thanks to solid melodic interplay and distinctive vocals, that's just enough to entice people to read your lyrics. It's the dream story of any indie rock band - well, at least the first half of it is.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |