Thrice Major/Minor
» Back to review

Comments:Add a Comment 
Deviant.
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


31153 Comments


I said big, don't kid yourself

Digging: Banks - Goddess

TomArnoldsArmpit
September 21st 2011


3009 Comments

Album Rating: 3.0

You brought up the big rubber and Irving, not me. Who is actually kidding themself?

Deviant.
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


31153 Comments


Okay, now you've confused yourself

TomArnoldsArmpit
September 21st 2011


3009 Comments

Album Rating: 3.0

what where am i

SowingSeason
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


15968 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

"if something is timeless it has no place in any era"

but it had to originate somewhere, right? dark side of the moon is timeless but it was still written.

Digging: Maybeshewill - Fair Youth

FelixCulpa
September 21st 2011


1240 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0

Great review Sowing. Pos'd!

StrizzMatik
September 21st 2011


3188 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

Great review, but "decades"? They started in '98.

theacademy
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


28505 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off

i don't think theres anything wrong with that part of the sentence... even objectively, think about it like this:

you can say something like: edgar wright has become the most exciting filmmaker of the past couple decades. (meaning basically: of all the filmmakers making films over the past few decades (making films way longer than EW has), he has become the most exciting (again, despite the fact that he's only been in the business for about a decade...)


my problem with that sentence, on the other hand, is this part:

Over time, Thrice have evolved...


The inherent redundancy of saying "Over time..." X evolves... it just reads sloppily imo

theacademy
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


28505 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off

but it had to originate somewhere, right? dark side of the moon is timeless but it was still written.



yeah, obviously I won't dispute this. Again, I'm not saying it's wrong as written. I'm saying it's worded (i don't want to even say "poorly" because i feel like that would make the wrong statement) ... poorly.

It’s the same old Thrice that continues to give us something truly new which, in today’s era, is a gift that will never die.


im gonna try and break down what i mean...

It’s the same old Thrice that continues to give us something truly new

old Thrice
keeps giving us something new


this is an excellent idea to end the review with imo. it stands on its own as a great thought in a great sentence

which. . . is a gift that will never die.

the gift thrice has given us (of a remarkably diverse catalog) will never die


this is still pretty great, except for the minor technicality that gifts don't tend to die (unless they're like pets or something). Still, this has a point and it draws out your closing thought even further: old thrice has given us something new that is timeless.

Now, ask yourself: is this what you wanted to say? Because, and again, this is my opinion: everything above drives towards this closing thought directly, and without any muddled wording.

If the answer is 'yes,' then don't read any more of this comment... you should (if i've been clear enough) be able to see why "in this era" is unnecessary.

If the answer is no, then ask yourself why is it important, notable, or relevant to contextualize the release in "today's era"? Are you suggesting that Thrice's "gift" is somehow more timeless than say, Pink Floyd's "gift"? Presumably, neither "gift" will ever "die," so what difference does it make which era it comes from? The outcome is the same...

Now, what I think your overall point was here is that this sort of impact is uncommon for a modern band. In my opinion, this point comes through pretty well throughout the rest of the review... not worth muddling up that last thought to keep drilling it in

Ending
September 21st 2011


1909 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

I love these (album and review).

Spec
September 21st 2011


27167 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Still haven't listen to this. Now is the time.

Omaha
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


10185 Comments


Very good review Sowing. I recall us agreeing on Beggars, so I hope this album is for me

Digging: The Contortionist - Language

SowingSeason
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


15968 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Thanks for the boat loads of feedback academy, I actually do appreciate it...

I still don't see the merit in your claim that it doesn't matter when something "timeless" originates. I think the fact that The Dark Side of the Moon was written in the 70's is very important, but it is just timeless in spite of the restrictions of its era. Obviously, an album can't literally be timeless, it can only be timeless in its effect. And that's all I was trying to say about Major/Minor, even though I never actually used the word "timeless."

As far as that last sentence goes, I see what you are saying now. I didn't mean for it to sound like I was saying "the same old Thrice" (even though that's exactly how I worded it, so I understand your issue with it), I meant that the same band that has brought us past frontier-blazers such as Illusion of Safety and Vheissu continues to create music that pushes in a new direction. I re-read that last paragraph though, and I think it would flow just as well if I omit that last sentence...so i may just toss it out.

As far as the "gift" part, I didn't mean for it to be taken that literally, but once again, if I remove that last sentence, it won't even need to be debated.

SowingSeason
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


15968 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

"decades"? They started in '98.

I didn't mean that Thrice has been the best band for multiple decades, just that they are one of the most consistent to come out in the past few. I thought my phrasing was clear, but maybe not.

@omaha: thanks, yes we did agree on beggars. this is a bit better than that album IMO

Spec
September 21st 2011


27167 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Seems like a 3.5 to me.

SowingSeason
Staff Reviewer
September 21st 2011


15968 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

That was my first impression too Spec, but it only took a week to climb to a 4.5. I got hooked on the lyrics and the meaning behind this album in general.

Irving
Staff Reviewer
September 22nd 2011


7264 Comments


Fanboy, much? ;)

Digging: U2 - Songs of Innocence

Irving
Staff Reviewer
September 22nd 2011


7264 Comments


*PULLS OUT A BIG RUBBERY ONE*

SowingSeason
Staff Reviewer
September 22nd 2011


15968 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Creeper, lol.

RubberDucky
September 22nd 2011


221 Comments


Did someone say Rubber Ducky?

Oh my bad...



You have to be logged in to post a comment. Login | Create a Profile





FAQ // STAFF & CONTRIBUTORS // SITE FORUM // CONTACT US

Bands: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z


Site Copyright 2005-2014 Sputnikmusic.com
All Album Reviews Displayed With Permission of Authors | Privacy Policy