| | | Ratings (13) |
Give your Rating |
| 3.5 great | Erwann S. STAFF | February 16th 24 |
i like my noughties throwback when it delivers me indietronica bangers like "Flex" or "Emily G". woo!
Bump |
| 4.0 excellent | IAmEverest | February 3rd 24 |
I actually really enjoyed this. Surprised everyone hates it honestly
Bump |
| 1.5 very poor | Gene Gol-Jonsson CONTRIBUTOR | February 2nd 24 |
Spectacularly ill-inspired album, where after a few tracks and a myriad of baffling production choices one starts to question whether the initial influence driving the band to make this was actually there to begin with. Is this a 00s throwback or does my brain just try to cling to any moment of familiarity, cause everything else just sounds like the most haphazardly constructed drivel. At least if the tunes and the performances were at all resembling the -presumably- tongue-in-cheek attitude the band is going into this with, but alas it ain't so. A baffling blunder this early in the year is not a good sign of things to come.
Bump |
| 2.5 average | ajcollins15 | January 31st 24 |
Not quite sure what the UK-based crank wave band had in mind when creating their sophomore record. Courting veers away from their crank wave roots, delving straight into a 2000s-style Indietronica and post-punk revival sound, which unfortunately doesn't do justice to the band. Additionally, the vocal editing on this record is downright annoying. That being said, if you're a fan of the 1975, you might find this somewhat appealing, as it dabbles in similar ideas. Despite the missteps, it's evident that the band had fun making the album, and there are a few memorable moments scattered throughout.
Bump |
| 2.5 average | iGuter | January 29th 24 |
The band?s second album has a pleasant and fun tone overall; but seriously lacks the growth or experimentation that was so infectious compared to their debut album. I won?t write it off as a bad record, there?s a lot of good jams in here (?Emily G? more specifically); however, this was a chance to hear the band evolve further, which would?ve been more engaging than some of the same-sounding tracks or odd auto-tuned vocals.
Bump |
| 2.0 poor | Zac124 | January 26th 24 |
This was extremely disappointing. Not only was their debut great and showed a lot of promise but some of the instrumental work here is really strong but the vocals are heavily autotuned killing the hooks and songs. The autotune isn't even used well once on the album. The only song here that doesn't rely on autotune is Flex and it is by far the best song here.
Bump |
| 1.0 awful | anat CONTRIBUTOR | January 26th 24 |
| 1.5 very poor | doofy | January 26th 24 |
| |
Give Your Opinion on New Last Name
|
