|
| |
|
|
|
Review Summary: More of the same, but the same is still good In an age where even the slightest tweak to an artist’s bpm can spawn a new sub-genre, it becomes increasingly difficult to find a sound that will recognisably be your own. Explosions in the Sky are lucky in that regard, because people still trace those tinkling guitar lines and subdued chords back to the Texan post-rockers, regardless of who is behind the instruments. Producing a simple, effective formula was bound to attract some hangers on, but the inevitable surge has made something distinct and pure seem overdone, pedestrian and jaded. Well, for their new album, Take Care, Take Care, Take Care, Explosions in the Sky stick firmly to what they know, releasing a collection of six songs that meander through that familiar sound. It loses some immediacy due to its comfortable position in the band’s discography, but what becomes clear is the obvious faith Explosions have in their style. At times sounding like a relaxed jam session, Take Care, Take Care, Take Care makes no attempt to wow the listener, instead welcoming them in with each return.
The album title provides a neat clue to the content, as repetition takes a greater role here compared to previous efforts. Chiming guitar melodies recur with an almost hypnotic effect, whilst taught drum patterns help build and carry the motifs for minutes at a time. Eerie vocal samples underpin the sombre rhythms of ‘Let Me Back In’, adding a subtle layer of atmosphere, but the stabs of oh-oh-oh’s in ‘Trembling Hands’ quickly outstay their welcome. The lull and crescendo of old is still present, with ‘Postcards from 1952’ providing the most dramatic shift between the two, and some of the most energised music in the band’s career. Though short on surprises, Take Care, Take Care, Take Care rarely feels like a rehash of old material, but there are moments where things seem a little too familiar, as if lifted directly from older songs. Thankfully, these moments are enveloped in sprawling arrangements full of tenderness and confidence, leaving the overall vibe of the record intact. Explosions in the Sky might have returned with nothing new to say, but they repeat themselves with grace, and it’s good to have them back.
| other reviews of this album |
Iai EMERITUS (3.5)
Unquestionably the best album named Take Care in 2011....
craigy2 (3.5)
...
letsgofishing (3)
like the last album, but with a different name....
Volk23 (4)
With this album, Explosions in the Sky are both comfortable in their well-practiced style ...
Lambda (3.5)
Gorgeous, sprawling, and epic, Explosions in the Sky's latest may not break much new groun...
SeaAnemone (2)
Tepid Fizzling Situated Only Slightly Above Sea Level...
|
Will someone please give this man a contributor status ffs! Good job as always.
| | |
Explosions in the Sky are lucky in that regard, because people still trace those tinkling guitar lines and subdued chords back to the Texan post-rockers
I'm pretty sure it started with Mono, but I could be wrong
like a relaxed jam session
I'm not gonna dispute this at all because that would just be dumb... it's just that what sounds relaxed to some sounds lazy to me
are rarely feels like a rehash of old material
gonna disagree with that but then again you do a great job of illustrating why you think so...
nice review, I understand exactly where you're coming from, and thanks again for looking over mine.
Part of me can't help but feel like EITS are being treated so softly with this record (I'm tempted to make a huge generalization and say that post-rock is generally treated with kid gloves on sputnik... but I won't. OK I just did). Like I said, I understand where the people who do like this record are coming from... I just can't see this quality of an album that's such in the vein of their old work etc. being released by a different band in a different genre and getting a positive reception. Then again, maybe I should compare between genres.
| | | Album Rating: 5.0
post-rock is generally treated with kid gloves on sputnik
i also hate this
| | |
You hate that I said it or you hate that it's the case? ... can't tell if you agree.
| | | Album Rating: 5.0
im sorry (need sleep)... i mean i agree with you
| | |
omg pretty post rawk i luv mono
| | |
Well there is the mentality of, "if it sounds pretty then it's good,"
Xenophanes on human psychology...
Imo, post-rock shouldn't sound pretty, it should evoke strong emotions through the use of unconventional and powerful instrumentation. That's just my 2 cents.
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
really really good review. This is the one I agree the most with so far. The album is nothing shocking, but like you said, it's good at being what it's trying to be. Postcard From 1952 is my jam.
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
and I was ready to jump all over this shit for being "bad." I've always found EITS to be painfully overrated, and I thought this would be the same.
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
Someone's making a push for the Contributor title ;)
Pos.
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
I'm pretty sure it started with Mono, but I could be wrong
Yeah I think they might have been first, but in my experience the sound still gets attributed to these guys, on here and irl.
I'm not gonna dispute this at all because that would just be dumb... it's just that what sounds relaxed to some sounds lazy to me
It's sounded lazy to me at points. My opinion has gone up and down more than on any other album.
Part of me can't help but feel like EITS are being treated so softly with this record (I'm tempted to make a huge generalization and say that post-rock is generally treated with kid gloves on sputnik... but I won't. OK I just did). Like I said, I understand where the people who do like this record are coming from... I just can't see this quality of an album that's such in the vein of their old work etc. being released by a different band in a different genre and getting a positive reception. Then again, maybe I should compare between genres.
I think the kid gloves thing happens, but when people like bands it's pretty usual to cut them some slack. Sticking to a strict formula has never been an issue for me really, as I only look for innovation in certain bands/genres. It doesn't bother me, for example, when Maiden release another Maiden album. If anything, that's what I want. I doubt the EitS formula has decades of wear left in it, but there's still enough life to make it worthwhile. (that's how I feel today, anyway...) I've never gone much further than entry level post-rock, I just judge them on my opinions of instrumental music in general.
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
Well there is the mentality of, "if it sounds pretty then it's good," which is sort of where this falls. It's sweeping, and indeed pretty, which is why I believe so many are overlooking that this is a re-hash of re-hashed material.
Why the need to make assumptions about other people's opinion? I'm not sure what benefit this has to anyone. I mean, everytime I criticise a popular album I'm reacting to hype, and everytime I'm in agreement with the general consensus I'm a sheep. Now people have to be reduced to liking stuff because it's pretty? Even if 99% of all EitS fans did like them just because they were pretty, you'd still be robbing the 1% of their genuine, considered opinion. And how many people like Converge because they're brutal, or tool because they're really cool n shit? More than a fraction of their fanbase, I'd guess.
| | |
album title is so deep........................ not
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
I've always cared so much about album titles being deep. Shit keeps me up at nights.
| | | Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off
"Human Qualities" is mindblowing cuz it starts with a chill little jam, then it just completely stops(so rad), comes in with a cooler little groove guitar thing going, then arbitrarily sort of shifts into these heavy guitar drone sort of blasts that thunder for a little bit, but quickly fade away before overstaying their welcome
its just the chillest, most nonchalant thing and its awesome
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
great song
| | |
consider- I know exactly what you mean :| jaykay
| | | Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off
also i concur with everyone else on "postcards from 1952"
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
nice review. I pretty much agree. It's good but nothing new.
| | |
these guys are consistent
| | | |
|
| |
