Royal Blood
How Did We Get So Dark?


3.0
good

Review

by judgedeath2 USER (6 Reviews)
June 16th, 2017 | 52 replies


Release Date: 2017 | Tracklist

Review Summary: How did we get so tame?

When I reviewed Royal Blood 3 years ago, I was deeply enamored by a duo that took several elements of my favorite artists and was able to chop, grind, and blend them together in bombastic fashion. Clearly I was not the only one either, as the previously-unknown group went straight to the top of just about every chart they were tracked on.

So, what has happened in 3 years? The group themselves have lamented about the struggles of dealing with becoming a global near-overnight success and the pressures that come with it when writing a follow up album -- with big success comes bigger budgets, and bigger budgets mean even bigger production. Unfortunately for the duo, the production on How Did We Get So Dark? has sucked almost all the life of their songwriting. The raw aggression of the debut album has been traded for a smoother, more alt-rock sound that slides nicely down the ear canal, and as a result doesn’t engage the listener in the same way. Sadly, we also see the loss of some of the more creative songwriting, like the tempo change in “Loose Change” or the intro to “Out of the Black”, Royal Blood used a lot of these creative or surprise elements to keep the album fresh and interesting through its runtime.

While it seems like I have little good to say about Dark, this is quite far from the truth. Despite my disappointment with the overwrought production, there are still a number of tracks that make this a good album, and there's not really anything inherently bad here. “Hook Line & Sinker” and “Hole In Your Heart” are absolute bangers, and “Where Are You Now” sounds like a B-side from the debut album (this is actually a compliment). While I personally dislike the use of group vocals/overdubs used in various songs, “Lights Out” and “I Only Lie…” are still catchy tunes. The album’s closer, “Sleep”, is a slow-burner with a great riff that finally mixes up the tone and tempo a bit.

How Did We Get So Dark? is by no means a radical departure from the group’s debut, but the refinement and polish is an unwelcome addition to the group’s sound, rawness and grit was a big part of what made the self-titled album so engaging to listen to. Dark pushes further towards radio-friendly, and no longer demands that you crank the volume.



Recent reviews by this author
Bayside Acoustic Volume 2Foo Fighters Sonic Highways
Emarosa VersusRoyal Blood Royal Blood
The Title Making a Scene
user ratings (367)
3
good
other reviews of this album
Victor Silveira (3.5)
Hook, riff and sinker...

BlownSpeakers (2)
For the distracted listener that’s playing the album on shuffle, or perhaps, hearing snippets betw...

DoofusWainwright (0.5)
The UK's premier rock outfit (it says here)...



Comments:Add a Comment 
danielcardoso
June 16th 2017


11770 Comments


Fitting summary lol.

Pos.

AngryJohnny
June 16th 2017


1028 Comments

Album Rating: 2.5

They were always gonna go down the route of polishing their sound and making a tamer album.

Never saw these guys as the type to do anything surprising

LethalPaintball
June 16th 2017


1005 Comments

Album Rating: 1.5 | Sound Off

nice write up, great summery

TooManyFriends
June 16th 2017


3497 Comments


not really any reason to listen to this when the new '68 record exists

neekafat
Staff Reviewer
June 16th 2017


26188 Comments

Album Rating: 3.0

Thought this sounded a bit too much like the original tbh

Kalopsia
June 16th 2017


3384 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

i'm okay with that

GhandhiLion
June 16th 2017


17643 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

Listen to the new Royal Trux instead.

Sowing
Moderator
June 17th 2017


43954 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Picked this up in good faith because I absolutely loved their debut. I'm not expecting this to be as aggressive as that so I'm just hoping they add some cool twists and branch out their songwriting. Either way, this is 3rd on my list as I continue absorbing Fleet Foxes and Lorde.

LaughingSkull
June 17th 2017


860 Comments


I loved their debut and was very hyped for its follow up, but I was fully expecting this descent into mediocrity after hearing the promo singles. Put plainly, they sucked. I don't think I even did a repeat listen, at least not after the second time anyway.
I'll definitely make sure to at least listen to the tracks you specifically recommended though.

AsleepInTheBack
Staff Reviewer
June 17th 2017


10192 Comments

Album Rating: 2.0

Great review (though you could probably remove the "(I also expressed concern about this in my original review)"; reads quite clunky to me and out of place and pointless). Going to check this, but my expectations have certainly been tempered

theBoneyKing
June 17th 2017


24432 Comments


Always thought that band was pretty generic, the only thing distinguishing them is the gimmick of using bass instead of guitar.

GhandhiLion
June 17th 2017


17643 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

Its worth listening to

DoofusWainwright
June 17th 2017


19991 Comments

Album Rating: 0.5

This album is worse than the new Linkin Park. It's worse than the new Nickelback. It's worse than the new Incubus. It's worse than the new Papa Roach.



That isn't good.

GhandhiLion
June 17th 2017


17643 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

correct rating sir

StickFeit
June 17th 2017


2272 Comments


They get a 2 for the effort

Sowing
Moderator
June 17th 2017


43954 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Is this really that bad? I only heard one single and it was okay. Don't have the highest hopes right now.

GhandhiLion
June 17th 2017


17643 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

If you thought the debut was good then you will think the same for this.

StickFeit
June 17th 2017


2272 Comments


Well.. it just goes nowhere, there was no point in putting out this record.

It's just very bland

judgedeath2
June 17th 2017


81 Comments

Album Rating: 3.0

> not really any reason to listen to this when the new '68 record exists

Oh hot damn, this is good!



> It's just very bland

[x2]



It has very little personality compared to the s/t, last 3 tracks are solid though.





danielcardoso
June 17th 2017


11770 Comments


"If you thought the debut was good then you will think the same for this."

Have to disagree. Debut had good jams, this does not.



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





STAFF & CONTRIBUTORS // 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 2005-2023 Sputnikmusic.com
All Album Reviews Displayed With Permission of Authors | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy