Album Rating: 2.5

guess not.

Album Rating: 3.0

I "listen" to everything I hear... It's just a matter of if I get around to it. Or in this case; when.

Album Rating: 3.5

"Make it a Fleet Foxes weekend.





That would require trekking to Nepal & finding a hut in the middle of nowhere.

This album is not better than Fleet Foxes' debut. Maybe to someone's opinion but in terms of solid and actually good song writing; it isn't.

This is like Take That found a banjo and continued doing what they were doing for so many years...with a banjo. I genuinely can't understand why people possibly could think this is better than Fleet Foxes' self titled ablum. It's so over produced and poorly written, more accessible yes but that's it. Can someone give me a reason? =)

Album Rating: 3.5

Maybe you just answered your own question Stephen. I haven't heard FF's debut, so it's only conjecture, but maybe it's so inaccessible that some listeners never bother with delving into it further. I know I was like that with many albums before I started writing reviews, etc...

Okay yes but on a music website were almost all of us have no trouble with inaccessible albums; I'm surprised to see the album recieve more praise that FF's debut, which is wonderfully written, vocaly beautiful and more diverse (in song structure)

I'll never understand it thought. =/ I guess it's simply agree to disagree. =)

Bitches love this shit. Almost as much as they love skinny love by Bon Iver

I love when you read comments on Bon Iver videos saying.
"This is real music. No auto-tune B/S"

=) Very funny.

Album Rating: 3.5

Oh yeah... & "bitches love this shit". LOL.



" all of us have no trouble with inaccessible albums"

This also depends on the person & the genre. Please don't ask me to listen to black doom death metal.

That's true as well. I am a bit of a folk fan so I've come to expect some pretty raw stuff.

On the same boat as you too. Metal doesn't sit well with me. =/

Different strokes for different 'folks' (See what I did there?) I guess. =)
Still fully believe that Sigh No More is a worse album than Fleet Foxes.

Album Rating: 3.5

We are folks who will not put our pedal to the metal.

Hahaha brilliant Davey. =)

I can't top that, I won't even try.

Okay how the fuck is this band so big? I seriously don't understand how they're this big off of one release

I think it's that there are some teenagers (those who like Coldplay. Snow Patrol and so on...) use
Mumford & Sons' banjo wielding image as a way in being more in tone with their 'roots'.

The band's music is accessible enough for them to actually like and folky enough for them to parade
them as an influence of their roots and a rebellion against other pop music such as Lady Gaga and
instead claim it to be 'real music'. =)

Album Rating: 3.0

It's extremely likable and fairly deep, even though it follows this formula: http://i.imgur.com/myCLa.jpg. Banjo player's good, singer sings from the heart and, crucially, it's accessible music that is the most universal sigh from loss i have ever heard

It's odd that despite all the good elements; together it's just so underwhelming. It's like Disney folk.

you claim fleet foxes to have worked a classic with their debut and then consider this vapid youve lost me

Album Rating: 3.5

Here are the Fleet Foxes ->

























































































Here are Mumford & Sons ->

Yeah. Anyone with a taste in good music would easily consider Fleet Foxes a superior band to Mumford &
Sons. It's like comparing Radiohead to Snow Patrol. =)

Don't get me wrong though, if you prove to me the opposite I'll openly accept your opinion. =(
So far, all the compliments I've heard is that it's accessible...so.

Album Rating: 3.0

'I Gave You All' has more emotion in it than I've heard in any Fleet Foxes song. Also, there is a collective sigh that permeates every track on this album which is balanced by sick banjo lines never before meshed with an indie sound.