It's got to 100 ratings already, and it's at a 4.
|
| |
Listened to the first few tracks, enjoyable, well-crafted stuff even if it doesn't really bring anything new to the table
|
| |
Based on your taste Mad, I'm sure you're bound to enjoy it.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
Grew a little. I'm well aware that this isn't the most expansive in terms of guitar tone, and other
bands have already thoroughly explored this sound - but it's just so well done for what it is. It's
also a good straight up rock record, which is a nice break from my usual "pretty and happy" indie
taste.
|
| |
derivative shite
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
harsh but ultimately fair
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5 | Sound Off
I've given this enough chances
|
| |
admittedly i've only heard 'figure it out' but that song is so up to its neck in that jack white 70s worship real rock shtick i have no inclination to hear the rest
trite af
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
join the NEW ROCK REVOLUTION man cmon
i hated that shit when the scene appeared like 10 years ago and it's no better now
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5 | Sound Off
The opener is pretty good but that's honestly as far as it goes
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
there's the odd DFA 1979 echo which is nice i guess
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
Trainwreck 1979?
|
| |
Yeah there are some definite DFA 1979 similarities
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
Never heard much from them except the new song
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
They're big in Canda though
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
People want more rock music and then when we get it you all call it shit.
|
| |
sorry matey :D
|
| |
this sucks and DFA 1979 is big in Canada yea can confirm cus band is better than this
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
There's always going to be a few people that think something is shit. The best albums in history even do. But the average rating doesn't lie.
|
| |
then how do you explain the 4.3 on larks' tongues in aspic :D
|
| |
|
|