|
I said big, don't kid yourself
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
You brought up the big rubber and Irving, not me. Who is actually kidding themself? 
| | |
Okay, now you've confused yourself
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
what where am i
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
"if something is timeless it has no place in any era"
but it had to originate somewhere, right? dark side of the moon is timeless but it was still written.
| | | Album Rating: 5.0
Great review Sowing. Pos'd!
| | | Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off
Great review, but "decades"? They started in '98.
| | | Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
i don't think theres anything wrong with that part of the sentence... even objectively, think about it like this:
you can say something like: edgar wright has become the most exciting filmmaker of the past couple decades. (meaning basically: of all the filmmakers making films over the past few decades (making films way longer than EW has), he has become the most exciting (again, despite the fact that he's only been in the business for about a decade...)
my problem with that sentence, on the other hand, is this part:
Over time, Thrice have evolved...
The inherent redundancy of saying "Over time..." X evolves... it just reads sloppily imo
| | | Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
but it had to originate somewhere, right? dark side of the moon is timeless but it was still written.
yeah, obviously I won't dispute this. Again, I'm not saying it's wrong as written. I'm saying it's worded (i don't want to even say "poorly" because i feel like that would make the wrong statement) ... poorly.
It’s the same old Thrice that continues to give us something truly new which, in today’s era, is a gift that will never die.
im gonna try and break down what i mean...
It’s the same old Thrice that continues to give us something truly new
old Thrice
keeps giving us something new
this is an excellent idea to end the review with imo. it stands on its own as a great thought in a great sentence
which. . . is a gift that will never die.
the gift thrice has given us (of a remarkably diverse catalog) will never die
this is still pretty great, except for the minor technicality that gifts don't tend to die (unless they're like pets or something). Still, this has a point and it draws out your closing thought even further: old thrice has given us something new that is timeless.
Now, ask yourself: is this what you wanted to say? Because, and again, this is my opinion: everything above drives towards this closing thought directly, and without any muddled wording.
If the answer is 'yes,' then don't read any more of this comment... you should (if i've been clear enough) be able to see why "in this era" is unnecessary.
If the answer is no, then ask yourself why is it important, notable, or relevant to contextualize the release in "today's era"? Are you suggesting that Thrice's "gift" is somehow more timeless than say, Pink Floyd's "gift"? Presumably, neither "gift" will ever "die," so what difference does it make which era it comes from? The outcome is the same...
Now, what I think your overall point was here is that this sort of impact is uncommon for a modern band. In my opinion, this point comes through pretty well throughout the rest of the review... not worth muddling up that last thought to keep drilling it in
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
I love these (album and review).
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
Still haven't listen to this. Now is the time.
| | |
Very good review Sowing. I recall us agreeing on Beggars, so I hope this album is for me
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
Thanks for the boat loads of feedback academy, I actually do appreciate it...
I still don't see the merit in your claim that it doesn't matter when something "timeless" originates. I think the fact that The Dark Side of the Moon was written in the 70's is very important, but it is just timeless in spite of the restrictions of its era. Obviously, an album can't literally be timeless, it can only be timeless in its effect. And that's all I was trying to say about Major/Minor, even though I never actually used the word "timeless."
As far as that last sentence goes, I see what you are saying now. I didn't mean for it to sound like I was saying "the same old Thrice" (even though that's exactly how I worded it, so I understand your issue with it), I meant that the same band that has brought us past frontier-blazers such as Illusion of Safety and Vheissu continues to create music that pushes in a new direction. I re-read that last paragraph though, and I think it would flow just as well if I omit that last sentence...so i may just toss it out.
As far as the "gift" part, I didn't mean for it to be taken that literally, but once again, if I remove that last sentence, it won't even need to be debated.
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
"decades"? They started in '98.
I didn't mean that Thrice has been the best band for multiple decades, just that they are one of the most consistent to come out in the past few. I thought my phrasing was clear, but maybe not.
@omaha: thanks, yes we did agree on beggars. this is a bit better than that album IMO
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
Seems like a 3.5 to me.
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
That was my first impression too Spec, but it only took a week to climb to a 4.5. I got hooked on the lyrics and the meaning behind this album in general.
| | |
Fanboy, much? ;)
| | |
*PULLS OUT A BIG RUBBERY ONE*
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
Creeper, lol.
| | |
Did someone say Rubber Ducky?
Oh my bad...
| | | |
|
|
