Stylus Magazine Reviews OWB

[BrotherLovesDub]

http://www.stylusmagazine.com/reviews/underworld/oblivion-with-bells.htm

Nick Southall, if you google yourself, and i'm sure you will, may you find this thread and realize at least one person on the internet thinks you're a giant douche. Any plans for a real job? Your review sucks ass.

"the problem at the heart of Oblivion With Bells; for all its tasteful craft, aesthetic unity and knowing winks to its makers’ history, it’s simply not very interesting."

and the Mike Skinner line again. did you read the forums here and then steal that line?

Nick Southall: Cock.

[gillenium]

Did you even read his review? He actually said some good things about the album. And how does not liking the album make him a douche? Explain that to me.

[BrotherLovesDub]

because i said so. opinions are like assholes and i'm hugely opinionated.

[Tom]

I agree with the review.

[BrotherLovesDub]

1. "twin bombshells of Second Toughest in the Infants and “Born Slippy,”
---- if you think STITI and Born Slippy were the artistic peak of Underworld you're ignorant.

2. "reduced to releasing web-only EPs and providing incidental music for ignorable British films"
---- the films were ignorable but to say they were reduced to doing web only eps and soundtracks is to be clueless to the sense of freedom and artistic exploration rick and karl experienced through those projects. giant festering infected douche is what i should have said.

3. "badly-dressed obscurity that typified their pre-techno reinvention circa 1992."
---- good point, well said.

4. "100 Days Off continuing in the exact same vein but perhaps with less direction."
---- i completely disagree that AHDO continued in the same vein as the prev. 3 albums and i think most fans with a brain would.

5. " rollicking, deranged assault of “Born Slippy,”
---- did you discover techno through Trainspotting? what was your first exposure to UW? Born Slippy? as i said, Giant Douche.

6. "wide-open plains of Joshua Tree"
---- oh, because Larry Mullen is on one song, i'll refer to another U2 album, that will be cool and tie it all together.

7. "sounds like nothing so much as Mike Skinner’s drunken, rambling dad caught in the early morning detritus of some ethno-disco gone wrong."
---- ring road sounds like Ethno-Disco? really? and you had to use the Mike Skinner line from some other clueless person on this forum?

8. "The immaculately produced pulses and scrapes of “Glam Bucket” get things back on track though, but also typifies the problem at the heart of Oblivion With Bells; for all its tasteful craft, aesthetic unity and knowing winks to its makers’ history, it’s simply not very interesting."
---- knowing winks? which sounds/lyrics etc. are knowing winks? you think Glam Bucket and the album in full is not very interesting yet you praise more than half the tracks? seriously, stick to reviewing shitty indie rock. you know fuck all about electronic music.

9. "it would be ludicrous to expect them to still be pile-driving dance-floor slaying bangers at us."
---- and yet, you follow up by pretty much slating them for not doing the very thing you say would be ludicrous. you're a fucking piece of shit reviewer on a shitty fucking website. do you actually get paid to write this shit?

10. "They now seem perpetually stuck in the ‘morning after’ phase"
---- really? you've seen them live? you don't understand that some artists seperate their live shows and studio productions? theres a place for everything. try seeing them live then condemn them for being stuck in the morning after phase. you fucking idiot.

11. you mentioned raving.

i rest my case.

[irons]

1. "twin bombshells of Second Toughest in the Infants and “Born Slippy,”
---- if you think STITI and Born Slippy were the artistic peak of Underworld you're ignorant.

He actually calls it the "cultural peak." I took that to mean the time when they were most popular.

I haven't listened to the album yet, but this is what I expected from a review of it. Underworld isn't for everybody, the same way high IQs aren't for everybody, right? ;) Ever since the so-called "cultural peak," hordes have been disappointed that the group doesn't crank out Born Slippy NUXX over and over again the same way so many other artists in the genre do. What I thought was bad about the interview is that maybe half of it of it speaks of the music itself; a lot of it seems caught up in criticizing cultural relevance or other, similar things. I don't think the guy is a "c*cksucker," but I also think his writing could be a lot better. I give him a C+.

[BrotherLovesDub]

y'know, i don't think he's actually a cocksucker/douche either but his review pissed me off. i'm sure i've pissed off others who would call me a fawning fan-boy or whatever. that's the joy of being able to freely post your opinions. if you can't anonymously call someone you don't know derrogatory names on the internet, the terrorists have won.

[gillenium]

if you can't anonymously call someone you don't know derrogatory names on the internet, the terrorists have won.

I'd have to agree with that one.

[joethelion]

f_ck that reviewer

totally agree w/ you BLD

...at least it got 4 stars in URB (or is it five... I forget how many stars albums get..)

[qirex]

I don't see what everyone is in an uproar about. It was actually a positive review, or am I missing something? The guy complimented the band numerous times and just said he misses the dance anthems which are much more interesting to him than these abstract/experimental pieces which they've been putting out recently. First, it was his opinion, and everyone has one. Second I don't see anything there really that should piss anyone off.

[joethelion]

b/c it's basically a completely uninformed review

C+ isn't positive

he sounds like one of those guys who think Tiesto is the coooooolest
and that Oakenfold is creating forward-thinking music



...or like those people who thought that Daft Punk only released "Discovery"

[idoru]

To be honest, I could give two shits if someones personal opinion differs from my own. I don't see the point in getting frustrated just because my views on a piece of music differ from someone else. But that's just me.
________
Gong Bong (http://glassbongs.org/)

[BrotherLovesDub]

i'm over being mad now. i just got my blaze on and can't even remember why i was upset to begin with ;)

i started out just wanting to post the link to the article. the thread on top was "insightful dutch article" and i thought i'd do a parody thread with this article but when i read the full text i couldn't help thinking the writer was an idiot. i strapped on the flame thrower and set the controls to 12. i never asked anyone to agree with me.

http://www.darktrain.org/dirty/forums/member.php?u=337

click that link, then select "Add BrotherLovesDub to Your Ignore List" on the right hand side.

problem solved.

[Tyler]

b/c it's basically a completely uninformed review

C+ isn't positive

he sounds like one of those guys who think Tiesto is the coooooolest
and that Oakenfold is creating forward-thinking music



...or like those people who thought that Daft Punk only released "Discovery"

Do you know who Nick Southall is? I'm not his biggest fan, but trust me, he is not "one of those guys who think Tiesto is the coooooolest". Knock him for whatever, but dude has cred, and for better or worse, 'was there'.

[jose m]

was where?:confused:

[hippy dave]

opinions are like assholes and i'm hugely opinionated.
would you say that you're the goatse of opinions? :D

[BrotherLovesDub]

would you say that you're the goatse of opinions? :D


:D :D

excellent

[the mongoose]

I think that if we take off our fan bias glasses we would see that this is how most average listeners will think of the cd.....it's NOT as classic as the "classics" were and if you didn't like UW before I don't think OWB will change that opinion. The guy was a little harsh and misinformed about a few facts, but I'm afraid he's mostly spot on. Besides, it's his opinion, and last time I checked he's free to have one. Who reads Stylus Magazine anyways?!:p

[ChemicaL]

Without getting into this whole "aggrevated" crap, the entire review is pretty decent and sounds pretty unbiased and authentic to say the least. He knows what he's talking about. Its a great album and definetly along the lines of their classics but its not really very interesting for this day and age. As almost all of their albums, I'll be listening to this one on a hazy day, great morning after or a tram ride in the rain. Radioheads new album... now thats interesting :)

[crank]

check the comments. I called him on the carpet on a portion of his article. He basically admited he'd only listened to it twice (thrice?) regardless. I'm sure he has loads of records to review and can only give cursory listens...which leads to the problem of "Critics". They don't really listen well. They can't. It's their job to review music. Unless you are really talented at reviewing, you don't hear the way John Peel or Tony Wilson heard...

crAnk!

[Flywaver]

I guess every track that will have the sound that is similar to U2s 'Where The Streets Have No Name' Intro..... “To Heal”’s wide-open plains of Joshua Tree space are nonetheless beautiful to behold.
But then thats Brian Eno's influence. U2s Unforgettable Fire has Eno's influence on the whole. As far as i am concerned he is a creative chap isn't he!?

[Cadevil]

I agree with the commets about the average reviewer...UW are now basically on the indie route and consequently have the "cult" following they have now...found here :)

but...I think that is what precisely makes their music interesting...it's different than 96% of everything else out there...

I found the review pretty strange...He spent most of the time bagging Underworld, but it seems like he liked most of the tracks...then called it boring.

[Cadevil]

Another confused reviewer...

http://www.thefinalword.co.uk/content/view/593/25/

Seems the press doesn't know what to make of these Hyde and Smith guys. These reviews sound like they want to like say they like the album...but are afraid to because it's not a true "techno" album and Underworld are a "techno" band..

[Cadevil]

I found this review interesting:

http://www.twistedear.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1206&Itemid=31

[taoyoyo]

judas on a moped... i'd hate to see the carnage if someone dared to give UW a really bad review. :D

(fair play though... i thought 'to heal' sounded like the intro to 'where the streets...' too... that's no slight, just an observation).

this is UW's 'song-album' as far as i'm concerned and so far i'm enjoying it.
(don't give is another Born-Slippy lads!)

[dubman]

holy damn
now i cant wait for when pitchfork casually tosses this album in the 6.0-7.0 area and continues to assert that underworld is, in so many words, irrelevant (although why people steadfastly ignore them while expecting the chemical brothers to have better longevity and growth completely eludes me, but whatever).
there will be paragraphs. literally, paragraphs, explaining why everybody is wrong in not taking a fanboy-ish amount of time (hint hint) to "get" an album from a band who doesnt do a bad job in alienating those who aren't totally understanding about their style (which is, as we love to say, completely unique).
basically most reviews come from critics who dont envelop themselves past a certain amount because they're writing for a broad swath of the music-listening demographic this album falls under. people not totally enamoured with underworld, who are just casually interested in this among a host of other things, are not going to be bowled over by this album. i'm not saying my friends are slave to critical opinion, but it's safe to say that the critical concensus of the album will probably echo the less than passionate sentiments of the more resonable. for them it'll be good, not great, and much better than a hundred days off, and they'll be content to let me have my fun with it.

besides, you guys dont know what a good review by pitchfork does anyway. people who, at best, only dabble in the genre will cluster all over it and start talking about why this particular 'electronica' record triumphs over it's inherently flawed contemporaries. lots of threads asking for albums similar to this as an attempt to get into a limited radius of the band's influence, JUST to get points for variation and "understanding". Then the avalanche of backlash, whereas you otherwise would have been left alone to enjoy it, the fact that it'd be getting so much buzz would piss people off so much, and they'd just have to say what a goddamned awful record it is, and etc.

i know none of that may matter in the big picture but it is such a headache because it'd all come from the reception and not much to do with the record itself. BLD would blow a gasket calling everyone names, each more offensive than the last, and die of high blood pressure, making his girlfriend very sad and selling his biro shirt on ebay. and i'd venture to guess that it'd throw some unecessary complications in R+K's decision to just do what they will.

but since none of that will happen it seems like it'll make good sales (there's a decent amount of hype anyway) and things will continue unabated by senseless noise.

[ChemicaL]

Another confused reviewer...

http://www.thefinalword.co.uk/content/view/593/25/

Seems the press doesn't know what to make of these Hyde and Smith guys. These reviews sound like they want to like say they like the album...but are afraid to because it's not a true "techno" album and Underworld are a "techno" band..

Seems like they're affraid to categorize it because it doesnt fit in with todays current & most popular genres. Its on a path of its own, thats what I like about it. Of course, your average listener or reviewer, for that matter, will not see it in the same light.

[thee carp dreamer]

point #1) i think this reviewer isn't a million miles off. the new album, apart from the first 4 tracks, is a bit shit. ring road is extremely shit. however, beautiful burnout and crocofdile are amazing. so c+ is probably right, considering this year, i would have given animal collective a- and battles b+.
point #2) pitchfork won't give this higher than 4.5. they just won't. and no one cares.
point #3) you just want everyone to love underworld. we are on an underworld forum after all. fact is, they will have to push harder to beat stiti, and i don't think they want to, cos they have nothing to prove.

underworld, lads, if you're reading, just do what you love. fuck reviews. whatever. xxx

[luminary]

(fair play though... i thought 'to heal' sounded like the intro to 'where the streets...' too... that's no slight, just an observation).


the work really well together :D

http://www.sendspace.com/file/34pbbv

[Ufotofu]

A bit off topic, but I don't understand all the hate on Ring Road. It's got a really uplifting chorus, and good musical flow overall. "Securrrrrity" is a bit rough, especially for the two times it shows up, but the rest of the track is gold. It's no "Beautiful Burnout", "Holding the Moth", or "Best Mamgu Ever", but there's something really refreshing about it.

Also, I was really surprised by how much UW improved "Holding the Moth", compared to the earlier versions of "Globe", a track I always found kind of sparse and boring. "Moth" has a much denser, more relaxing sound to it. If they'd including that bit of autotrader at the beginning, with the echoing "Citroen," it would have been perfect.

[dubman]

point #2) pitchfork won't give this higher than 4.5. they just won't. and no one cares.

True, but maybe a bit higher. they did stuff AHDO in the "decent" range, and this will obviously appeal to them more than that record did.

[matt]

i can't understand why anyone would get so upset just because their favourite band get's a bad review..i mean, so what?

and besides c+ is probably about right for this album, maybe b--

yes, it's a huge improvement over the rubbish that was AHDO but it's still a massive way short of scaling the heights UW reached with their first two albums

besides, music is an art and so enjoyment is subjective (i mean, some people genuinely think westlife make great music :eek: ) and that's what makes music forums etc such interesting places as everyone's opinion tends to differ. as this is an UW forum and populated mainly by UW fans (many of whom i have to admit do seem to see all of UWs output through rose tinted glasses) it's natural that the new album gets a better reception here than it will in general. i've seen lots of reviews for OWB and they alll seem to be either 3 or 4 star reviews which gives an average of 3 and a half stars and again seems about right

at the end of the day if you really love this album then who cares what other people think. get over it.

[Tom]

---- if you think STITI and Born Slippy were the artistic peak of Underworld you're ignorant.

No, you'd be right.

---- did you discover techno through Trainspotting? what was your first exposure to UW? Born Slippy? as i said, Giant Douche.

What does his first exposure to UW have to do with his opinion of this record? I guarantee that a large portion of your peers on this board discovered UW through Trainspotting. That's not to say they're any less a fan that you or I. You're being a douche.

11. you mentioned raving.

i rest my case.

Raving used to be awesome, don't hate.

He basically admited he'd only listened to it twice (thrice?)

I really don't think this should matter. If I'm not immediately engaged by a track it can go get fucked, because there's 100 other tracks out there that will engage me immediately.


WOOP WOOP!

[crank]

I really don't think this should matter. If I'm not immediately engaged by a track it can go get fucked, because there's 100 other tracks out there that will engage me immediately.


in my humble experience there have been masterpieces that i've listened to, that, on first listen, i hated.

not to say this is or isn't a masterpiece, but you just can't digest something in one listen if, of course, it's your job to listen. now obviously there are exceptions to all rules. I'm just saying that if you are a reviewer, don't give it a cursory listen.

[BrotherLovesDub]

http://www.hatebook.org/

i'm signing up to this new wonderful social network. you folks should too!

[the real stuff]

I passed OwB on to a friend who played it at a party, and apparently a lot of people really dug it. I'm more looking forward to how people react to this music, and less what the press have to say about an 'old techno group trying new things'.

[Future Proof]

I agree with the review. And actually I applaud the reviewer here -- that was a top-notch job of even-handed criticism.

[IsiliRunite]

I don't feel the record has as much charisma as the others, as in I could see some of it being released by any ambiguous artist. I'm not sure how this is true, but maybe a change in creative scenery/sobriety would help