|
Post by somedaysoon on Oct 18, 2011 0:37:49 GMT -5
pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/15944-noel-gallaghers-high-flying-birds-st/Oasis perpetually faced accusations of over-borrowing from rock history, unapologetically nicking words and melodies from the biggest groups of all time. But the band were also skilled samplers of rock'n'roll storylines, arriving in the early 1990s pre-equipped with that classic intra-band conflict, the singer vs. the songwriter. The tension between Noel and Liam Gallagher arrived with Oasis in the early 90s as a fully-formed rock drama worthy of Keith-Mick, Robert-Jimmy, and Rog-Pete, given added juice by shared genetics. With Chekhov's gun inevitability, their squabbles blew Oasis apart in 2009, with the final indignity of forcing Noel, the band's master architect, to quit his own masterpiece project via blog post.So here begins the familiar second act of the rock'n'roll story arc, the competitive-solo-record period. While Liam and the rest of Oasis got in the first punch (reforming and flicking Vs at their former bandleader as Beady Eye), Noel has launched his High Flying Birds "collective" with a premise that's also rock canon: who needs a frontman, anyway? Oasis history already gives Noel some credibility on that front-- by their second album, the guitarist was already taking lead vox duties on a hit single ("Don't Look Back in Anger"), and the notorious MTV Unplugged episode proved he could do just fine without his brother on the band's other material, thank you very much.
But for a declaration of independence, the self-titled High Flying Birds LP sounds awfully nostalgic for the good old days. Through most of the mercifully brief 10 tracks, Gallagher passes on the opportunity to use this new career chapter for either an Albarn-like experimental exploration or something stripped-down and personal. Of course, nothing in his career to date would suggest "stripped-down" is in Noel's vocabulary. His new band goes straight back to the widescreen aesthetic, with choirs, string sections, horn sections, and choruses aiming for the universal. Noel is still writing for the stadium-- it's the only audience he knows.
Keeping that in mind, a listener can forgive a lot of corniness, even as Noel tests the limits. At this point, it's almost endearing that he earnestly sees no problem starting a song with the lyric, "Hot time/ Summer in the city," and thinks the clunky "(I Wanna Live in a Dream in My) Record Machine" is an acceptable song title and hook. But the latter track also shows Gallagher can still tickle anyone who once took the kind of soaring-orchestra-and-guitar-solo bridge (think Slash emerging from a pool of water in the rain) seriously. If the emotional power of anthemic rock is quickly draining, Gallagher remains among the best conductors of the fumes.
Still, there are some intriguing ideas buried under the maudlin arrangements and verse-chorus-verses. Often, the most interesting parts of the songs float frustratingly on the periphery of the mix, as with the lap steel of "If I Had a Gun…" or the musical saw that eerily haunts both "The Death of You and Me" and "AKA… Broken Arrow". One place where that formula reverses promisingly is "AKA… What a Life!", which is built upon a stormy piano loop, filtered drums, and Noel's melancholic take on 20 years of stardom.
The song is a reminder that Gallagher might have found a more exciting solo path by revisiting "Setting Sun", the Oasis-related moment that sounds most vital in 2011 (and perhaps the inspiration for his upcoming collab with Future Sound of London side project the Amorphous Androgynous). But instead he chooses to make another MTV Unplugged statement that's equal parts self-sufficient and self-conscious, all but writing in Liam and the rest of Beady Eye drunkenly heckling from the balcony. Founding High Flying Birds on pretty much the same musical territory as his old band, where Liam's snide yowl will always win out over Noel's passable but pedestrian voice, is the album's critical flaw. Forever a slave to rock history, Gallagher feels like he's biding his time for the third act reunion rather than breaking from the well-trod path.
5.7/10 - That's nearly 3/5, so it's not too bad considering Pitchfork's general reluctance to score anything above 8.5.
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Oct 18, 2011 0:52:53 GMT -5
I'm surprised they reviewed it at all. I seem to remember them not even bothering with DGSS.
The write-up actually makes me wonder if it's possible they'll actually like the AA album. Same as all the review that criticize Noel for not experimenting enough. But that is probably an outlandish thought.
|
|
|
Post by Velo on Oct 18, 2011 1:38:59 GMT -5
Pitchfork likes Noel Gallagher. They've reported on his press conference, the whole lawsuit, etc. They always mention in Oasis reviews how good the first album is. They definitely are not into Beady Eye.
They gave the TCT gig a 6.2 and Time Flies a 6.0...and DOYS a 4.9 and everything else pretty low so this is actually a good score coming from Pitchfork. Pretty equivalent to the 3/5 scores we've been seeing.
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Oct 18, 2011 2:21:50 GMT -5
5,7 ? and why not 5.6 or 5.4 haha. they are funny people.
|
|
|
Post by BlueJay on Oct 18, 2011 3:08:47 GMT -5
I agree with one of the above posters, Rob Mitchum (the guy that wrote this review) is a fan of Oasis' golden era and Noel in general - he gave Stop the Clocks a pretty positive review. This review is pretty spot on in some parts, but he fails to see that the huge arrangements benefit songs like EOTR and TDOYAM.
The critism of Noel's voice as pedestrian compared to Liam's more exciting sound is not too far off the mark, although his voice is powerful on some songs it can become tiring and boring in some of the tracks on the latter-half of the album.
|
|
|
Post by Silence Dogood on Oct 18, 2011 3:12:27 GMT -5
basically a 2.5/5 review.... Pitchfork are a joke though so, i couldn't care less.
|
|
|
Post by deasy on Oct 18, 2011 4:08:15 GMT -5
5.7? Jesus, they must have really loved it so
|
|
|
Post by Sternumman on Oct 18, 2011 6:03:51 GMT -5
|
|
dion
Oasis Roadie
Posts: 362
|
Post by dion on Oct 18, 2011 8:07:35 GMT -5
Pitchfork is invalid because they gave The Masterplan 3.7, doesn't matter what they rate anything else until they address that.
|
|
putmeinmyplace89
Oasis Roadie
I live my life for the stars that shine
Posts: 208
|
Post by putmeinmyplace89 on Oct 18, 2011 9:47:31 GMT -5
considering this is pitchfork this is basaically a rave review..
|
|
putmeinmyplace89
Oasis Roadie
I live my life for the stars that shine
Posts: 208
|
Post by putmeinmyplace89 on Oct 18, 2011 9:49:09 GMT -5
also look at this review fairly, where i strongly disagree.. the reviewer is way more fair than pitchfork has ever been. nobody ever gets higher then a 7 on this site anyways.
|
|
|
Post by deasy on Oct 18, 2011 9:50:46 GMT -5
also look at this review fairly, where i strongly disagree.. the reviewer is way more fair than pitchfork has ever been. nobody ever gets higher then a 7 on this site anyways. I've seen many higher than 7 and a few 10s
|
|
|
Post by icebreath on Oct 18, 2011 9:52:00 GMT -5
also look at this review fairly, where i strongly disagree.. the reviewer is way more fair than pitchfork has ever been. nobody ever gets higher then a 7 on this site anyways. I've seen many higher than 7 and a few 10s on famous artists,bar radiohead ?
|
|
|
Post by Headmaster on Oct 18, 2011 9:55:47 GMT -5
Even if they had given HFB a 10, Pitchfuckers would still be shit anyway.
|
|
putmeinmyplace89
Oasis Roadie
I live my life for the stars that shine
Posts: 208
|
Post by putmeinmyplace89 on Oct 18, 2011 9:55:59 GMT -5
the reviews above 7 are saved for Radiohead, and Obscure artists that mix hip hop with scary computer sounds that wear tight pants and call themselves a brooklyn rock band
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2011 10:07:12 GMT -5
Shitfork media,
Read the fucking lyrics before critising them 'hot time, summer in the city'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2011 12:22:42 GMT -5
Maybe if he was a bit more lo-fi and looked like he was homeless, he'd get a 7/10 or a best new music.
|
|
|
Post by deasy on Oct 18, 2011 12:26:04 GMT -5
I've seen many higher than 7 and a few 10s on famous artists,bar radiohead ? Kanye Wests most recent album got a 10 I believe
|
|
|
Post by XTRMNTRSCREAM on Oct 18, 2011 13:05:47 GMT -5
the reviews above 7 are saved for Radiohead, and Obscure artists that mix hip hop with scary computer sounds that wear tight pants and call themselves a brooklyn rock band not true at all.
|
|
|
Post by space75gr on Oct 18, 2011 15:06:02 GMT -5
if that album was by a canadian underground artist it could easily have a 9,4/10 verdict from Pitchfork...but you know its Noel's new album...
|
|
|
Post by paulm on Oct 18, 2011 17:13:09 GMT -5
5.7 isn't that bad coming from Pitchfork
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Oct 18, 2011 22:14:09 GMT -5
Considering it is Pitchfork and how they hate Oasis for the most part, I see this as a good score. I think he will land a 7 for the AA album. That is more Pitchfork's taste. I'm just glad Noel didn't get a Jet style review. If anyone remembers they simply showed a monkey taking a piss. I imagine that is how they feel about Beady Eye too. pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/9464-shine-on/
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Oct 18, 2011 22:46:00 GMT -5
That was nasty!
|
|
|
Post by Headmaster on Oct 18, 2011 23:14:17 GMT -5
also look at this review fairly, where i strongly disagree.. the reviewer is way more fair than pitchfork has ever been. nobody ever gets higher then a 7 on this site anyways. BHN got a 7.9 on this site.
|
|
|
Post by manualex on Oct 18, 2011 23:22:10 GMT -5
also look at this review fairly, where i strongly disagree.. the reviewer is way more fair than pitchfork has ever been. nobody ever gets higher then a 7 on this site anyways. BHN got a 7.9 on this site. Yeah but it was before Oasis wasnt cool anymore(or cool to slag them for being themselves)
|
|