Silverchair are like the English Rugby Team.
Having achieved multi-million success in their early career, things have gone backwards apace for Silverchair like the England forwards in the face of another Southern Hemisphere assault. The latest offering from these Antipodean rockers is like an English back line move orchestrated by a non-existent fly half. The lack of ideas, energy and cutting edge is worthy of the Guinness Premiership in all its chest puffed out pomp. The riffs may be the size of Andrew Sheridan but they run up blind alleys with the pace of a Mike Catt line break. When, halfway through we are treated to the rhyming of day, way, say and grey you just wish that Silverchair were left to stew down under and that they took Farrell and his rugby league chums with them.
Â
Lumbering monoliths who have regressed whilst others innovate…its not the rugby I’m talking about here, Silverchair have as much chance of regaining the popularity they once enjoyed as England have of retaining the Rugby World Cup.
1%
Links
Silverchair [official site] [myspace]
September 19th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
one percent? Is this meant to be a joke?
Seriously… you need to actually listen to an album to review it or at the very least mention the name of a song.
September 19th, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Marge,
TLOBF is always on the look out for new writers so by all means if you fancy writing a few reviews then get in Touch. Its not as easy as you might think. Great when you get a decent album that gives you something to write about, but not so good when you are sent something that in every sense is a load of old cack.
Of course to form an opinion you have to actually listen to it in the first place, but lets face it if everyone enjoyed the same things life would be pretty forward.
September 21st, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Pretty vague criticisms. Would you like to substantiate them with any kind of informed opinion? The fact that you think the riffs are big (I think that’s what youre implying), and that there is a lack of ideas is proof you never really listened to the music anyway, but rather the band through your biased perception of them. 1%, eh? this “review” would be laughed out of any serious literary circle. If you want to give a negative review at least do it properly.
September 25th, 2007 at 5:36 am
“The lack of ideas, energy and cutting edge”, you have got to be kidding. the album, is infact, the exact opposite of that statement. i dont think i have ever heard an album with so many ideas executed as well as young modern.
silverchair wouldn’t want your 1%.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:40 am
This is a fantastic review, if only to serve as an example of flawed criticism, and “what not to do” in an Album Review. That 1% is hilarious, perhaps I had been taking your views too seriously; now I realise that these “reviews” you have here are just meaningless jokes.
Of course in the highly improbable chance that I am incorrect, and that your reviews ARE meant to constitute meaningful criticism – everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and clearly you enjoy being wrong.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:44 am
Calm down everyone; it’s a typo – Shawn Murtough just forgot the 00’s ;), and ignore the text.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:53 pm
Shaun – in answer to your “now I realise these ‘reviews’ you have here are just meaningless jokes”, surely you realise this is just one writers view on one album. How that influences all the other reviews on this site I struggle to understand.
One review does not a site make – whether that review is good or bad.
October 6th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Thank you for sharing!
November 5th, 2007 at 8:42 am
To Rich Hughes, I’m sorry that I’ve lumped everyone at this site under this review of ‘Shawn Murtough’, however I did assume you would have implemented some sort of quality control system – surely if a review gets published here it is because you deem it to be valid and of acceptable standard? So either you have not critically examined Shawn’s review, or you accept and/or share his views. Do you mean to say that the merit of a site such as this should be judged by ignoring its worst examples?
Please don’t go down the same path as Pitchfork Media…
November 5th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Shaun, I think it’s more down to the idea of Rich and Rich respecting that the writers are individuals who are giving analysis, opinions and critiques. The writers are on this site because both Rich and Rich think they are good at giving analysis, opinions and critiques. They don’t necessarily have to agree with all the views all the writers have, its more about finding value in the ability to elucidate how they view the album/artist in question.(I think, maybe).
I accept that Shawn Murtough has this point of view, I can understand someone may feel this way about an album, any album.
(In retrospect it’s quite funny how close England DID come to retaining the rugby world cup.)
November 5th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
“everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and clearly you enjoy being wrong.” – Shaun
It’s not even about being wrong or right, though. It’s an opinion, a subjective thing. Whether you agree or disagree with the way the reviewer thinks about music is what makes a criticism “valid”. There is very little science about it. (This is all my opinion, by the way. Also, sorry if it seems I am being a little aggressive towards you, it’s just something I feel strongly about.)
November 5th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
The people who’ve got an issue with this review should run off and seek out the Air Traffic review! But then again, I doubt they have any fans to jump to their defence…
In regards to this comment “So either you have not critically examined Shawn’s review, or you accept and/or share his views. Do you mean to say that the merit of a site such as this should be judged by ignoring its worst examples?”
Well – it’s really irrelevant whether anyone agrees with Shawn’s review or not. It’s Shawn’s opinion, and if he wants to talk about the Rugby instead of the music then thats fine by me – that in itself speaks a million words about how bad the music is..
November 21st, 2007 at 11:15 pm
I do mostly agree with Simon Gurney, however there is a limit to how far you can take ’subjectivity’. The more subjective a review becomes, the more irrelevant it is to the wider public. As Rich Thane said: “it’s really irrelevant whether anyone agrees with Shawn’s review or not” – does Shawn write these reviews for his enjoyment then, so the opinions of we readers do not count?
Also how can you possibly defend being ‘wrong’ with a claim of being subjective and opinionated? If I was to publish an editorial explaining my views on how smoking prevents cancer, the fact that it is only an opinion does not mean that being incorrect is any more ‘acceptable’ or ‘valid’. “Silverchair have as much chance of regaining the popularity they once enjoyed as England have of retaining the Rugby World Cup” – but of course, I have the benefit of hindsight do I not?
Finally, all this talk about opinions etc. does not remove the fact that this review is just plain badly written. The only actual mention of any aspect of the music in Young Modern is the complaint about the rhyming of ‘day, way, say and grey’ – as much as I would be impressed by the rhyming of daytime, path. speak, and grey – alas that is not how ‘rhyming’ works.
Really, Shawn Murtough isn’t providing his opinions, he is just complaining. Too bad having to read through it isn’t much fun.
July 10th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
What a joke. I can’t even be bothered to point out the waste that is this review.