Theneedledrop reviews BoC

bearhead · Post by **bearhead** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:37 pm

here's the review

What did you guys think about what he had to say?

In some aspects, I do agree that it is a pretty underwhelming album, but that the sound quality on it is immaculate. Personally, I think that they were inventive with what they created on this record, but it was just a lot less eventful than their previous albums. Some may even call it boring. I don't think so, but I definitely don't think this is the strongest thing they've ever made. *cough*Geogaddi*cough*

StarblazerUK · Post by **StarblazerUK** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:59 pm

I'm failing to see the "Underwhelming" side of things tbh.
I've so far enjoyed the album from start to finish on many occasions and I have also had it playing on my tattoo studio's, music system, to which many people have already commented on how nice and different it sounds...some who have and others who haven't heard BoC before.

I'd have probably been more disappointed if it was just a rehash with a view to only creating something similar to what they have previously gained popularity for.
This album is BoC...no doubt about it, and as it often is with great musicians treading new or different paths, marmite....love it or hate it haha.

ButterBalls69 · Post by **ButterBalls69** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:10 pm

this guy uses uses jump cuts in 2013. Nuff Said

riverz · Post by **riverz** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:14 pm

I don't understanding the "underwhelming." He's not the only one that's said that.

The listener is actually quite whelmed with this record. Perhaps he should spend less time editing and more time listening?

Moloch · Post by **Moloch** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:17 pm

Theneedledrop looks like a jerk.

The Telepathic Kid · Post by **The Telepathic Kid** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:21 pm

I'm biased since I've been a Needle Drop fan for about 4 years, I'm a regular on his forum and have supported him financially.

So don't go sayin what I say as following the herd, but to an extent I agree.

But I also disagree. Here, I'll break it down for you;

points I disagree on
- The beats are repetitive; I dunno how hard he listened but in a track like Nothing is Real, despite the rhythm not changing, there's all these subtle drum fills and change ups in between the beats.
- The album is what they've already done; I don't think this is at all what they've previously done, it's nothing like their previous work. It's like the dark side of TCH
- It lacks detail; this is their densest work yet, it's not detailed in melody sure, but in terms of being a soundscape, this is like ear porridge.

Points I agree on;
- The melody writing, this is something which seems to come up in every review, whether it be good or bad. This album lacks melody, full stop. Only tracks with melody are Cold Earth and Nothing is Real, and neither of those develop said melody.
This is an atmosphere and soundtrack-esque album, it's not about the melody. The arpeggios don't count as melody.
- The tracks do not progress, this also I agree with. At least they don't change up hugely, with Jacquard Causeway you do get layers of synths added, but no real song progression, and you can't really notice it without headphones. You don't get anything like the progression in Eagle in Your Mind, Sunshine Recorder, or Nlogax.

This dude DOES spend a lot of time listening to the albums he reviews, so don't go saying he doesn't spend enough time on it. You have to think about him (and all publications), they have an audience and have to deliver the review in an expected time else when they do print the review, it'll be irrelevant.
It's not their fault, it's the fault of the public wanting instant opinion at the time of release.

Overall in terms of reviews, I'd say the Pitchfork review is what I agree with the most.

Kathleen · Post by **Kathleen** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:34 pm

This might make me sound like a knob, but if you're not going to sit down, wear some headphones and really listen to TH, you're probably going to find it underwhelming. There is a TON of stuff going on in this record, but not a lot of it is immediately apparent. It doesn't have a lot of "woah cool! This is so catchy!" moments like other BoC releases.

The Telepathic Kid · Post by **The Telepathic Kid** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:40 pm

of course, but this is the age we live in.

An age of instant gratification and satisfaction.

People don't have time to do things any more, or at least say they don't, because they're too busy talking to people who are talking to people about tweeting people on facebook who are talking to people about getting drunk and partying, which is also time consuming.

the more I listen to Tomorrow's Harvest. the more I see it is an album for BoC fans, not for anyone else, really.

GeometricPish · Post by **GeometricPish** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:42 pm

Moloch wrote:Theneedledrop looks like a jerk.

Anthony Fantano actually comes across as a really nice guy in most of his vlogs. Perhaps you could refrain from personal attacks just because you don't agree with his opinion.

riverz · Post by **riverz** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:51 pm

The Telepathic Kid wrote: This dude DOES spend a lot of time listening to the albums he reviews, so don't go saying he doesn't spend enough time on it...

I don't know how much time he does or doesn't spend listening. I was only suggesting that maybe he should listen more. By definition, the album is anything but underwhelming. Whether or not you like it, you can't disagree with that.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter.

novayshun · Post by **novayshun** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:57 pm

It's only his opinion...

The Telepathic Kid · Post by **The Telepathic Kid** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:00 pm

riverz wrote: By definition, the album is anything but underwhelming. Whether or not you like it, you can't disagree with that.

that sentence doesn't make sense.

what is your definition of underwhelming?

noby · Post by **noby** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:17 pm

"I don't agree with his review, he sucks!"

You guys...

riverz wrote:By definition, the album is anything but underwhelming. Whether or not you like it, you can't disagree with that.

Lol what? Of course you can.

riverz · Post by **riverz** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:25 pm

The Telepathic Kid wrote:
riverz wrote: By definition, the album is anything but underwhelming. Whether or not you like it, you can't disagree with that.
that sentence doesn't make sense.

what is your definition of underwhelming?

noby wrote:"I don't agree with his review, he sucks!"

You guys...

riverz wrote:By definition, the album is anything but underwhelming. Whether or not you like it, you can't disagree with that.
Lol what? Of course you can.

It does make sense with the emphasis on the word under as I implied in my post. It's not my definition, it's the definition.

Whelming (Verb):
1. Engulf, submerge, or bury (someone or something): "a swimmer whelmed in a raging storm".
2. Flow or heap up abundantly.

There is a lot happening on the record, it has depth. Whether or not you like that depth or the things happening doesn't mean that it's underwhelming. My point is that it's a poor choice of words or simply misused, as it often is.

noby · Post by **noby** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:25 pm

The Telepathic Kid wrote:the more I listen to Tomorrow's Harvest. the more I see it is an album for BoC fans, not for anyone else, really.

I wouldn't agree with that since the response was very positive and it did (and still does) receive almost a universal acclaim across the board.

chorus · Post by **chorus** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:26 pm

He criticize them for not repeating their past albums but at the same time not reinventing themselves, ok

I really don't like this SNAP SNAP BOOM BOOM editing style going on, IT'S HOT HOT HOT. Christ, put your hands down, and listen to the record a few more times.

noby · Post by **noby** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:37 pm

riverz wrote:It does make sense with the emphasis on the word under as I implied in my post. It's not my definition, it's the definition.

Whelming (Verb):
1. Engulf, submerge, or bury (someone or something): "a swimmer whelmed in a raging storm".
2. Flow or heap up abundantly.

There is a lot happening on the record, it has depth. Whether or not you like that depth or the things happening doesn't mean that it's underwhelming. My point is that it's a poor choice of words or simply misused, as it often is.

Well your problem is that's not what underwhelming means, it's rather "To fail to excite, stimulate, or impress". To some people it doesn't have depth. To some people who have listened to a broad spectrum of music it can be even shallow. Or it just might not be their taste. Just because the artist intends something doesn't mean every single listener needs to be as receptive to it as you are. I sympathize with Anthony in this case a lot, though not as strongly as he does.

chorus · Post by **chorus** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:40 pm

The Telepathic Kid wrote:
An age of instant gratification and satisfaction.

People don't have time to do things any more, or at least say they don't, because they're too busy talking to people who are talking to people about tweeting people on facebook who are talking to people about getting drunk and partying, which is also time consuming.

Nail on the head!

noby · Post by **noby** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:42 pm

chorus wrote:He criticize them for not repeating their past albums but at the same time not reinventing themselves, ok

I really don't like this SNAP SNAP BOOM BOOM editing style going on, IT'S HOT HOT HOT. Christ, put your hands down, and listen to the record a few more times.

He's saying it doesn't have the certain familiar elements he likes on their previous work and at the same time it doesn't bring any new elements to the table that he finds interesting or particularly well done. Come on people, if you're going to criticize actually listen to what he says and don't just read into it the way you like because you disagree...

Also, looking at his last.fm he seemed to listen to the album about 5-6 times.

fdamb · Post by **fdamb** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:52 pm

"borderline offensive" haha