Switchfoot - "Hello Hurricane"

[murlough23]

I knew you were asking to systematically tear them down (well, I figured that would be the result anyway), so I didn't respond.  

Knowing that it's someone else's favorite will cause me to pay a little more attention to it, though. That has changed my impressions of songs in the past that I otherwise didn't notice or enjoy.

And I didn't tear down "Sing It Out". Couldn't find any fault with that one - it's not my favorite, but it's solid.

(Really, you thought I was just looking for reasons to be argumentative? I'm not that bad. I hope.)

[dgp11776]

Sorry to say, I didn't respond for the same reason.

[murlough23]

Sorry to say, I didn't respond for the same reason.

Man, I'm sorry for seeming like such a downer on everything. I don't even dislike the tracks that were mentioned; just thought they could have been better is all.

[bloop]

Well, that's not really all in my case.  I've explained myself well with some others where we've disagreed (YHF, Grizzly Bear, Sigur Ros).  I don't really think I'm as up to the task, strangely enough, with those things I like that are more conventional.

[murlough23]

I don't really think I'm as up to the task, strangely enough, with those things I like that are more conventional.

That's where I'm the most curious, actually. If it's somewhat conventional, and you like it more than I do, I must really be missing something.

[bloop]

From another thread:

bloop: It should probably go in the HH thread, but I'm still trying to figure out what you've noticed about this album that I haven't, given that you usually set the bar a lot higher in terms of expecting something unconventional.

To respond to that effectively, I would need to know everything you've noticed.  I don't require the unconventional, and this certainly isn't.  It seems authentic to me, and I had fun with it.  At the very least, nothing strikes me as vastly inferior to their other work I like. 

You might note, though, that I did rate it in the B column, which is basically where my favorite albums from this band so far have ended up (and where the best vanilla has to offer usually ends up as well).

[murlough23]

To respond to that effectively, I would need to know everything you've noticed.

That'll probably have to wait for my review, which will get written this month if I'm lucky.

I don't require the unconventional, and this certainly isn't.

I like for Switchfoot to try a few things each record that are unconventional, at least for them, and I think they've done it on every record, with varying levels of success. But yeah, this isn't experimental, challenging, indie music. It's quirky pop/rock, which is what they've always done best. Just a teeny bit more on the pop side. I would say that's what I like a little less about it, but TBL is their poppiest album and it is my favorite, so I don't know.

It seems authentic to me, and I had fun with it.  At the very least, nothing strikes me as vastly inferior to their other work I like.

I wouldn't characterize it as "vastly inferior" either. I probably expected more, so hearing a result that didn't throw as much of a curveball as I'd have liked might be the thing that's bugging me. It feels like a standard Switchfoot album to my ears. It's their first album as an independent band. I expected it to make more of a statement. (I feel that way about Jars of Clay's latest, too, though that one's grown on me over time.)

You might note, though, that I did rate it in the B column, which is basically where my favorite albums from this band so far have ended up (and where the best vanilla has to offer usually ends up as well).

I have it at a B minus. We're coming out in roughly the same place; you probably just came in with more reasonable expectations.

[murlough23]

My review. I'm sure this will satisfy none of you.

http://www.epinions.com/content_496143470212

[eatenbytehworms]

Seeing album live was definitely worth it.  It's not like the entire setlist was predictable.

That said, Sing It Out is a concert singalong already.
and strangely Yet is also one too, though I'm not too impressed by that one, live or not.

I was also disappointed by Red Eyes on the album, but in concert, they gave it direction and turned it into an effective set closer.

NP: "Kill Me Quickly" Thrice

[murlough23]

Seeing album live was definitely worth it.  It's not like the entire setlist was predictable.

I liked that they took requests for which classics/fan favorites to play at the end. If the setlist could have been requests mixed in with the new album in a less predictable order, I'd totally be there. I know this is extremely nitpicky on my part, but for me there's a big difference between "Oh yeah, that's the opening riff from 'The Sound', I love this song!", rather than, "OK, they're palying 'Your Love Is a Song', I guess that means 'The Sound' is next." I like hearing how new ideas and old ideas can get juxtaposed; it shows some thought on the artist's part about how to match up themes or musical ideas that were born out of different creative periods in the artist's history. Playing an entire album in full and then a sprinkling of either stuff severely limits that aspect of a live performance. Most other folks probably don't care. And that's fine. They can go to this tour and I'll sit it out and wait for the next one.

[NinjaRob17]

I liked that they took requests for which classics/fan favorites to play at the end. If the setlist could have been requests mixed in with the new album in a less predictable order, I'd totally be there. I know this is extremely nitpicky on my part, but for me there's a big difference between "Oh yeah, that's the opening riff from 'The Sound', I love this song!", rather than, "OK, they're playing 'Your Love Is a Song', I guess that means 'The Sound' is next." I like hearing how new ideas and old ideas can get juxtaposed; it shows some thought on the artist's part about how to match up themes or musical ideas that were born out of different creative periods in the artist's history. Playing an entire album in full and then a sprinkling of either stuff severely limits that aspect of a live performance. Most other folks probably don't care. And that's fine. They can go to this tour and I'll sit it out and wait for the next one.

I'd be pretty ticked if I went to a concert for my favorite band and they played their entire new album in the proper order. If I wanted to hear the album the way it was supposed to be heard, I'd listen to the album, not go to a concert. So, I can feel you on this one, Murlough.

[murlough23]

I'd be pretty ticked if I went to a concert for my favorite band and they played their entire new album in the proper order. If I wanted to hear the album the way it was supposed to be heard, I'd listen to the album, not go to a concert. So, I can feel you on this one, Murlough.

Wow, glad to finally get some support on this! Thanks!

I will say that I could theoretically make an exception for an album where the tracks were sequenced in such a way that they segued into each other and would sound strange split up and played in a notably different order. For example, if I went to a Sufjan Stevens performance specifically to hear him play The BQE, I would expect each of the movements to be played in order (I wouldn't be opposed to any variation that he felt made it work better live, but still, those are successive movements with a beginning and en end). Similar thing if Dream Theater decided to play their "Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence" suite (which is technically half of an album, but it takes up an entire disc).

But Switchfoot? Nah, they don't have that level of musical ambition. And they don't need to in order to be a solid live band. But they shouldn't treat their work like it is that ambitious. Let's be realistic here.