The Syndicate

Haha nice. I thought I picked up on the Queen references in the lyrics. Nice to have it confirmed.

I would definitely recommend The Darkness. I have their debut album in mind for a future submission here. They're cheesy, sleezy glam-metal revival, unitards and all. It's fun stuff, even if their albums are a little uneven. When they came out in 2003, my college roommate and I thought they had to be a fake band because their music video looked like an elaborate joke:



My Chemical Romance was more emo than I usually get into and I only have their first album. A very theatrical, bombastic sound there.

Actually, it seems I have My Chemical Romance's second album- Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge.

I definitely agree with the Muse comparisons lol (and as they overlap with the Queen comparisons)

Muse wrote the book on ripping off Queen. At least Toehider left a citation in their lyrics.

At least Mika was honest about it.

Btw Epi I haven't seen you participate in here in a while but have you listened to this week's album? I really think you'd like it.

I'm checking out Toehider's other stuff on Spotify, this EP-compilation deal (guess it's all on bandcamp too). Liking it so far. This is a really interesting artist speed, thanks for showing us.

I tend to give up when I get too far behind in something.

Which is weird considering this is just listening to music.

I'll give this one a listen and maybe try to catch up.

I don't get the idea of catching up - or rather being behind becoming a deterrent. It shouldn't be a chore. It's one album per week to check out, at one's leisure.

nutella wrote: ↑Sat Jul 29, 2017 1:55 pm Btw Epi I haven't seen you participate in here in a while but have you listened to this week's album? I really think you'd like it.

I'm checking out Toehider's other stuff on Spotify, this EP-compilation deal (guess it's all on bandcamp too). Liking it so far. This is a really interesting artist speed, thanks for showing us.

You're welcome! I enjoy pretty much all of his stuff. I've bought both his full albums and the 'Best of 12 EPs in 12 Months'. It's all worth a listen.

New link for The Stooges:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qannFs9 ... 6t3s3ymYrF

YouTube deleted the full-album video, so we're stuck with a playlist now.

I'll post my review for Toehider and some info on The Stooges later today.

I am unable to transition the album right now, but anyone else is welcome to.

Do not attempt to adjust your listening devices. This 7-track assault is indeed 36 minutes and 35 seconds of lusty aggression. Listening to this album may have the following side-effects: dizziness, sweating, increased heart rate, uncontrollable spasms, sexual arousal, and homicidal tendencies. If any of these symptoms last more than an hour after listening to this album, listen to it again.

This album was released in 1970, 11 months after the Woodstock Festival. That's right, while psychedelic rock was winding down, bands like The Stooges were snarling, sweating, and bleeding their way to cult followings with music that would give tripped-out hippies recurring nightmares. The unchecked testosterone and libido present on their second album, Fun House, could easily qualify even the slightest utterance of either the band or this album as a trigger warning by today's standards of political correctness.

Their first album was largely unnoticed and the band felt it was too crisp and clean. When recording Fun House, the band removed all sound paneling from the studio and they recorded together as a band, rather than separately to splice together the best takes of each instrument. They wanted the album to better capture the energy and power of their live shows. The result is an electrifying display of guitar, bass, and drums, while Iggy Pop howls, growls, snarls, and shouts his way into your home, whether you like it or not.

The genre "proto-punk" is a retroactively-assigned bit of nonsense slapped on the late-60s and early-70s artists, especially Mid-Western acts like The Stooges and MC5, who were the greatest influences on the punk rock movement that rose to prominence in the mid- to late-70s. Basically, bands like The Stooges were a fusion of hard rock and garage rock, cranked out to the loudest possible level.

Fun House is raw, uncompromising, and hard-hitting rock and roll. While The Stooges are among the most influential bands in rock history, they were a financial failure in their time. They rocked peoples' socks off at their live shows but they couldn't sell enough records to stay viable in the eyes of the studio big-wigs.

The Stooges made rock and roll dangerous and sexy all over again. Had they played this kind of music back in the 50s, I think more people would have believe that rock and roll was the Devil's music. The band is thrilling and Iggy Pop is a freaking wild man. Enjoy!

Hey folks! I listened to Toehider and The Stooges both today. I gave Toehider a 2.5 and The Stooges a 3.0.

Toehider was definitely an interesting and more diverse listen than I was anticipating, but it seems G-Man came to many of the same thoughts I had while listening to it -- I thought it was flawed because it sounds jumpy and derivative. Doesn't help that I'm not the biggest fan of Queen, Muse, or MCR for that matter to begin with. But I didn't dislike it by any means, it's just more not my thing than anything, and I think it was a pretty eclectic group of songs. Unfortunately it had trouble keeping my interest overall. That said, I'd be interested to hear a subsequent album.

G-Man introduced The Stooges excellently. The album is a freaking classic for a reason. I have the utmost respect for its place in rock history, and if anything it doesn't get enough recognition for its influence on punk and the 1970s and 1980s in general, despite being pretty widely acclaimed. With all of that said, the album is very much not the type of music I find myself naturally inclined to enjoy. So although I do think the album is fantastic and among the best straight up kick-your-ass proto-punk/hard rock releases I can think of, I have to be in a very specific mood to get any real enjoyment out of it. I know it puts me in the minority, but I've always had that relationship with this album and The Stooges in general. Consequently, since I'm rating entirely based on my enjoyment and not considering historical significance at all, I couldn't justify giving it anything higher than 3.0.

I'm going to be traveling again later this week and into next week, so I'll get to the Week 21 album late next week.

I'm going with a 4 for Toehider. I even more thoroughly enjoyed it on second listen and also followed along with the lyrics which are excellent (and pretty hilarious at times -- I did gain some appreciation for the goose song lol) and really impressed me overall (the story in the long track is pretty well done too). And realizing that this is literally just one guy made it all the more impressive to me. I can't deny the common sentiment here that he wears his influences on his sleeve, but he seems to embrace that transparency, just runs with it and does some really cool stuff of his own even when the inspiration is obvious. This also held true as I listened through his 12-EP compilation -- I thought there was some really good stuff in there (and it looks like there's one more full-length that's not on spotify but I will check out on bandcamp). Anyway this album was pretty solidly interesting and fun for me, and even got me to enjoy the bits inspired by genres I'm generally less excited about. This album/artist definitely left an impression on me (at this moment The Thing With Me is stubbornly stuck in my head) and is one I might save and go back to now and then.

Ricochet wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:14 am

Spoiler: show

Oh wow.

You listened to it all. Or, most all of it. I'm impressed.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:45 am

Ricochet wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:14 am

Spoiler: show

Oh wow.

You listened to it all. Or, most all of it. I'm impressed.

You're impressed that Ricochet listened to a full album?

Think he means Toeheidegger's entire discography.

Cause if it's the other thing, then yeah. I hardly ever do song cherrypicking, unless it's my jogging playlist.

Not just the What Kind of Creature Am I album. Also the To Hide Her album, and his entire "12 EPs in 12 Months" collection that spans like four hours of music.

The carols EP segment almost made me lose it, but then a song with actually tight riffs came on lol

People from list#2 not showing up anymore need to get back in the saddle with at least one rating. G-Man is expected to drop one soon, so he's the exception.

Rico, I thought I had mentioned that APP was five stars for me. I guess I hadn't.

What Kind of Creature Am I?

My earlier comments still hold true for this album but familiar sounds are by no means a deal-breaker for me. I would not call Toehider derivative. He's not blatantly imitating other bands for the sake of personal gain. It is evident to me that he loves the music of some of the bands I heard in his songs but he's having fun emulating those sounds rather than exploiting them.

After reading a few articles and interviews with Michael Mills I had an epiphany of sorts. From what I gathered from the casual lyrics of his songs and his approach to recording (he is intimidated by group collaboration and would rather just do his own thing), I think he's not trying to become famous with his music. If nothing else, Mills is just playing his brand of rock and roll for the fun and limited journey that comes with it. That changed my perspective on the last two listens to this album.

"You and I Both Lose (But 5 Wins)" opens the album up with a headlong dive into Mills' influences. He shoots for a grand, sweeping song that runs five minutes long. The lyrics don't make much sense to me, so I wonder if there are Australian idioms or cultural references that I am ignorant to. "Whatever Makes You Feel Superior" uses familiar chords and a whole lot of vocal dubbing to create a song that was neither disappointing nor enthralling. "The Thing With Me" closed out my standard three-track exercise with some promise. It's shorter but not less indulgent. Perhaps a tighter track time sat well with me because the length of the first two tracks were a bit much. Perhaps this is too harsh but, if I have to use three pages of Google search results to learn the faintest amount about you and your music, you best just save the indulgent rock-god track lengths for later because you have to prove that you're worth a long song first.

I still feel that the second half of the album is a better display of his creativity. "Spoilt For Choice," despite lyrics that struck me as vanilla, was a nice chance for him to leave all his influences behind and be himself. I feel like that continued for the most part through the end of the album. He had some flourishes of other bands but they lacked much of an aftertaste of anything too familiar. Maybe these tracks wouldn't sound right on their own EP without the 'look-at-me' nature of the first half of the album. Maybe that's the whole point. Mills is talented, so perhaps he wanted to draw you in with his skills before easing you into songs that were more him or represent him taking more chances musically. The second half still drags on a little too long for my taste even though I enjoyed the songs. Cut some of the fluff out of "Under the Future, We Bury the Past" and "Meet the Sloth" and you'll have a better product on your hands.

Picking three to take with me was pretty easy. "The Thing With Me" is good, silly fun and the highlight of the first half of the album. The operatic delivery got the song stuck in my head quite often over the last week. "Meet the Sloth" is more or less what I hoped Jethro Tull would be like. It was better than A Passion Play, despite the lyrics being totally weird and possibly not deserving of the serious, minstrely structure. I'll stick "Spoilt For Choice" on the list because it's the least silly song on the album to me and feels at least somewhat self-reflective. I think Mills needs to learn a little more about writing serious songs and keep going in this direction at least part of the time in his future work.

If Mills is correct in that you'll only ever be as good as the dumbest thing you've done, then the dumbest thing he's doing is limiting himself by avoiding more collaborative work. If he's content to ride the bar and club circuit an open up for acts with legitimate claims to fame with his quirky throw-back indulgences, that's his choice. But it's evident that he's more talented than his self-deprecating demeanor gives him credit for. He's not likely to get rich and famous making this kind of music but, at nearly 40 years old, perhaps he knows that and just doesn't care. It worked for Cake for a little while, so perhaps there's still room for Mills.

This album was skillful and amusing. The first time through, I really was wondering just what Mills was going to do next. I was never on the edge of my seat but credit is due for keeping me wondering. The songs are all listenable even if he's not the best lyricist the world has ever known. If I were to come across this one again, I probably wouldn't hesitate to skip past a track or two but I could see myself listening to the whole album under the right circumstances. Overall, it's a pretty decent DIY effort.

G-Man Scale: 3.25 out of 5
Rico Scale: 3 out of 5

It had been a long time since I'd listened to The Stooges, so I decided to play this week Rico style by running through more than one album -- I covered the three from '69 to '73 that made them famous. Go figure, I enjoyed the other two more than Fun House. They're all worthwhile though, and their influence over punk rock is obvious. I think my favorite of the three was Raw Power, since that one was a little more eclectic (they even gave blues rock a shot for at least one track).

The best quality of these albums is that they're short and very easy to digest. Put 'em on, rock out for a bit, and go about your day. 3 stars for Fun House.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2017 4:50 am It had been a long time since I'd listened to The Stooges, so I decided to play this week Rico style by running through more than one album -- I covered the three from '69 to '73 that made them famous. Go figure, I enjoyed the other two more than Fun House. They're all worthwhile though, and their influence over punk rock is obvious. I think my favorite of the three was Raw Power, since that one was a little more eclectic (they even gave blues rock a shot for at least one track).

The best quality of these albums is that they're short and very easy to digest. Put 'em on, rock out for a bit, and go about your day. 3 stars for Fun House.

Truth be told, I was torn between submitting Fun House and Raw Power. I like both albums (remember Mad Max Mafia and how I used Stooges song titles for some of the post titles?) and listen to them both with regularity. I think I went with Fun House for the shock value and the rawness of it. At the time, it had to be a bit jarring compared to all the sunshine pop and psychedelic rock of the latter half of the 60s. Raw Power is a delight too though. It's got an almost early-glam sleaze to its swagger and is a much more fun album to listen to than Fun House. How about that? Fun House is more raw and Raw Power is more fun.

I guess that's where I draw a line when choosing between the two. When I want to feel alive and pound on stuff, I go with Fun House. When I want to strut around and have fun, I opt for Raw Power.

Just listened to Fun House. I think I must be too young or something, or it's just not really my style of music, but I didn't really get a lot out of it. But as with some previous submissions (like Chuck Berry) I can recognize and appreciate the Stooges' influence on future genres. Particularly the vocal style is really not enjoyable for me, but I liked some of the bass, guitar, and drum parts, and the bits with saxophone were groovy as hell. I think this would be a 2.5 or even just 2 if not for the sax but the good parts were enough for me to bump it up to a 3.

I find myself stuck on the track "1970." Once I pin down an opinion on that track, I'll be ready to post a review.

I can see where some of you are coming. Obviously music is subjective. I think I'm less picky when it comes to music than with movies. The jury is still out on books. Iggy Pop is singing through a hand-held microphone, like he would on stage. From what little I gleaned from my music recording technology major roommate in college, that switch changes the sound dynamics quite a bit. Perhaps that adds the harshness that may not appeal to you @nutella

@MovingPictures07 commented about needing to be in the right mood to enjoy this album to the fullest reminds me of Robert Christgau's split opinion on the album. While I find the guy to generally be an elitist d-bag, his opinions on Fun House amused me. From Wikipedia:

Christgau wrote in his original review for The Village Voice that the Stooges' competent monotony and incorporation of saxophone had intellectual appeal, but questioned whether it was healthy as a listener for "[me] to have to be in a certain mood of desperate abandon before I can get on with them musically". He later said his criticism had been based on the album's "inaccessibility" as popular music. He also stated:

Now I regret all the times I've used words like 'power' and 'energy' to describe rock and roll, because this is what such rhetoric should have been saved for. Shall I compare it to an atom bomb? a wrecker's ball? a hydroelectric plant? Language wasn't designed for the job.

Until my thoughts are compiled, here is a two-part video where Henry Rollins talks about his futile obsession with showing up Iggy Pop in concert (watch out, it's vulgar!):

Fun House

For me, this is a near-perfect album. My dad was into punk rock music when he was in middle and high school (when it was new). He's got at least one album from each of the major punk acts from the 70s and early 80s- Sex Pistols, Clash, Dead Kennedys, The Ramones, and the list goes on. As I hit the age of paying attention to the radio, the glam metal/hair band era that my father's punk sensibilities despised was crumbling with the arrival of grunge rock. Between grunge and early post grunge, there was a lot of punk-influenced music that he steered me toward.

My dad was too young for the Stooges. I think he might have liked them. Listening to them on this album is an experience every time. With rock and roll beginning around 1955, Fun House is only 15 years removed from Chuck Berry's "Maybellene," Little Richard's "Tutti Frutti," and Elvis Presley's rendition of "That's All Right." It also comes just seven years after The Beatles first performed on the Ed Sullivan Show and took America by storm, and (as I mentioned before) less than a year after Woodstock. The journey of rock and roll is truly astounding.

We live in an era when most commercially successful/"popular" bands and artists struggle to put 7 good songs on an hour-long album. Fun House is not even 40 minutes long and contains only seven tracks and not a one of them is filler. "Down On the Street" begins with either a whip crack or gunshot (take your pick) of snare and guitar and immediately throws you into Iggy Pop's primal hoots and howls. "Loose" ups the tempo, the aggression, and the sexual tension in what I can only conclude is a head-banging song that pre-dates head-banging. "T.V. Eye" somehow finds a way to take the intensity even higher, with Iggy Pop announcing its beginning with the raging howl of a maniac. Later in the song, his shouting suggests that he may actually want to kill someone.

"Dirt" is the only song on the album that falls short for me but I understand its necessity. If this album captures their live show as they intended, the entire band needs a break after one of the best three-song sets I've ever heard. "Dirt" slows it down but it has a creepy tone, suggestive of a sexual predator. It's slow and yearning structure is sexy and unsettling but it didn't quite rock my world like the rest of the album.

"1970" starts firing things back up. Between Iggy's higher pitched "I feel alright!" cries and the surprising introduction of a saxophone, it keeps the album compelling. The titular track see the band cutting loose. The bass really asserts itself and the saxophone wanders wherever it damn well pleases, creating an almost funky groove for Iggy to strut through. When I move around to this song, all the motion emanates from the pelvis. It's too dead sexy to do otherwise. "L.A. Blues," while containing no traditional song structure whatsoever, is mesmerizing. The cacophony of sounds competing against each other for your attention sucks you in only to leave you completely shattered by Iggy Pop howling like a mountain lion.

I can't pick three songs from this album. It's almost too hard. If you cut out "Dirt," you'd have the hardest rocking non-metal album ever made but you'd also do yourself a disservice. The listener needs a mid-album break just like the band because it'd be too overwhelming to cope without it. It's no wonder hat this album (or probably more so The Stooges' live shows) influenced a generation of punk rockers my dad grew up with, who, in turn, influenced the music and artists that I grew up with. Fun House is pure, unadulterated rock and roll. No pretension. No phoniness. Nothing but in-your-face energy. Shut up, take my money, and please sir, may I have another?

G-Man Scale: 4.82 out of 5
Rico Scale: 5 out of 5

I plan on listening to this whole album and rating t tonight since I can't just submit something then not participate

That's not cool

Will return in a few hours then

I cant say im the best at describing music off of one or two listens, but i do love myself some rock and roll, punk rock, alternative rock, it all just reaches out to my soul. perhaps it's cause a lot of them are just ripe with raw emotions? are those the correct words?

anyways, ive enjoyed all the songs so far, i really like Down on the Street the best so far.

1970 just came on though and i swear ive heard it from somewhere, either a commercial or some past source of media to where ive heard it a lot.... be back in a second to follow a hunch.

I was right, ive heard this song many a times since i poured hundreds of hours into this game as a kid in the mid 2000's with a PS2

but back to the rest of the album which is just fun house and LA blues,

Fun house is almost 8 minutes long, but i loved the percussion and sax throughout it, not to mention the sounds that, presumably Iggy Pops is making, that arent lyrics i mean, are both funny but also convey the craziness and feelings he's expressing in the song. its one of those songs you take a deep breath once its over and just say "wow"

and capping it off with LA Blues, i actually enjoyed this song probably the least, just due to its "raw power" if you will, lots of screeching sounds and loud pitches, and actual unintelligible screaming too.

Overall i give the album a 3/5. it's got some choice songs but it's also really charged and i wouldnt want to listen to it lots.

I'm three songs in and I'm loving the energy of this music. The hard edged tone works for me, and it's a rather toe-tapping kind of thing.

Solid, but it doesn't do much beyond that for me so far.

man makes me consider if i should change my selection to something ive listened to more, since i more so submitted this album on a whim and "wouldn't this be cool to get a review of?" But that's more for you guys to decide, otherwise i always have the next queue in which i can submit something ive listened to dozens of times

sprityo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 03, 2017 10:44 pm man makes me consider if i should change my selection to something ive listened to more, since i more so submitted this album on a whim and "wouldn't this be cool to get a review of?" But that's more for you guys to decide, otherwise i always have the next queue in which i can submit something ive listened to dozens of times

I wouldn't sweat it. I listened to a few tracks off of your submission tonight. It should make for interesting discussion. Also, I plan on submitting an album I've never even listened to at some point, just to see what some of the pickier listeners think.

I may not be able to do much more than "impression" reviews, but I think I'm going to try and stick with this a little better.

Also I'm going to nominate A City Dressed in Dynamite by That Handsome Devil

speedchuck wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2017 10:17 am I may not be able to do much more than "impression" reviews, but I think I'm going to try and stick with this a little better.

Also I'm going to nominate A City Dressed in Dynamite by That Handsome Devil

I shall keep the nomination handy, but be aware that you won't be eligible until the voting cycle after next (those who get selected one cycle are not eligible during the following cycle). You should certainly share your take on our albums as we go though, even if it's just a basic take. There are no wrong answers in music creation or interpretation.

I'm gonna go with Classics by Ratatat as my next album j think

Either that or Tourist History by Two Door Cinema Club

It's more so instrumental versus lyrical

We're in the last album of this block, so while we listen to sprityo's submission we can also select new albums for the following queue. Remember, those who were in this most recent block should wait for the next queue. Later in the week we'll do another poll.

Submitting:

JaggedJimmyJay - Mariee Sioux - Faces in the Rocks / 2007 / Contemporary folk / 8 tracks / 49:40 / YouTube, Bandcamp, and Spotify

Ricochet - Phoenix - Mugur de fluier / 1974 / Progresskve folk / 14 tracks / 45:56 / YouTube and Spotify

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2017 4:30 pm

speedchuck wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2017 10:17 am I may not be able to do much more than "impression" reviews, but I think I'm going to try and stick with this a little better.

Also I'm going to nominate A City Dressed in Dynamite by That Handsome Devil

I shall keep the nomination handy, but be aware that you won't be eligible until the voting cycle after next (those who get selected one cycle are not eligible during the following cycle). You should certainly share your take on our albums as we go though, even if it's just a basic take. There are no wrong answers in music creation or interpretation.

That's alright. Throw it in the poll whenev it's supposed to go. Thanks.

I listened to the first four songs of MT&HK, and my impressions so far:

The music itself didn't leave that strong an impression on me, particularly the first song. Ambient-ish music isn't really my thing, even when bands I like do it. The other songs were neither catchy enough to stick with me, nor snappy or complex enough to catch my attention.

I also didn't really like the vocalist's voice.

A part of this is probably my "meh" reaction to electronic/whatever this genre is music. Dawn of Man was pretty good, though. Made me feel nostalgic for some reason. Probably due to some video game.

In my personal experience this is most definitely an album you have to listen to more than once, Michael Guy Bowman has weird kinds voice that sounds weird maybe even bad but at the same time intriguing.

Dawn of man is the highlight of the album I will agree with Chain of Prospit and No Release being pretty good too. The first and final songs of the album are instrumental if im not wrong, and I have always been a fan of instrumental works more so than lyrical. I in fact listened to the whole album again just today during my drive back home. The album itself is different as well as its different than the other multitude of songs considered akin to it in the discography which in turn is related to the source material. You could say it's technically a soundtrack album. Overall though I have to give it a 3.5/5 since I do enjoy all the rhythms and techno sounds but the lyrics are a little silly, given how familiar you are with the source material.

My first time through I was kind of night-and-day. I much preferred the instrumentals to any of the tracks where the guy sings. Today I listened again but it was noisy in the office, which enabled me to take in the lyricist as an instrument instead of hearing the words. I liked it more. I'm probably not going to be a good judge of what good synthpop sounds like and what bad synthpop sounds like, so I'm curious to see what some of the RYM folk have to say on this one.

A pleasant experience all in all and I got a kick out of all the 2001: A Space Odyssey references in "Dawn of Man."

@Gman so you'd agree that, for whatever odd reason, listening for a second time was more enjoyable?

I've just started the album myself. "Dawn of Man" is very Yoshimi-era Flaming Lips.

The Flaming Lips sound persisted through the full album for the most part. That's not a bad or a good thing, just a thing. I thought it was generally enjoyable, and that the first half in particular was quite good. I do think the momentum stalled some over the latter half. I gave it 3 stars. I did consider a 3.5 given the strong start, so it's a positive product for sure.

I think the only Flaming Lips song I know is "Bad Days" from the Batman Forever soundtrack, which I still own on cassette. That one doesn't sound anything like this album.

sprityo wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:15 pm @Gman so you'd agree that, for whatever odd reason, listening for a second time was more enjoyable?

I didn't fall in love with it but yes, it was more enjoyable. I think the first time through I reacted too harshly to the difference in sound/style between the opening instrumental and the second track.

Example:

So much reading from the notes, but oh well, whatever.

"Dawn of Man" is still the standout track with vocals but here's the funny thing- the beat on that song (duh-duh DUNNN, duh-duh DUNNN) reminds me of the incidental music that plays during episodes of MacGyver (the original series, not the inferior remake version that's on now) when Mac is scrambling around and assembling things to help out of a jam. I'm not sure if that hurts or helps this song yet.