#31
vagabond wrote:
jesus …
well, i think it’s cool.
it’s simple, but with attitude.
Posted on Tue, 13 January 2009 at 23:50
#32
ChrisDavies wrote:
Dermot wrote:
I think it looks alright… but I’d be surprised if it’s the official new cover
It is , it’s on the news page of this site.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 00:02 in reply to an earlier post
#33
Old twat wrote:
Nice to see this artwork getting another airing. My first ever T? t-shirt had this on it all those eons ago. Made from some native irish animal hide and dyed with peat mixed with ox-blood and piss if I remember rightly. Circa 1876 or thereabouts.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 04:23
#34
Taunty Dan wrote:
Kill_Hill wrote:
well then they’ll have sold 20 million copies of an album with a shit cover.
LOL :D
Its just lazy is what it is. Lets just pray they’ve put more thought into the actual music…
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 07:28 in reply to an earlier post
#35
soul doubt (an) wrote:
I love the soberness of the cover! It’s one of their best covers IMO, together with Meat Abstract and Suicide Pact - You First.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 07:44
#36
Dermot wrote:
Dusty wrote:
It is , it’s on the news page of this site.
Ha! Well thats me told. I am surprised though… I thought Charlie’s effort looked better :-/
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 09:19 in reply to an earlier post
#37
Auto_Surgery (Andy) wrote:
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 09:32
#38
Dennis (Dudley Less) wrote:
Charlie wrote:
Even if its fake - its better than the OCFA cover. I really liked the High Anxiety and Never Apologise covers but was really dissapointed with the one cure cover. I actually wouldnt mind this. Its simplistic and looks neat and catchy :)
Totally agree. I’m not keen on the OCFA cover, but I quite like the idea of a back-to-basics approach, especially if that is reflected in the music.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 09:51 in reply to an earlier post
#39
Beefgrinder wrote:
Hmm, not a fan, I could have knocked that up in 5 minutes. But maybe that’s the idea. Looks kind of like a bootleg though. Still, with so many people downloading things nowadays, covers aren’t all that important anymore. Still really looking forward to the album!
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 10:25
#40
LunacyBooth wrote:
Looks shit! The last album cover looked shit and the music was, IMHO, shit. Let’s hope there isn’t a trend developing!
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 10:27
#41
Cuchulain wrote:
I like it a lot , kinda back to basics and lets the album be judged by the songs , not by the cover.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 10:36
#42
Old twat wrote:
LunacyBooth wrote:
Looks shit! The last album cover looked shit and the music was, IMHO, shit. Let’s hope there isn’t a trend developing!
Nah, that cover pissed all over most of the songs acually :-(
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 10:45 in reply to an earlier post
#43
loco wrote:
i dont like it much (although i really like gemil), but who cares… i think that NANE has a terrible cover and its maybe my fav T? album so…
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 11:09
#44
Squall wrote:
Dermot wrote:
Ha! Well thats me told. I am surprised though… I thought Charlie’s effort looked better :-/
:) Thank you for that .
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 12:50 in reply to an earlier post
#45
fatboy wrote:
As much as I’m looking forward to the new album, the cover would be more suited for a Greatest Hits collection. But in saying that, those who followed and then forgotten the band in the 90’s would see Gemil and would probably remind them that ‘our’ band are still going.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 12:54
#46
Squall wrote:
When the dust settles - it’s just a picture on the front of an album. Its the music that counts.
Plus, I do believe that, the music can change your opinion of a cover and vice versa.
I once bought Six by Mansun. Hated the music - detested it - but loved the cover and the artwork inside. Ended up LOVING It…:)
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 12:56
#47
g (My Shade Will Comfort you) wrote:
maybe this cover was done on purpose to stir up disscussion and its working.
if thats not the case I still think the band have a clever reason behind it and I’m sure nearer the time we’ll find out through interviews or a diary entry.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 12:58
#48
KJC Dublin (Karl) wrote:
I have to admit, I kind of laughed out loud when I saw it first, but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense.
Plain and simple - 100% Therapy?
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 13:02
#49
Kill_Hill (Brendan) wrote:
maybe it will make sense in time but it’s still lacking.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 13:04
#50
Citizen Erased (confused again) wrote:
It’ll make a good T-shirt, and it’s nice to see Gemi so prominent for once, but it does kinda look a bit record-label-with-no-budget, in the same way that Terrorvision’s ‘Good to Go’ did. Yes, the msuic should be judged on the way it sounds, but you’ve got to get people to listen first…
That said, on something the size of an Ipod screen, it’s simplicity will probably mean it looks better than something more complex like Sergeant Pepper, which was obviously designed for a big LP sleeve.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 13:28
#51
Squall wrote:
They should have asked my bro ! He’s an absolute photoshop master and would probably have done it for free just to get his name out there.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 13:34
#52
Misanthropologist (d) wrote:
Personally I love the new cover. And it’s at least twelfty times better than the cover of NANE.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 14:19
#53
Dermot wrote:
I feel a “rank Therapy? album covers from best to worst” thread coming along ;-)
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 14:24
#54
Alan wrote:
I like the statement it makes, you know, 100% Therapy?. It seems like they’re trying to make a link to 90’s “popular” Therapy?, like Fatboy said, and attract some lost fans. But generally, it’s a good no-nonsense cover. Maybe they could’ve changed the style of “Crooked Timber” to incorporate a ‘wood’ effect, but what do I know.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 14:31
#55
kossu (Petri Koskiniemi) wrote:
I like it alot too! Simple is nice! Like i said before: roll on with…
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 15:13
#56
opal_mantra (Holly) wrote:
..i just don’t like the font..
and yes it’s probably getting worked up over nothing…but i don’t like the font.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 17:02
#57
Ronald wrote:
Oh, stop wining! Maybe the album cover is a 3D one, maybe if you move it up and down you’ll see a headbanging gemil, who knows??…like I said ealier on: It’s plain and simple, love it!
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 17:15
#58
kossu (Petri Koskiniemi) wrote:
..there will be always someone wining about something(the colours of the cover, cannot hear the bass, the production sucks, it´s not like TG, etc. etc…), that´s what I´ve noticed here in the past years…just wait when the record is out, then the vining starts again:) Hope it wont leak out this time so there won´t be any “ratings” from the “wannabeproducers” before the actual streetdate of the record is!
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 17:48
#59
g (My Shade Will Comfort you) wrote:
oooh charlie just got shot down there.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 17:57
#60
andys gibson sg (James Harris) wrote:
I can see why people dislike it. The kind of cover you could make in under 3mins. But I’d like to see the story behind that choice and obviously what the rest of the inlay will be like :)
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 18:02
