#211
Charlie wrote:
30seconds wrote:
So… A couple of weeks later. And, it hasn’t done that well after repeated listens. Maybe It’s because I’m listening to the mars volta and tool, OCFA just sounds so lifeless and unambitious.
I disagree - i have been listening to 10,000 days And OCFA.
Im playing OCFA a lot more :D
Posted on Fri, 12 May 2006 at 20:55
#212
andys gibson sg (James Harris) wrote:
IVE BEEN PLAYING IT EVERYDAY EVER SINCE IT CAME OUT! :P
Posted on Fri, 12 May 2006 at 21:05
#213
Charlie wrote:
Squall wrote:
I disagree - i have been listening to 10,000 days And OCFA.
Im playing OCFA a lot more :D
Tool take 5 years to make 7 songs
In that time, Therapy? have released 4 full length albums :D
2001 - shameless
2003 - High anxiety
2004 - Nane
2006 - One Cure Fits all .
Tool
2001 - Lateralus
2006 - 7 new songs
:D
Posted on Fri, 12 May 2006 at 21:22
#214
mr self destruct wrote:
I’ve given OCFA a fair bit of time to sink in…and I’m afraid to say I’m not hugely impressed.
For me there are three great songs (Deluded Son, Dopamine…, Rain Hits Concrete) and some very average ones. I’ll take Lose It All as just one example of several songs that sound uninspired and plain tired…
I’m sorry to have to say it but I much preferred NANE.
Posted on Sat, 13 May 2006 at 16:13
#215
tatty seaside town wrote:
NANE was the best of the last three albums!
the last two albums sounded not very inspired and creativ to me. not as bad as sh, but … i don´t know. sometimes i think they should wait a little bit longer between the albums to put out a greater album. but perhaps they like it that way or its a matter of money?
Posted on Sat, 13 May 2006 at 17:54
#216
tatty seaside town wrote:
Posted on Sat, 13 May 2006 at 18:11
#217
Charlie wrote:
I like OCFA more every time I put it on.
:D
Posted on Sat, 13 May 2006 at 20:06
#218
andys gibson sg (James Harris) wrote:
Squall wrote:
I like OCFA more every time I put it on.
:D
I seemed to be agreeing with you chucky more and more everyday :eek:
Posted on Sat, 13 May 2006 at 21:40
#219
WolfJazz wrote:
Squall wrote:
Tool take 5 years to make 7 songs
In that time, Therapy? have released 4 full length albums :D
2001 - shameless
2003 - High anxiety
2004 - Nane
2006 - One Cure Fits all .
Tool
2001 - Lateralus
2006 - 7 new songs
:D
man, do you really want to compare what it takes to make a tool record in comparison to a t? record? and as for the record..tool didn’t spend 5 years recording 10,000 days, a perfect circle released 2 records between lateralus and 10,000 days and the whole recording process took between 4/6 months.
and the reason why t? recorded 4 albuns in that period of time is because t? records are mostly straight foward rock music that could be recorded in probably 2/3 weeks and tool records are filled with complex stuff (like it or not) that takes a lot of time to complete…not to mention the artwork :P
Posted on Sun, 14 May 2006 at 00:06
#220
Theng wrote:
30seconds wrote:
I’m listening to the mars volta and tool, OCFA just sounds so lifeless and unambitious.
I don’t really agree, they’re in different leagues but
FUCKING LISTEN TO END OF LEVEL BOSS AND TOOL WILL SOUND LIFELESS!!!!!
Posted on Mon, 15 May 2006 at 15:35
#221
Alan wrote:
WolfJazz wrote:
tool records are filled with complex stuff (like it or not) that takes a lot of time to complete…not to mention the artwork :P
Hmmm, Cult of Luna released full albums in 2004 and again this year. Their albums are pretty complex too. IMO, there’s no real excuse for a band to take 5 years to put out a record.
Posted on Mon, 15 May 2006 at 15:38
#222
FNYANKEZ wrote:
Alan wrote:
Hmmm, Cult of Luna released full albums in 2004 and again this year. Their albums are pretty complex too. IMO, there’s no real excuse for a band to take 5 years to put out a record.
Other than, they have no idea what they want to do on it :D
Posted on Mon, 15 May 2006 at 16:41
#223
WolfJazz wrote:
Alan wrote:
Hmmm, Cult of Luna released full albums in 2004 and again this year. Their albums are pretty complex too. IMO, there’s no real excuse for a band to take 5 years to put out a record.
i just said that tool dindn’t spent 5 years recording 10,000 days, and if they want to spent 10 years without releasing any records that’s they’r own business, there’s plenty of good music around
Posted on Mon, 15 May 2006 at 20:04
#224
therapy_gr wrote:
who cares about tool.psycedelic shit! ha :) its all abou therapy and kicking your rock ass…i hope tool release their next album in 20 years because they are cooll :)
Posted on Mon, 15 May 2006 at 22:59
#225
WolfJazz wrote:
yeah and pink floyd in their prime released albuns every year, it’s true. but i don’t think it makes any sense to compare t? to tool…
Posted on Mon, 15 May 2006 at 23:14
#226
Drengi wrote:
Totally love the new album.
Have been listing to it for the last few days in the car, had to do a few drops for work. One being in Baldoyle (mm spelling!!)
Had it on constantly and not once did I want to switch to something else.
Dopamine I have to say is my favorite.
Just my opinion, but I think this album combines alot of the feelings that are generated from alot of whats gone before. Sort of a blend of what makes Therapy?…well Therapy? :)
Will post more when I feel I can do it justice
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 10:48
#227
Billy Blue wrote:
I’ve also given OCFA time to sink in and I think its one of their best.
Absolute class.
Can’t stop imagining which tracks will come across best live when I listen to it. Probably Spung and Our White Noise I think.
Role on the 25th!
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 10:53
#228
Dennis wrote:
Find it disappointing. Too many tracks that I just skip.
RHC and Sprung promised great things, but there’s too much emphasis on going for the Big Chorus in the rest of the album.
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 11:52
#229
KJC Dublin (Karl) wrote:
Well, guess you can’t please everyone.
I bought it when it came out and still can’t get enough. I’d say seeing some of the tunes live might make a difference to the nay sayers…
Only thing that I was missing on the album is a straight forward “punch in the face” type song like Accellerator or Animal Bones.
Has so far however passed the test of time with me, hardly skip any track when listening.
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 12:08
#230
Charlie wrote:
KJC Dublin wrote:
Well, guess you can’t please everyone.
I bought it when it came out and still can’t get enough. I’d say seeing some of the tunes live might make a difference to the nay sayers…
Only thing that I was missing on the album is a straight forward “punch in the face” type song like Accellerator or Animal Bones.
Has so far however passed the test of time with me, hardly skip any track when listening.
I definitely dont skip any tracks. The only slight letdown is the guitars do almost completely drown out the drums in the choruses of Deluded Son, but the rest of the album is getting better and better each time I hear it :D
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 12:46
#231
Taunty Dan wrote:
Dennis wrote:
Find it disappointing. Too many tracks that I just skip.
RHC and Sprung promised great things, but there’s too much emphasis on going for the Big Chorus in the rest of the album.
yeah i’d go with that. And outtro is just a waste of space.
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 13:45
#232
Dennis wrote:
Taunty Dan wrote:
yeah i’d go with that. And outtro is just a waste of space.
Not a good start for an album, when you have to skip the first track, is it?
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 13:58
#233
Charlie wrote:
Dennis wrote:
Not a good start for an album, when you have to skip the first track, is it?
It should have been welded to the start of Sprung as one whole track instead :D
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 14:17
#234
Dennis wrote:
Squall wrote:
It should have been welded to the start of Sprung as one whole track instead :D
Good God no! Then I’d have had to forward-search thru it to get past it, and I’d have kept missing the start of Sprung.
How’s about “Outro” should have been welded to the cutting room floor..?
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 14:35
#235
therapy_gr wrote:
whats your fuking problem with outro????its the coolest intro for sprung!i hope to hear it live as well.i mean ok its 10 seconds long,it doesnt last for ever
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 14:48
#236
Dennis wrote:
therapy_gr wrote:
whats your fuking problem with outro????its the coolest intro for sprung!i hope to hear it live as well.i mean ok its 10 seconds long,it doesnt last for ever
It’s just…I mean, the first time you hear the album it is OK, but after that it just gets in the way. For me personally, anyway. And I don’t see the point, it’s just a mashed up version of Wark Through Darkness - I mean, why?!
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 14:50
#237
therapy_gr wrote:
its an atmospheric kinda thing..i like it,i always listen first to outro and then sprung.i think its a good intro for sprung…you hear outro which is atmospheric and slow and then sprung comes in and panic! :) i like the whole change
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 14:54
#238
Charlie wrote:
therapy_gr wrote:
its an atmospheric kinda thing..i like it,i always listen first to outro and then sprung.i think its a good intro for sprung…you hear outro which is atmospheric and slow and then sprung comes in and panic! :) i like the whole change
When i listen to outro - im always at the volume hoping it doesnt come in too loud and blow my head off :D
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 15:03
#239
Taunty Dan wrote:
outro is like all that bloody Holmes noise on Infernal Love: Okay at first, irritating as fuck on repeated listens.
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 15:13
#240
Dennis wrote:
Taunty Dan wrote:
outro is like all that bloody Holmes noise on Infernal Love: Okay at first, irritating as fuck on repeated listens.
Fuck me, I typed that without moving my fingers!
Spot on, mate, spot blummin’ on!
Posted on Tue, 16 May 2006 at 15:17
