#61
andys gibson sg (James Harris) wrote:
…and I hope the band gets more attention on this release to. As to be honest I was quite fearful for their future around the release of OCFA :(
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 18:04
#62
Squall wrote:
Didn’t Andy say that HA and NANE sold well ?
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 21:26
#63
Squall wrote:
Gimme Back My Brainsaw wrote:
oooh charlie just got shot down there.
:p Too true. I’m always ” vining ” .
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 21:27 in reply to an earlier post
#64
andys gibson sg (James Harris) wrote:
I think the last, most successful selling album was High Anxiety, but I could be wrong.
Posted on Wed, 14 January 2009 at 23:07
#65
Superunknown wrote:
Oh boy… I don’t wanna bitch before the album’s even out, but this cover is cheap and uninspired. It is clear that at this point the band probably didn’t want/couldn’t afford a cover that cost more than this quite simple one.
Too bad. Album covers are very important to me and up until this one Therapy?’s covers were always great and original and wacky. Let’s hope the music makes up for the cover this time.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 02:05
#66
KJC Dublin (Karl) wrote:
Well,
I know loads of people who are familiar with the band, but think that they no longer exist. The album cover is fully recognizable as a Therapy? album. Not that this is going to have a revolutionary impact on the sales of the album, but it may spark curiousity.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 08:10
#67
Jobrok (John O)))) wrote:
It’s just an album cover!
Who cares what the album cover looks like.
It’s only going to be read once or twice, then sit on a shelf with all the rest.
Take it down every once in a while only to take the CD out then pop it back in it’s place.
As long as the songs are good, I couldn’t give a rats arse what’s on the cover.
Which by the sounds of the few posts from the T? lads and the time they’ve taken to get it together, it should be good album.
As long as it’s an improvement on the last one, I’ll be happy.
OCFA just came across as a bit hollow to me.
Sounded as though the band weren’t really interested in the songs that much.
But that’s just my opinion! Everyone to there own.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 09:13
#68
hoochalobster (Sarah) Super Moderator wrote:
Well I for one was grinning cheshire cat stylee when I got the artwork - I think it’s spot-on. FYI, here’s what Michael had to say:
“We had a few different front cover concepts and we debated long and hard over which one to use…one option was to go quite ornate/colourful like “One Cure…” but in the end our gut reaction was to go with the bold ‘gemil’ visual. There’s something about that really appeals to me…there’s certainly no ambiguity to it.”
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 12:38
#69
SHITLEGS wrote:
who actually cares, as long as the music is great!
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 12:46
#70
Kill_Hill (Brendan) wrote:
KJC Dublin wrote:
Well,
I know loads of people who are familiar with the band, but think that they no longer exist. The album cover is fully recognizable as a Therapy? album. Not that this is going to have a revolutionary impact on the sales of the album, but it may spark curiousity.
can these exfans not read? every album has therapy written on it, its a bit sad if these people need a cartoon image to be reminded that they are still going.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 13:00 in reply to an earlier post
#71
Ronald wrote:
Ok, Demolition Records is linked to Roadrunner, right? I love cartoons, I love Gemil, I love taking the piss, so next album on this label should have a cover with Wile E Coyote chasing both Roadrunner and Gemil at the same time, MEEP, MEEP!
( ok, I admit, it’s a bit early to talk about the one after Crooked Timber)
PS Still love this cover!
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 13:21
#72
KJC Dublin (Karl) wrote:
Kill_Hill wrote:
can these exfans not read? every album has therapy written on it, its a bit sad if these people need a cartoon image to be reminded that they are still going.
Well, people may only see it from the distance and recognize it that way. I am not saying that it is the ultimate solution.
I agree with you though, it is quite sad.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 15:54 in reply to an earlier post
#73
nice guys wrote:
i like the cover. very simple, very good.
it’s the music that counts.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 15:56
#74
Kill_Hill (Brendan) wrote:
it is indeed the music that counts
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 16:04
#75
Shade wrote:
To be honest I’ve got a bit of a problem with the ‘It’s just a cover’ perspective. At least, it’s not really an interesting argument in the topic.
I think it’s a very elegant album cover. I’m not a huge fan of the font, but I think that overall it’s got that ‘I’m playing a record that will blow your mind’ hint when I’m imagining getting the record of the sleeve. We’ll see how that’ll hold up in person.
Also, what’ll be on the back?
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 17:12
#76
Shade wrote:
“When I’m imagining getting the record out of the sleeve” that is.
Guess I am a bit excited. ;)
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 17:14
#77
tsek wrote:
I’m kind of worried… very plain album cover(it reminds me of the ”best of” but the Gemil is missing), only 10 songs in the album… is this the end? I have a feeling I don’t know why…
I just hope the songs are good…
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 19:21
#78
Kill_Hill (Brendan) wrote:
10 songs sounds like all killer and no filler to me
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 19:27
#79
andys gibson sg (James Harris) wrote:
Just please make sure the label advertises the shit outta of this album.
Would be nice to see a T? album advertised on TV - when did we last see that? That would be awesome.
I always see bands I’ve never heard of get a few seconds tv promo - thats what I boys need this time round.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 20:28
#80
Tubthumper (Scott) wrote:
I like it. It’s simple and effective in my eyes.
Those who don;t like it need to get their priorities sorted in life. When you listen to the album, you don’t spend the whole time staring at the front cover, do you? Or do you?!
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 20:32
#81
richboy wrote:
i think it’s bollocks myself. maybe the guys just aren’t that much into art, but if i was in a band that were releasing albums i would want the covers to be the dogs bollocks. not just bollocks. each to their own i guess - one man’s meat is another mans poison after all.
still, i don’t overly like any T? covers. troublegum and SPYF are pretty good in my book. OCFA, NANE and HA are ok and the rest are mediocre. really liked the BACK of babytheeth and PD though. BIAC and HOTTI minialbums had good covers…
still, the wee soundbites on that youtube vid sounded alright to me and that’s what really counts i guess.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 20:41
#82
Gav wrote:
So did the singles and eps around that era (opal mantra, teethgrinder ect…)
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 21:47
#83
richboy wrote:
aye, right enough they did. the trigger inside cover looks like me when i was a nipper!
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 22:11
#84
g (My Shade Will Comfort you) wrote:
you were jeffery dahmer when you were young? (think thats who its a picture of)
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 22:43
#85
Superunknown wrote:
if the discussion is about whether you should download songs or not, some people will always argue that an album must be respected as a complete piece of art, certain order of songs, artwork and all.
now that some users here say they don’t like the album cover, all of a sudden it’s only the music that matters and the rest just sits on the shelf and will never be looked at anyway.
if you like the “crooked timber”-cover that’s okay, but don’t go saying that an album cover isn’t important at all. I’m with Shade on this one.
Posted on Thu, 15 January 2009 at 23:54
#86
g (My Shade Will Comfort you) wrote:
I believe a cover is important, i bought converge - no heroes the other day and I love how what I have in my hand is a complete piece of art, from the digipack artwork to the cd booklet.
I just think as long as I like the music the art is secondary.
and I like the back to basics approach of this album cover, none of you seem to have a problem with metallica’s black album or the ebatles white album
Posted on Fri, 16 January 2009 at 00:05
#87
FNYANKEZ wrote:
new label..new sound(?)…kinda re-ntroducing the band to the world. A simple here we are statement to me.
Posted on Fri, 16 January 2009 at 03:15
#88
FNYANKEZ wrote:
also gives them an excuse to put out some new Ts with Gemil on it…can’t be bad
Posted on Fri, 16 January 2009 at 03:18
#89
Citizen Erased (confused again) wrote:
I suspect the record company had a big say in deciding the budget for the cover, rather than the band. Which probably also explains the Troublegum covers - A&M budgets for T? got bigger after Shortsharpshock hit perhaps?
The cover is important, otherwise it would i) not be worth anyone’s time posting on this thread and ii) not also be used in advertising etc to get the band more coverage.
I suspect I will never play the CD itself, just stick it straight on my ipod, therefore it will just sit on a shelf. But its still important. And I’ll still get the T - long sleeve please, with some cool written down the sleeves, nothing too crude in case I want to wear it front of my mother.
Posted on Fri, 16 January 2009 at 12:52
#90
richboy wrote:
Gimme Back My Brainsaw wrote:
you were jeffery dahmer when you were young? (think thats who its a picture of)
i think you’re right. not about me being jeffery dahmer when i was young though…
Superunknown wrote:
…but don’t go saying that an album cover isn’t important at all. I’m with Shade on this one.
me too.
Posted on Fri, 16 January 2009 at 18:10 in reply to an earlier post
