Jump to content
🪐 MY UNIVERSE | COLDPLAY X BTS | OUT SEPTEMBER 14TH 🛰

===The ultimate Oldplaying Thread===S, BS, TBR, P, AROBTTH, X&Y, VLV, PM===


Recommended Posts

We are having an album listening party where Coldplaying members all over the world listen simultanously to the same Coldplay music and comment our listening experience in real time ! The exact time and date are yet to be determined, but it will be on this weekend. The idea is by @Jedi Leo and the first albums we're gonna listen to are VLVODAAHF and immediately afterwrds Prospekt's March. I thought I'd let you know because it might be of interest ! Here's the link: http://www.coldplaying.com/forum/index.php?threads/coldplaying-listening-party.105753/

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Songs like Coloratura and Arabesque frustrate me because they prove Coldplay can still make powerful, boundary-pushing and highly creative music, but they actively choose not to 90% of the time. 

I'm just hoping there's some sort of resemblance to the X&Y sound in LP9. Moving To Mars is a great example of a non-Oldplay song that's like that. It reminds me of What If. But I also want someth

I’m listening to Viva la Vida again for the first time in ages. I used to think of it as a pretty cool album, now I rank it up there with the greats of the 2000s alongside Funeral and In Rainbows. I w

Posted Images

We are having an album listening party where Coldplaying members all over the world listen simultanously to the same Coldplay music and comment our listening experience in real time ! The exact time and date are yet to be determined, but it will be on this weekend. The idea is by @Jedi Leo and the first albums we're gonna listen to are VLVODAAHF and immediately afterwrds Prospekt's March. I thought I'd let you know because it might be of interest ! Here's the link: http://www.coldplaying.com/forum/index.php?threads/coldplaying-listening-party.105753/

 

Sounds cool, I'm in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm always confused when people bag on Coldplay this way. It implies that the writer's musical pallet and catalog are so "diverse" and "deep" that they simply can't enjoy Coldplay. All the article does is make them look like a jerk.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
what happened to our dearly beloved band ?!

 

I wondered the same when I heard the new album. The songwriting is beyond terrible to me on MOST tracks. I immediately went back and listened to Parachutes. I feel like they were at their height with songwriting in the Parachutes/A Rush of Blood era and again in the Viva era. Ghost Stories is quite enjoyable to me but I really dislike the new album; it angers me more that they didn't tour for Ghost Stories and they went right in to record this album.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Favorite artistic direction?

 

I feel like each of the eras had such powerful design concepts behind them that were consistent in all of their media/live appearances

 

Viva being the easiest to notice. Outfits, backdrops, cover arts, even the website.

I personally liked the clean, professional design of the AROBTTH era. The color pallet felt in tune with the album as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm always confused when people bag on Coldplay this way. It implies that the writer's musical pallet and catalog are so "diverse" and "deep" that they simply can't enjoy Coldplay. All the article does is make them look like a jerk.

 

I agree. And what's with bagging a 'middle-aged' middle manager's taste in music?!! It stereotypes, stigmatizes, and even worse implies that the Super Bowl shouldn't be about the majority, and that people are only allowed to listen to 'cutting edge' music otherwise it invalidates their musical choices... What sort of twisted logic (pun intended) is that? The biggest mainstream event should of course reflect its biggest mainstream demographic! I understand Coldplay fans not liking the band going mainstream but whoever wrote that article needs their head checked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
and that people are only allowed to listen to 'cutting edge' music otherwise it invalidates their musical choices... What sort of twisted logic (pun intended) is that?

 

Nice pun! ^^ :laugh4:

 

Im not sure how others relation to "cutting edge/underground/experimental" music is, but personally I have tried a few times to delve into it a bit and every time Im like "eh I dont hear any melody here...I dont like it". Even the more intricate artists I like tend to always be known ones (like Tori Amos) either globally or locally (danish artists).

 

I can appreciate the cutting edge stuff for all other reasons, intellectual and whatnot, but its not a pleasurable listening experience for me. (Bjork comes to mind as an example, though she is fairly known she is also definitely not mainstream) Conversely though there is a lot of mainstream music everyone raves about that I also dont enjoy...so meh, its a conundrum! I totally agree based on my conclusions that no musical choice can and should be invalidated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest kmm1482
Favorite artistic direction?

 

I feel like each of the eras had such powerful design concepts behind them that were consistent in all of their media/live appearances

 

Viva being the easiest to notice. Outfits, backdrops, cover arts, even the website.

I personally liked the clean, professional design of the AROBTTH era. The color pallet felt in tune with the album as well.

I personally like the black AROBTTH era. It was simple and sleek and was just about the music and nothing else

Link to post
Share on other sites

And another icon has left our world. RIP David Bowie.

 

After seeing the impact of David Bowies death and how his music will now for sure reach many 'new' people/music lovers, it just made me think about coldplay. Imagine when they are old. One day they will go (yes thats life..). What will they then mean, how will they be remembered, what is their legacy. Will it be about their older albums, or have they by then been making so many more sky full of stars/adventure of a l./hymn for the w. songs.. will their classics leave a much smaller mark than I thought they would. I believe that songs like clocks, yellow, the scientist, viva la vida etc. are evergreens, but Im not so sure if the band will be remembered for making great music if they now just continue making album after album with less serious and more simple pop music. They are not even 40 yet, so there's a lot of time for many more poppy albums. And the more of these albums the further we're getting from their best music. Wonder if the band ever thinks about this. Isn't it strange if they really dont care about this at all?

 

Btw. I do like Birds a lot :) Wish they would take more of a indie direction. I would even prefer them to go a bit to the background of the music world. I think it's better if they would stop trying to make those big pop hits. They are not really their best songs anymore, not 'classic' material.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thought perhaps you might be interested in this, just posted now.

 

Why Coldplay have changed

 

[MEDIA=twitter]686271933097336832[/MEDIA]

Mobile Link: https://twitter.com/ColdplayAtlas/status/686271933097336832

 

Change was never the problem. I feel like after Viva they had two very different albums they could have made, and they do touch on this a little bit in certain MX era interviews. On one side you have MX, and as much as they say "oh we put the best of both (MX and the "quieter album") together" it's pretty clear the style and production of the album is made for the pop songs, Paradise, HLH, ETIAW, POC, etc. On the other side you have something mostly unknown.

 

With what we know now it's POSSIBLE that the album that got "merged" could have been Ghost Stories and maybe we would have just gotten the same thing in a different order. But even right after Viva, it didn't seem like they were going in that direction.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On one side you have MX, and as much as they say "oh we put the best of both (MX and the "quieter album") together" it's pretty clear the style and production of the album is made for the pop songs, Paradise, HLH, ETIAW, POC, etc.

 

Us Against The World, UFO, Charlie Brown, Major Minus, Up With The Birds, even DLIBYH in part have a very predominantly organic production (some are rock songs, some are acoustics), so there are just as many songs if not more that do not have a typical pop style production.

To me what they said about putting the best of both is exactly what they did...UATW, UWTB and UFO are most definitely some songs from that acoustic album they were making, then we have some rock-ish songs like Major Minus, Charlie Brown, DLIBYH and then songs whose style and/production lean more towards pop like POC, ETIAW, Paradise and HLH. So to me MX is exactly the mix they said they were going for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Us Against The World, UFO, Charlie Brown, Major Minus, Up With The Birds, even DLIBYH in part have a very predominantly organic production (some are rock songs, some are acoustics), so there are just as many songs if not more that do not have a typical pop style production.

To me what they said about putting the best of both is exactly what they did...UATW, UWTB and UFO are most definitely some songs from that acoustic album they were making, then we have some rock-ish songs like Major Minus, Charlie Brown, DLIBYH and then songs whose style and/production lean more towards pop like POC, ETIAW, Paradise and HLH. So to me MX is exactly the mix they said they were going for.

 

Jonny didn't vary up his guitar enough on the quieter songs, I'm not 100% on it but I think the effects used in CB sound like the same effects used in UATW (Slight distortion being prominent when ever he arpeggiates or even his riffs in DLIBYH). In their older discography, syncopation and LACK of sound is what really created a lot of magic.

 

Chris's voice and acoustic guitar take up too much of the perceived soundstage. Granted, I find this problem with every song on MX, the sound feels more like a wall instead of a real space of any shape or size. Not to mention the same vocoder/reverb effects are used what seems to be every song, giving Chris a very UNorganic feeling compared to previous albums.

 

U.F.O. chooses to have Chris sing through a tin can which is really the biggest problem with the song, second being the strings volume, way too loud in my opinion.

 

Charlie Brown makes maybe the most avoidable mistake on the album in overlaying Jonny's riff with some horrendous honky-tonk piano/percussive square lead. It really blows my mind because at Rock am Ring 2010 it SOUNDS like they got the song right and it wasn't there. Beats me.

 

Major Minus abuses Chris's poor acoustic guitar with reverb but it wouldn't fit the rest of the song if it didn't have it. On this song I think the voice effects actually fit. Major Minus in general is a real example of a song they flat out wouldn't have been able to make, or at least in this format, if they didn't "change", take that as you will.

 

Up With the Birds comes the closest to putting Chris's voice in the right spot. First half of the song is what I really think is the "dreamiest" the last 3 albums have reached (The Escapist being the dreamiest song I think they've made). Toning down the weird multi-Chris harmonic thing it does at "Might have to go" just the TINIEST amount would have went a long way as it wouldn't have meshed with the reverb as much which created a lot of noise for little sound. Also Jonny found a different effect on his pedal after recording 12 out of 14 songs (POCs effect is very unique in comparison to the rest). Honestly this song comes the closest to breaking down the sound wall and putting up something that feels natural.

 

All in all I can't disagree more. MX has in my opinion the worst production value/decisions and really suffers because of it. But opinion or not, the sound is at least consistent throughout the album. If they were aiming for that, they did a good job.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether the songs have similar production traits weaved among them (which may very well be the case), its still different genres in one album , from slow acoustic ones, to rockier pieces to more pop ones. It still supports the theory (which really isn't a theory cuz they pretty much confirmed it) that they took songs from the "slow" album and the more "up-tempo" one they were working on and mixed them together in MX.

 

I find what they did on MX pretty similar to GS and AHFOD, just that in this case they released them as two separate albums, but again they were pretty much working on more somber songs together with more vibrant ones during the same period of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jonny didn't vary up his guitar enough on the quieter songs, I'm not 100% on it but I think the effects used in CB sound like the same effects used in UATW (Slight distortion being prominent when ever he arpeggiates or even his riffs in DLIBYH). In their older discography, syncopation and LACK of sound is what really created a lot of magic.

 

Chris's voice and acoustic guitar take up too much of the perceived soundstage. Granted, I find this problem with every song on MX, the sound feels more like a wall instead of a real space of any shape or size. Not to mention the same vocoder/reverb effects are used what seems to be every song, giving Chris a very UNorganic feeling compared to previous albums.

 

U.F.O. chooses to have Chris sing through a tin can which is really the biggest problem with the song, second being the strings volume, way too loud in my opinion.

 

Charlie Brown makes maybe the most avoidable mistake on the album in overlaying Jonny's riff with some horrendous honky-tonk piano/percussive square lead. It really blows my mind because at Rock am Ring 2010 it SOUNDS like they got the song right and it wasn't there. Beats me.

 

Major Minus abuses Chris's poor acoustic guitar with reverb but it wouldn't fit the rest of the song if it didn't have it. On this song I think the voice effects actually fit. Major Minus in general is a real example of a song they flat out wouldn't have been able to make, or at least in this format, if they didn't "change", take that as you will.

 

Up With the Birds comes the closest to putting Chris's voice in the right spot. First half of the song is what I really think is the "dreamiest" the last 3 albums have reached (The Escapist being the dreamiest song I think they've made). Toning down the weird multi-Chris harmonic thing it does at "Might have to go" just the TINIEST amount would have went a long way as it wouldn't have meshed with the reverb as much which created a lot of noise for little sound. Also Jonny found a different effect on his pedal after recording 12 out of 14 songs (POCs effect is very unique in comparison to the rest). Honestly this song comes the closest to breaking down the sound wall and putting up something that feels natural.

 

All in all I can't disagree more. MX has in my opinion the worst production value/decisions and really suffers because of it. But opinion or not, the sound is at least consistent throughout the album. If they were aiming for that, they did a good job.

 

Not to agree nor to disagree, but I just wanted to give you a :thumbsup: for your detailed and considered analysis - I really like that aspect of your post... It certainly gives me a different way of looking at and hearing the songs on :mx:!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...