thecrackedjack

X&Y is pretty bad, but the rest are great.

See this line really makes me mad. By that logic I can't criticize food because I'm not chef. Hell, that means you can't criticize anything but your specific field. Do you realize how stupid that sounds? They make music to release worldwide and put themselves in the spotlight. People have every damned right to criticize them as much as they want. Some people are just to insecure to listen to criticism of something they like.

First time I head the song was in Japan. :D

Good to hear. It's hard to take many reviews seriously. Especially from fan message boards like this one. Because you know that the album could be worse than the ebola virus and it would be praised like the second coming. Large magazines aren't much better. So, when someone like this changes their mind, you get a little more credible.

this song's about as edgy as a butter knife.

Of course, if you live in a country where the album comes out the 12th.

ah, so your deaf or you've never heard the song?

Honestly, I think your both pretty far off. Every single person you see who stars on TV, movies, news anchors, etc has much more money and success than the average person and all aren't hated. Tom Hanks is a nice guy and not really your typical flashy star and he's well liked. In fact, the nicer and more well adjusted celebrities seem to be more well liked. The 2 main reason why Coldplay are disliked, I think: 1. They receive a lot of media attention and are the closest to being the "biggest band in the world" if there is such a thing these days. Therefore it's simple numbers that they would receive more hate than lesser known acts. With lots of fans and big selling albums comes people opinions from the opposite of the spectrum. 2. Yes, they are pretty nice guys and not typical "rock star". But, let's face it they aren't very rock n' rock to begin with and that will turn some guys off and many will label them a wuss band. Which is about half truth in my book, although they seem to be working on that quite well.

Violet Hill is still the best, but this sounds pretty good at the end.

Of course it will leak. Hundreds of thousands of copies will be manufactured and shipped around the globe to countries that will surely have questionable security measures in warehouses. Someone will get a copy and leak it eventually.

You sound like one of those, "Dude they made a change, a change can't be bad. They're doing something different so they couldn't possibly make a turn for the worse! Go listen to some other crappy band!"

I'd rather have a tarantula lay eggs in my ear than listen to Arcade Fire.

For all the tons and tons of money I'm sure they are all pulling in, I'm sure work isn't too hard on them.

Yeah, that's kind of what it sounds like. I hope they don't fall into the trap of thinking that adding a bunch of crap like choirs, strings, and weird instruments is "advancing their sound." It's not in the slightest. Mature melodies and interesting lyrics are (which I really like the lyrics I've heard so far).

Not even in the slightest.

Gotta say that review makes me a little worried. Choirs, strings, ect make it sound really overblown and pretentious. Truly great songs don't need to be drowned in choirs and tons of strings. Cemeteries of London sounds really cool though. Just afraid they might be getting a little carried away here and we'll all look back on this album in 5 years and cringe. Hopefully not though, because I really do like most of what I've heard so far.

right, and if if doesn't leak those people will wait to the release date and download it anyway. There not going to be rushing out to buy a copy, when it will be on the web the minute a store opens somewhere on the world. Therefore, it doesn't make any difference.

Cost the band sales? I really doubt that to any significant extent. I've never really understood that statement really. People either buy albums or not, not. If it leaks they get it early. If it doesn't leak, people will wait to the release date and download it illegally. It doesn't make a damn lick of difference one way or the other IMO.

Now that Viva La Vida is out, what do think is the best title track? I say A Rush of Blood to the Head.

I doubt its one person playing a violin. The sound is too full for it to be one person. I say either a string quartet or maybe Eno created the sounds on keyboard or something.

Is anyone concerned that 2/3 of the songs released feature little to no music from the rest of the band? No drum kits, no guitars, no bass lines. I don't know about you, but when we are talking about a band, I'd actually like to hear the other members. I guess I just find it odd, that's all. Anyone feel the same way? Change is fine, I just wish it didn't feel like the rest of the band was removed from the equation.

Violet Hill, of course. The other band members are barely even present on Viva La Vida or A Spell...

I like it. But I do have a complaint: It's not a very organic song. IE, instead of guitar, bass, and actual drums you get synths, strings, drum machines. I prefer to hear the band play, not some electronic doo dads. The melody and lyrics are fantastic, but I wish the actual music was different. Violet Hill is still the best song that we've heard.

Of course, only an ignorant person wouldn't think so. If I have 5 books and can only afford 1. How do you pick? You take a look and read a little of each, and buy the 1 that interests you the most. That doesn't mean you'll always be right with your judgment, but theres still nothing wrong with it. Why do you think every other online music store in the known universe has 30 second samples? I've discovered many amazing bands and CD from browsing said samples and so have many other people. And what was I doing? Judging from 30 second samples. Of course, I've had it go the other way too.

Of course you can judge a 30 second clip. Just like I can judge a movie trailer, and decide whether or not I want to see the movie. Now, that doesn't mean I'm going to always make the right judgment. But, you at least get an idea.