Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2012 22:51:22 GMT -5
rolling stone gives it a thumbs-up..... Rob Sheffield February 9, 2012 We've earned this, right? When David Lee Roth and Van Halen went down their own separate mean streets in the Eighties, who paid the price? We did. Van Halen fans everywhere have suffered through the years, waiting for this reunion. We don't need it to be Fair Warning or Van Halen II. We don't even need it to be Diver Down. We just deserve a break. Well, as the man used to say: one break, coming up. Van Halen's "heard you missed us, we're back" album is not only the most long-awaited reunion joint in the history of reunion joints, it is – against all reasonable expectations – a real Van Halen album. It's sonically closer to 1984 than to 5150, but it's closer to 1980's Women and Children First than to either – no synth glop, no ballads. Eddie always liked to compare the band's sound to "Godzilla waking up," but this is the real deal. And the old lizard sounds hungry to chomp some power lines. A Different Kind of Truth is the first Van Halen album since the Nineties dregs of Balance and Van Halen III, which were just humiliating Styx rips. But Eddie has rediscovered his guitar and unplugged the synths, as if Roth's presence reminded Eddie who his band is named after. Since there's never been a single Van Halen fan in history who secretly wished Eddie would put down the guitar and play more keyboards, this is a coup. Especially because Eddie's solos have the fluency of his early Eighties playing – just listen to him stretch out on "Big River" and "Blood and Fire." If the songs are based on 1970s demos, that was a wise move, because wherever these 13 tunes came from, there isn't a single Waldo on the bus. The tempos are atomic-punk fast, letting Alex Van Halen rock out on the drums for the first time since his flaming-gong days. Original bassist Michael Anthony is missed for his bottom end, and even more for his kicked-in-the-nads harmonies. But Wolfgang Van Halen, Eddie's son, acquits himself superbly – he definitely doesn't flunk if anyone asks, "Have you seen Junior's grades?" As for Diamond Dave, the gods only made one of him, because they couldn't take the competition. Now this is a rock star, except no other rock star would try to get away with this many cornball one-liners ("It's looking like the city towed my other apartment!"). He's lost a high note or two, but the "stone-cold sister soccer moms" he pursues in "Honeybabysweetiedoll" probably like him better this way. Toward the end, Roth reaches down between his legs, eases the seat back and shifts into "Stay Frosty." It's not just the show-stopper – it's a four-minute anthology of everything that rules about Van Halen. It begins as an acoustic country-blues goof, then switches into metal bombast, as Eddie's fingers and Roth's lips take turns showing off. "Stay Frosty" ends with the trick Van Halen did better than any band ever: the crashing power-chord-and-drumroll finale, which goes on for 30 insane seconds. It's ridiculous. It's obnoxious. It's awesome. This moment alone sums up why the album needed to happen. We've earned it. And so have they. Read more: www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/a-different-kind-of-truth-20120209#ixzz1lw15fBpLThe hyper bole about this album has reached rolling stone. Best reunion ever ! I think that says enough about how rediculously over the top this review is. I knew there was a reason i ignored Rolling Stone. For as smart as you supposedly are, you can't spell worth a fucking shit, so your opinion goes out the door for me. "Rediculous"? Really? tsk..tsk.. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 10, 2012 22:56:22 GMT -5
The hyper bole about this album has reached rolling stone. Best reunion ever ! I think that says enough about how rediculously over the top this review is. I knew there was a reason i ignored Rolling Stone. For as smart as you supposedly are, you can't spell worth a fucking shit, so your opinion goes out the door for me. "Rediculous"? Really? tsk..tsk.. Spelling or not the reviews i am reading are wildly over the top in their enthusiasm. Give me a review that says it's a good solid album and i'll take it seriously otherwise it sounds like serious fan boy stuff. You know the sound of some KISS fans, at some point the fandom just gets rediculous. The only knock in that review of the entire album was one or two high notes from Dave... REALLY ! " Stay Frosty " is the showstopper ! The back end of the album isn't too bad to be honest, most of the really good songs at at the end but it's ruined by " Stay Frosty ". There's goof ball but where's the SEXY That's what this album misses pure SEX had Van Halen brought the SEXY BACK we'd be talking much closer to great Van Halen in my opinion. The drumming is dissapointing on most of the album. The BASS player does a good job that i can concur on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2012 23:03:17 GMT -5
For as smart as you supposedly are, you can't spell worth a fucking shit, so your opinion goes out the door for me. "Rediculous"? Really? tsk..tsk.. Spelling or not the reviews i am reading are wildly over the top in their enthusiasm. Give me a review that says it's a good solid album and i'll take it seriously otherwise it sounds like serious fan boy stuff. You know the sound of some KISS fans, at some point the fandom just gets rediculous. The only knock in that review of the entire album was one or two high notes from Dave... REALLY ! And once again, you use this fucking "rediculous" word that doesn't exist...I'm sorry, but if you can't spell a word like "ridiculous", then you ARE THAT WORD. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 10, 2012 23:09:46 GMT -5
Spelling or not the reviews i am reading are wildly over the top in their enthusiasm. Give me a review that says it's a good solid album and i'll take it seriously otherwise it sounds like serious fan boy stuff. You know the sound of some KISS fans, at some point the fandom just gets rediculous. The only knock in that review of the entire album was one or two high notes from Dave... REALLY ! And once again, you use this fucking "rediculous" word that doesn't exist...I'm sorry, but if you can't spell a word like "ridiculous", then you ARE THAT WORD. I'm typing it with a bit of twang, get over it. I thought KISS fans had serious rose coloured glasses but i ain't seen nothin ' apparently until the release of this new Van Halen album. I am seeing rose coloured glassedness on a whole other level now. It's a good album. Nothing more, nothing less. Certainly nothing like the Rolling Stone review would suggest. I feel people who have not brought it yet are being mislead by reviews in general. It's good. Is it worth $20  ? If i lost the CD today i would be in no hurry to pay for a replacement. Judging by that review Van Halen have saved music. The reunion to end all reunion's, Thank God for Van Halen they have saved music from the britney spears of the world. I can't wait for the next time Rolling Stone review KISS should be the standard i gather or perhaps " Monster " will save us all from todays music. Like they say on ESPN NFL review show " C'MON MAN " |
|
|
|
Post by flexlufful on Feb 10, 2012 23:14:32 GMT -5
Spelling ridiculous as "rediculous" is not a twang.
E is not remotely close to I on the keyboard.
FAIL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 10, 2012 23:23:04 GMT -5
Spelling ridiculous as "rediculous" is not a twang. E is not remotely close to I on the keyboard. FAIL. So it must have been done deliberately, i.e. twang Like Reducorous Why all of a sudden get such a common word wrong but almost every other word right ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2012 23:35:42 GMT -5
Spelling ridiculous as "rediculous" is not a twang. E is not remotely close to I on the keyboard. FAIL. Pretty much. What a dick. I would love to argue, but I will wait when dude can at least get some of the playing field rules down. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 11, 2012 4:05:48 GMT -5
Spelling ridiculous as "rediculous" is not a twang. E is not remotely close to I on the keyboard. FAIL. Pretty much. What a dick. I would love to argue, but I will wait when dude can at least get some of the playing field rules down. RULES A. Do not dare question a Van Halen album as anything but less than GREAT. I got it, you may continue now. |
|
|
|
Post by Anomacunt the Excellent on Feb 11, 2012 4:08:05 GMT -5
Ooo, swing and a miss.
|
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 11, 2012 4:23:43 GMT -5
If ADKOT is great i'd hate to actually see a poor Van Halen album. He rounds fifth base........................................ Home run. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 11, 2012 4:45:44 GMT -5
If ADKOT is great i'd hate to actually see a poor Van Halen album. He rounds fifth base........................................ Home run. I could say the same about Hot In The Shade. How so ? There is no if's butt's or maybe's about Hot in the shade not being great so no. |
|
|
|
Post by Anomacunt the Excellent on Feb 11, 2012 4:47:41 GMT -5
Hot In The Shade fucking blows, the songs just aren't there. But if you think Boomerang's an all-time classic then hey...that's your opinion. A wrong opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 11, 2012 19:01:34 GMT -5
Hot In The Shade fucking blows, the songs just aren't there. But if you think Boomerang's an all-time classic then hey...that's your opinion. A wrong opinion. Not to the point of HITS being a great album i agree but i am saying the same about the new Van Halen album. I don't think Boomerang's as bad as most of my fellow KISS army. Boomerang is certainly not an all time classic and it sounds like your attributing such opinion to myself which is wrong. Boomerang is not even a KISS classic let alone all time. I think HITS is decent given it is their 15th studio album and 15 years into their recording career after their debut album. I would love to compare it with other artists 15th studio album. Do any of the factors i point out come into play when you judge an album like HITS ? Obviously i think these factors should play some role. Were you expecting HITS to be of debut or even follow up to debut type quality ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2012 21:03:23 GMT -5
Hot In The Shade fucking blows, the songs just aren't there. But if you think Boomerang's an all-time classic then hey...that's your opinion. A wrong opinion. Not to the point of HITS being a great album i agree but i am saying the same about the new Van Halen album. I don't think Boomerang's as bad as most of my fellow KISS army. Boomerang is certainly not an all time classic and it sounds like your attributing such opinion to myself which is wrong. Boomerang is not even a KISS classic let alone all time. I think HITS is decent given it is their 15th studio album and 15 years into their recording career after their debut album. I would love to compare it with other artists 15th studio album. Do any of the factors i point out come into play when you judge an album like HITS ? Obviously i think these factors should play some role. Were you expecting HITS to be of debut or even follow up to debut type quality ? Dude. Go to the FAQ for this discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 15, 2012 19:11:41 GMT -5
Not to the point of HITS being a great album i agree but i am saying the same about the new Van Halen album. I don't think Boomerang's as bad as most of my fellow KISS army. Boomerang is certainly not an all time classic and it sounds like your attributing such opinion to myself which is wrong. Boomerang is not even a KISS classic let alone all time. I think HITS is decent given it is their 15th studio album and 15 years into their recording career after their debut album. I would love to compare it with other artists 15th studio album. Do any of the factors i point out come into play when you judge an album like HITS ? Obviously i think these factors should play some role. Were you expecting HITS to be of debut or even follow up to debut type quality ? Dude. Go to the FAQ for this discussion. Can't do that. HITS is one of the most criticised KISS album's yet i feel it being the 15th Studio album it is criticised a little too harshly / unfairly for an album this deep into the catalogue. " Forever " alone for me goes a heck of a long way let alone the quality either way of the rest of the album. If every song was " Betrayed " i could understand, i just don't think it's quite THAT bad of an album. HITS is a damn good 15th studio album. |
|
|
|
Post by dute on Feb 15, 2012 19:15:51 GMT -5
Dude. Go to the FAQ for this discussion. Can't do that. HITS is one of the most criticised KISS album's yet i feel it being the 15th Studio album it is criticised a little too harshly / unfairly for an album this deep into the catalogue. " Forever " alone for me goes a heck of a long way let alone the quality either way of the rest of the album. If every song was " Betrayed " i could understand, i just don't think it's quite THAT bad of an album. HITS is a damn good 15th studio album. What does it being the 15th album matter? If you like HITS, you like it. Doesn't matter if it was the 7th or 15th album in the catalogue. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 15, 2012 19:39:07 GMT -5
Can't do that. HITS is one of the most criticised KISS album's yet i feel it being the 15th Studio album it is criticised a little too harshly / unfairly for an album this deep into the catalogue. " Forever " alone for me goes a heck of a long way let alone the quality either way of the rest of the album. If every song was " Betrayed " i could understand, i just don't think it's quite THAT bad of an album. HITS is a damn good 15th studio album. What does it being the 15th album matter? If you like HITS, you like it. Doesn't matter if it was the 7th or 15th album in the catalogue. So a band is just as likely to do a great album at their 15th or whatever album way down the line as they are the first ? |
|
|
|
Post by dute on Feb 15, 2012 20:03:51 GMT -5
What does it being the 15th album matter? If you like HITS, you like it. Doesn't matter if it was the 7th or 15th album in the catalogue. So a band is just as likely to do a great album at their 15th or whatever album way down the line as they are the first ? Bands still can make great music long after their heyday. Not saying it happens all the time, but it does. Alice Cooper is one example. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2012 21:39:54 GMT -5
So a band is just as likely to do a great album at their 15th or whatever album way down the line as they are the first ? Bands still can make great music long after their heyday. Not saying it happens all the time, but it does. Alice Cooper is one example. Amen on the Coop example. Alice has not made a bad record since TRASH, in my very humble selfish opinion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2012 21:45:20 GMT -5
Dude. Go to the FAQ for this discussion. Can't do that. HITS is one of the most criticised KISS album's yet i feel it being the 15th Studio album it is criticised a little too harshly / unfairly for an album this deep into the catalogue. " Forever " alone for me goes a heck of a long way let alone the quality either way of the rest of the album. If every song was " Betrayed " i could understand, i just don't think it's quite THAT bad of an album. HITS is a damn good 15th studio album. Here's the deal dude. This is a VH thread, but I'll play. HITS is a good album. I agree. But your example of a bad song (Betrayed) I disagree with. Anyway, hairsplitting, hold on...... I didn't like HITS very much when it came out. I thought it was bland in some ways, which I later learned had to do mostly with production and half-baked songs....all that said, years later, I am emotionally attached like fuck to it, more than probably you are. But it is not a battle I feel I have to have about. Personally. BUT----if I did, I would do it on the FAQ. And this whole 15 years in thing.....meh.....any band at any time can pull greatness out of them....again, Dute's example of Alice Cooper is perfect..... The point she made for you, and what I will make is that YOU LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE, and FUCK WHAT OTHERS THINK. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 17, 2012 21:23:28 GMT -5
Can't do that. HITS is one of the most criticised KISS album's yet i feel it being the 15th Studio album it is criticised a little too harshly / unfairly for an album this deep into the catalogue. " Forever " alone for me goes a heck of a long way let alone the quality either way of the rest of the album. If every song was " Betrayed " i could understand, i just don't think it's quite THAT bad of an album. HITS is a damn good 15th studio album. Here's the deal dude. This is a VH thread, but I'll play. HITS is a good album. I agree. But your example of a bad song (Betrayed) I disagree with. Anyway, hairsplitting, hold on...... I didn't like HITS very much when it came out. I thought it was bland in some ways, which I later learned had to do mostly with production and half-baked songs....all that said, years later, I am emotionally attached like fuck to it, more than probably you are. But it is not a battle I feel I have to have about. Personally. BUT----if I did, I would do it on the FAQ. And this whole 15 years in thing.....meh.....any band at any time can pull greatness out of them....again, Dute's example of Alice Cooper is perfect..... The point she made for you, and what I will make is that YOU LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE, and FUCK WHAT OTHERS THINK. Not so much 15 years BUT 15 album's in. I just want to make that very clear destinction. Very few bands reach 15 studio album's let alone make it be a great one. I'll give you Alice Cooper he's a musical freak. |
|
Kissthat
Full Member
KISS 1973-2014
Posts: 197
|
Post by Kissthat on Feb 18, 2012 9:49:40 GMT -5
Never cared for Dylan, and I like HITS,not in my top 10 KISS albums,but I like it. The new Van Halen album is a solid 4 star release.I'd personally list it right behind the first 4 albums . As someone else pointed out some of the 1 star trolls on Amazon are all pissed about who's there or whose not there.I did give it 5 stars on Amazon just to offset the 1 star trolls,I do that with most of my reviews on Amazon for that reason.Every album attracts 1 star trolls that hate an album for any stupid reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by allyourlies on Feb 18, 2012 11:36:17 GMT -5
Never cared for Dylan, and I like HITS,not in my top 10 KISS albums,but I like it. The new Van Halen album is a solid 4 star release.I'd personally list it right behind the first 4 albums . As someone else pointed out some of the 1 star trolls on Amazon are all pissed about who's there or whose not there.I did give it 5 stars on Amazon just to offset the 1 star trolls,I do that with most of my reviews on Amazon for that reason.Every album attracts 1 star trolls that hate an album for any stupid reason. True, but i think 4 stars is being a little too generous. I would say any of their first 4 albums to be a 4. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Feb 19, 2012 0:00:50 GMT -5
Dylan's 15th studio album was Blood On The Tracks, masterpiece. The Stone's 15th was It's Only Rock And Roll, masterpiece. Proves my point, thank you. That's the calibre, it does not get better than the rolling stones. Bob Dylan and The Rolling Stones they are the absolute best of the best of the best of the best of all time. KISS are my fav band but i don't have rose coloured glasses enough to not be able to say The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan and let's throw in the Beatles are in their own class onto themselves. Only the extreme best in music history are going to do a stand out 15th studio album. Again you prove my point 100% correct. |
|
