In It For The Money

People who go outside 3 times a week love to try telling you these guys are actually better than Oasis.

Well that’s pretty good.

If there was ever a case of judging a band by their hit single, this is it. 'Alright' is all I knew about Supergrass before today and I definitely thought that the rest of their work would be in the same vein: cheesy, fun, but not particularly brilliant. This album shut me down as it really showcases them in a different light, I enjoyed some of the tracks with darker melodies and it greatly surpassed their big hit from their debut album. Still not completely my style but I found myself enjoyed quite a few of these tracks. Favourites: Richard III Sun Hits The Sky Going Out

I like Supergrass a lot, have seen them live a handful of times and I think this is a solid album. But if you've got I Should Coco on the list, I'm not sure you need this too.

Definitely comes from the Smashing Pumpkins school of music.

think a lot of britpop and things adjacent is really quite bad. it's incredibly incurious music that is too loud and normative to ever ask whether or not there's actually a point in its existence. rock without dynamics, charisma, agility - everything is bashed out, played straight, totally dull. much of this is not reaaaaaally supergrass' fault, they're just part of a musical movement that is entirely worthless barring Pulp. so, re: the group at hand, a couple of songs are fine? i kind of like You Can See Me's lyric about being famous and still not getting any, and there are a couple good choruses here and there, but i'm mostly really bored by this stuff. when they decide to mix it up on the last track, they play circus music with tablas? what the hell ever man. move it along

90s rock. Still don’t really know this band but I think I like this album better than their last one on here.

I kinda guessed a britpop album would be the one that made me question the whole "must" hear but I didn't expect it to be everyone's fav little/big brothers Supergrass? What is there people must hear?! A couple of vaguely catch guitar based songs - like you can't get that on ten other albums around this time. The only thing of interest is wondering why it starts with In it For The Money rather than roaring out of the gate with Richard III. It is not bad, it is not great. 2.5/5

6/10 myślę że to taki spoko dobry album, którego można sobie posłuchać, ale niczym specjalnym mnie nie urzekł piosenki, które bardziej mi się spodobały: "You can see me" i "Sometimes I make you sad", zwłaszcza ta druga jest taka ciekawa całkiem

Really solid, would listen to again

Richard III banger

If the vocals were a tad more self-pitying, this could be Oasis.

Not as interesting or fun as their first album. Seems they were grasping for the right sound but not quite finding it.

Nothing exciting.

It had its moments but felt like nothing I hadn't heard a hundred times before or since its release. Standard late 90s Brit Rock that didn't offend whilst not particularly exciting.

Not bad, but not great either.

Laut. Aber auch echt gut.

This was surprisingly great. Upbeat and melodic with a nice range of styles.

Enjoyable vibe and lyrics, Good instrumentals. Overall an album I enjoyed listening to and would listen to again.

Notable Textzeile: Uptight, thinking things over Conversations running round my head Good times last so much longer And summer loving going straight to my head Schwieriges zweites Album, kaum Ideen, Sound zu glatt. Trotzdem noch sehr angenehm zu hören, aber irgendwie nicht so richtig innovativ. Ergänzt nicht mal so richtig das Live-Set. Gute Band, kann das besser.

Was für ein brillianter Titel für ein zweites Album. Auch wenn es nicht an das erste heran reicht, sind auch hier genug popfekte Hooks und coole Riffs und quirkige Entscheidungen um zu beglücken. Highlights neben den Hits z.B. Going Out, das klingt wie Oasis, dann aber um Zuhause bleiben und Medienpausen geht. Ach, Supergrass.

Very nice. Like it.

I love Supergrass - definitely one of the best bands to be saddled with the dreaded 'Britpop' label. They're great live too - and one of those rare bands that seem able to capture the energy and sheer joy of their live sound in their recordings. This is a joyously punchy record of infectious guitar pop that absolutely does not sound 30 years old. Does it belong on this list? I'm not convinced, much as I love it, but it's considerably more deserving than some of the drivel I've sat through...

Late 90s alt rock.

It was a fine listen, but I already forgot all of the songs.

Never been a fan of Supergrass

Tikrai neblogai

This is some excellent stuff!

melodic psychedelic britpop loaded with fun i am a fan

Some really great Britpop that still holds up. Even in they haven't had the resurgence that others from that era are going through now. Richard III is a truly great track and the rest of the album is solid. 3.75 stars rounded up to 4*

2.42

This is a fantastic album, and there is a variety of sounds here. I get grunge-type vibes from some songs, heavier songs like Richard III felt Sonic Youth-influenced, and there are some alt-rock sounds.

Kind of whatever but not bad. It's funny, it sounds like that era where everyone was trying to do that lo-fi garage band-y type sound but it's from 1997.

Supergrass are pretty damn solid - a definite punch above some of the other 90s indie bands in my humble opinion. Favourite tracks: In It for the Money (love that abrupt ending), Richard III, Laste in the Day, Sun hits the Sky, Going Out, Sometimes I Make You Sad.

COME FANNO CERTI ALBUM A RIENTRARE QUA BOH. LAMENESS PURO, TRACCE SMEMORABILI E SENZA ANIMA. BRITPOP SICURAMENTE NON IL MIO GENERE. 2/5

I didn't expect to like this one so much, but it's a straight up rocker!

Я навіть не чув про цей гурт)

A fine album. Maybe if I had heard it when it came out I would have a nostalgic connection and I would like it more but alas.

Good, but nothing to write home about. Solid 4 Stars.

I’m at a 4. It’s a good album. It just feels a little safe. Somehow, Supergrass have managed to make a post-Britpop album right at the inflection point of Britpop losing some of its major relevance as a cultural moment. For 1997, this feels more like 2000 or 2001. This is like jumping off of the Titanic a day before it hit the iceberg. I don’t know if they knew it was coming, but it’s something that makes the album a bit more cookie-cutter compared to “I Should Coco”. There’s just something in this album that lacks the same overall bite. Part of it is the lyrics; I just needed more here. A lot of these are very reliant on broader pictures & reiterating things that are already established early, making a framework for tracks that say things, but don’t specifically have something to say. There’s not much depth in it. Instrumentally, I think I prefer the wider variety of styles on their first album, as it gives everything a breakneck pace that’s unpredictable & just generally cooler. Vocally, I think they do a generally good job, but with the instrumentals feeling rather similar throughout (yes, there’s some variety, but the peaks of each track don’t differ too much), something just kinda dilutes their energy. Realistically, it’s the pacing of this album that really pulls it down to a 4 for me. I think that reiteration leads to a feeling of repetition, one that’s not helped by the instrumental progressions only happening during a solo. A lot of these have a “first minute is the whole song” air to them save for those solos, and when it’s structured like that for the full 42 minutes, there’s just something in the pacing that feels unnatural. A lot of these could trim some fat, tighten up their verses, fade out a bit sooner, and keep the flow going. There’s too much time left to sit & simmer in its shortcomings, and they feel very noticeable once they simmer for long enough. All of that said, the vibes are good throughout. I don’t think there’s any bad tracks here, but there’s a handful that just didn’t grab me in more compelling ways. I think the ceiling here is a 4, but the floor is probably a 3. It’s a very technically sound album, and it is an enjoyable one. I’m not entirely sure it needed to be on the list, but it got pretty good acclaim at the time of its release, so I get it. I think it’s very digestible at the expense of being less interesting, and while I still think it’s a 4, I can’t help but feel just a little disappointed at how safe it is.

Fun and wild, not particularly what I expected from them, though while the album has some variety and goes places, the individual songs can be a little more stationary Still likeable, though

6/10 No bad songs, but no real stand out songs either. Highlights: Richard III Cheapskate In It for the Money

eh

Supergrass were a band that I was aware of all the singles back in the day but never played an album. This one I enjoyed, the album tracks stood up to the singles. A good all rounder. Will definitely listen again

Supergrass make Britpop sound a little less predictable here. The big choruses are there, but the heavier guitars and psychedelic detours give the songs more to offer than a tune to sing along to. I like how something apparently straightforward can suddenly open up into a much stranger arrangement without losing its momentum. There’s also a real pleasure in hearing the band play. They can pile on the detail without sounding stiff, and even the more ambitious passages have a scrappy energy that keeps things fun. For a band supposedly just in it for the money, they certainly seem to be putting in the extra work.

pretty good britpop that starts strong and wanes through the middle. 3.5

I only knew a few Supergrass songs before listening to this. Not a bad collection on songs, I don't know that I needed a second disc though.

I like it. But it’s nothing special.

Snodige greier. Funker greit altså.

Didn't resonate with me

Decent enough

Got a bit bored but some nice moments on there

I bet you were in it for the money, and I wouldn’t be surprised to find you didn’t make any. For damn sure you’d never get any of mine. Another day, another unimpressive nobody band from the UK.

I was surprised with how in enjoyed this. I have I Should Coco a 4, and I think this is fairly equal in quality. It’s not as Britpopish as some of the Britpop on the list, so I enjoyed it.

Love Supergrass, some absolute bangers on here, couple of odd tracks (that last on was like something from Willy Wonka)

Blew right over me and I registered nothing. I have no memory.

The bit Darker album from their debut. Great moments are title track , Richard III has an amazing riff , Late in The Day is a good ballad, and G-Song is one of those tracks I love singing along to, It’s Not Me is beautiful longing track Going Out is very Beatles with that 90s twist Supergrass in my opinion just doesn’t make bad albums. Every album they have is consistent and I enjoy their style. 4/5

This drips with nostalgia, and absolutely stands the test of time. I very much enjoyed the revisit. Prime UK 90s. It's on the shelves. Heard before ✅️ Listened this time ✅️ Revisit ✅️ ★★★★☆(8/10) Total reviewed : 430 Already owned : 97 Purchased : 21 To buy : 5 Nope : 307

I generally don't like Britpop or Smashing Pumpkins, and the combination of the two similarly doesn't impress me much.

Good bordering on really good

Good

Generic and non memorable but alright to listen to. 3/5

I think I liked this album a smidge more than the other Supergrass album. Still didn’t light me on fire, but enjoyable. Standout Tracks: Going Out, Cheapskate Rating: 3

Had forgotten the song Going Out which I particularly enjoyed. It's a bit more mature and sonically interesting than their debut without sacrificing too much of the youthful energy of the debut. I've never liked their 70s disco type logo and it feels like a band without much lore or an exciting back story. They are just there making music, most of it fairly good.

Actually liked this quite a bit, saved

oasis sounding band IMO - rlly liked the album

We had a pretty good hiatus from Britpop for a while there, but we all knew it wouldn’t last. Like most of the Britpop on this list, it was fine. I did enjoy a few songs quite a bit but overall it was just pretty average. I wouldn’t skip past one of their songs on a playlist but I also wouldn’t listen to the whole album again.

Decent music, but I don’t think this is a must listen to album. Average 90’s rock IMO.

Supergrass is definitely an overstatement. PrettyGoodGrass would be more accurate.

This wasnt all that bad, perhaps my favorite Britpop album so far. Those are likely the kindest words I'll ever write about a Britpop band, high praise.

Very good record, nice blend of various rock genres. I don't usually enjoy Britpop, but this was done very well

This album is one of the very rare times where I think the production is holding this album back. It’s just so mushy and indecipherable. The best example is on the song I liked the most on the album “Richard III”. That’s song is just a wall of noise, and not in a positive way. Is it the worst rock album I’ve heard, far from it! But as a whole it just felt so boring. The other problem I had was just that I don’t really care for the vocals, like just his voice. It’s so generic and unremarkable. Again not the worst and not grating, just kinda underwhelming and not really for me. The more I listen to this album the more issues I have instead of it growing on me. So who knows maybe in a few years this review will be worse.

I really really enjoyed this one. At the beginning it sounded to me like the precursor to a lot of alternative 2000s rock (”Richard III” feels like a nascent version of Strokes-era rock), and then it reminded me of the 60s (the guitar riff in ”Tonight” reminds me of early rock n roll), and then it reminded me of Oasis (play the first minute of ”It’s Not Me” and I don’t need to explain myself) and hints of Blur (intro and harmonies in ”Sun Hits the Sky”), grounding it more firmly in the Britpop canon. So it sort of feels like this emblematic work of the past, present, and future of rock. In addition to the fact that I enjoyed the songs themselves, it does actually feel like this album is a helpful part of understanding a certain aspect of music history. Fav tracks: G-Song; Going Out; Cheapskate; Hollow Little Reign

Saturday, 29 August, 2026 Fine. Mid 90s alterna rock. With a touch on the country. I’d listen again, but probably wouldn’t seek it out.

Absolutely love this album

I hate this fucking generator it made me like Supergrass

Pretty average album with no song that stood out for me. 3 stars or C.

A few good tracks but nothing too memorable and not one I’ll revisit.

Rock, 1997 -> 3

Buen sonido, me gustó.

Never heard of the band or the album before and I was most pleasantly surprised. I wasn't listening to any rock at the time, so it's no wonder this got past me. These surprises are why I love this list so much.I'll listen to this again.

Fun, up-tempo album with some highlights ("In it for the Money").

Never really cared for Supergrass, it's too upbeat and fun for me aha

I think I might be a Supergrass fan. Although I enjoyed I Should Coco more this was a fun album. Very drive around with the windows open and this blaring. Seriously why did Oasis blow up and were not talking about Supergrass? These dudes don't sound like whiny bitches! Yet I get advertising for the damn Oasis documentary.... Either way I enjoyed it, glad I heard it, would listen again.

There's nothing wrong with it but also not a whole lot that stands out... I wouldn't call it super. Remember kids, sedges have edges, rushes roll and grasses like asses have holes.... Kinda like how this album is missing something.

The Kooks’ origin story

How have I never heard of them before?! As soon as the opener started I was hooked. And every song since. I feel like I’m at a house party in the 90s and I am loving every minute of it. I really love the lead singer’s vocals. It’s so versatile—like one minute he sounds kind of like the vocalists from Alice In Chains and then, other times, like Billy Corgan. Definitely one of my surprises in this album journey!!

Album #175: Supergrass – In It for the Money ⭐⭐⭐ The three-star albums cover a wide spectrum. They can be a pleasant surprise or a disappointment, but for the most part they can be quite forgettable. I reviewed I Should Coco by Supergrass maybe two weeks ago and gave it three stars. When this came up today, I realised I had little to no memory of it, but worse still, I felt little to no desire to listen to Supergrass again at all. I don't know what it is about them. They're not a bad band, and they do not make bad music. That's nearly an objective statement! Their apparent influences are all great. They're clearly indebted to '60s British rock. I hear a lot of The Kinks, and when they get a bit wah-wah with the guitar and the instrumentation wanders a bit, I hear Soft Machine. I should love it. But I think it's the tone of the music itself. I like my music to be a bit darker and probably a bit more depressing. Ironically, I seem to be too cynical for an album called In It for the Money. They just rarely land with anything that sticks in my mind. So I want to make this abundantly clear, Supergrass: it's not you, it's me. Favourite track was Cheapskate. Onto the next one.

Ikke lige et band jeg forventede at støde på igen på listen. Stadig overraskende gode i forhold til alt andet britpop, der er et eller andet i deres energi der ikke irriterer mig. Stor 3

Sjovt energisk take på britpop. Og så er de jo lokale!!

Weird... At times it sounded like Billy Corgans voice.. The music sounded ... alternative.. I think they had fun recording this! 3+

This album was pretty great. Long, but awesome. The use of the theremin in a rock album!? I'm in.

Pretty good, this!

This was surprisingly decent!

One of my favourite albums

I like it when two albums have the same or similar titles and force you to think of them together. It's easy enough to think of Supergrass's In It for the Money without thinking of the Mothers of Invention's We're Only in It for the Money and, most of the time, I don't, but it's a starting place. The titles differ by one significant word, but that word tells you almost everything. The Mothers are ONLY in it for the money: a joke about the counterculture becoming a commodity, delivered with the knowing sneer of people who understand that they are part of the same machine. Supergrass are simply in it for the money. No apology, no refusal, no need to pretend they are above wanting success. Indeed, it's probably an ironic nod to how fleeting success can be. Britpop had a strange relationship with selling out. Grunge and American alternative had made a virtue of resisting the mainstream; Britpop more or less wandered into it. Blur, Pulp, Suede, and Oasis weren't afraid of appearing on magazine covers. They liked having their photos taken. They liked being on TV. They probably all liked being invited to Downing Street on Blair's election victory in May 1997, even if most were wise enough not to go. But all discovered, in different ways, that success could become its own trap. In April 1997, Supergrass seem remarkably untroubled by it. Partly, they were so much younger than the others (poor Jarvis). I Should Coco had made them successful before they had much time to build up an expectation of what success was supposed to mean (poor Jarvis again). In It for the Money sounds like the benefit of that: they have the security of a successful band without the burden of having to prove what the success means. And the opening volley is remarkable shows no lose of propulsion: the title track through to Going Out: diverse, energetic, full of ideas and played with the confidence of people who haven't yet learned to be self-conscious. Compare them with Ash, who were slightly younger and whose early success seems, retrospectively, to have become a constraint. No need and no time to develop creatively. Supergrass's success, however, gave them room. Perhaps the novelty of Alright helped here: everyone had already decided what Supergrass weren't serious, were completely harmless. So they could get on with being something else. Low expectations can be easily surpassed. And they were of Britpop without being emblematic of it - Goodies t-shirts aside. They didn't have Oasis's bravado, Blur's cultural cache, or Pulp's social purpose. Nobody needed Supergrass to represent anything. They didn't mean anything other than fun. So they weren't anyone's favourite band, perhaps, but it also meant they could make records without having to live up to a constituency. There was no great weight on their shoulders. So In It for the Money has an odd quality for a record with such a cynical title. They really are in it for the money - but perhaps money means something less tawdry than the Mothers intended. They are in it for a career. They are in it for life. They have discovered that being just successful enough means you can keep doing this. I once said in one of these reviews (OK Computer, I think) that nobody did their best work in 1997. Perhaps Supergrass did. Perhaps they were simply better suited to the year than anyone else. Oh, and Tony Blair I guess too. And everyone who was secretly negotiating the Good Friday Agreement already. Both of those would have rocky futures, but Supergrass were Alright. 3.5 I am pretty sure ‚Moving‘ - the second single from Supergrass‘ third album - is what first peaked my interest in this band but discovering this second album is what really made me a fan. In It For the Money… I meant to write more there. I got sidetracked this morning arguing with a friend about Schindler‘s List. Great film. 4/5

Decent album not as good as I should Coco or their self titled but overall strong 90s fare.

Delightfully kitsch and fun, this is Britpop that doesn't take itself too seriously and rocks in the process. Granted it's not earth shattering or too memorable, but there's something to be said for a band that has ideas and throws them at the wall in a way that people want to hear.

Indie x carnival is not my vibe.

At first I thought this was a less annoying Oasis, but it really grew on me