User Albums Journey
Exploring beyond the book, one album at a time
8
Albums Rated
2.5
Average Rating
Rating Distribution
How you rate albums
Rating Timeline
Average rating over time
Ratings by Decade
Which era do you prefer?
Activity by Day
When do you listen?
Taste Analysis
Genre Preferences
Ratings by genre
Origin Preferences
Ratings by country
Popular Reviews
Cluster
Incredibly impressive for 1974, the use of electronics is bright, atmospheric, and able to induce feelings of calmness, energy, and hope. It sounds incredible, very clean and you're able to pull apart the layers. There are some amazing unique styles on here. My major complaint is that it does sometimes come off as a bit harsh, with moments where it sounds like the dudes are just abruptly hitting random keys. It's more noticeable in the eerier more experimental tracks, which I don't think are very good compared to the brighter, fuller ones.
I think one reason it sounds a bit harsh and weird at times is because the technology is dated (rather than their skill or precursor artists), and I'm sure it would sound so much smoother had they used stuff from just a few years later.
1 likes
Status Quo
A bit of everything in British 70s rock. There's some glam, Beatlesesque, power pop, heavy metal, and jam. I appreciate the diversity in styles and how hard they go. Most of their songs do sound like they're trying to imitate more popular bands as closely as possible without understanding the charm that those bands have, coming off as a bit ingenuine. No standout tracks, but I found myself liking something out of almost every track.
1 likes
Boy Azooga
It's that 2010s/20s indie sound that's still prevalent in albums today! Very much like Tame Impala or Ty Segall with that neo-psychedelia style. Clean yet hazy, groovy and funky, atmospheric, energetic, fun & weird vibes yet chill, random sound effects, and a bright & happy mood.
I quite like the effort they went into the production. There're a lot of creative ideas in here, and it kept me engaged wondering what stunt they were gonna pull next. I also like the mixing. There were a few subdued channels, and some conflicts, but for the most part, it was clear and distinguishable.
If I were to be critical about it, I do find it to be commercial and directionless. The tracks felt a bit scattered, as if they were throwing things at the wall, and I can see what they were trying to go for in most cases, but hardly much of it really hits the bullseye. The moments they try to emphasize lack impact, and that's why much of it barely left a memory if not for the unusual sounds. A lot of hooks and riffs also felt like they were copying contemporaries. It sounded familiar yet off.
Fine to listen to. Fine to put on an indie playlist. The weird effects will definitely gravitate ears from the casual listener. But it's not something I could fall in love with, and it leads me wanting to listen to the ones they try imitating who are able to fulfill that power and satisfaction I long for.
1 likes
Bad Religion
I could never get behind Bad Religion. Their most influential records (Suffer, No Control, Against the Grain) had some creative ideas. But for the most part, they just sound like a commercial radio-friendly boring version of what earlier hardcore bands like Dead Kennys initiated. It's slow and melodic, with riffs and catchy vocals that appeal to the alt rock crowd. I wasn't able to find anything special out of it.
Recipe for Hate marks their mainstream breakthrough in the 90s alongside Green Days, NOFX, and Offspring. It's even slower and more melodic with expressive singing vocals. If not for the fast-paced minimalist riffs, anthemic-style vocals, anti-authoritarian lyrics, and basic drum beat, you'd confuse this for another alt rock album of the time.
Didn't care for most tracks. A lot of it was ok, some of it catchy, most of it boring and lacking innovation. Most of it trying hard to appeal to the mainstream crowd. It is produced well, with diverse styles, and it does a decent job at being pop without losing its punk roots.
1 likes