Six is the second album by English alternative rock band Mansun, released in September 1998 via Parlophone. It was released in the UK and Europe on 7 September 1998, and in the US on 20 April 1999, with an alternative running order, different artwork, and the re-recorded single version of the title track. In an interview prior to the release of Six, Paul Draper stated that the "interlude" "Witness to a Murder (Part Two)" was included to separate the album into two parts as a tribute to old-style vinyl albums.
In a rave review for Uncut, critic Steve Sutherland described Six as "the most ridiculous, confusing, complicated, over-reaching, frustrating, inventive, hyperactive, surprising and liberating record to yet appear from the post-Britpop stable." Jon Garrett of PopMatters conceded that the album is "not for everyone" but was impressed by its "debauched beauty", calling it "the sound of a band collectively snubbing its fan base and smashing expectation to spectacular effect".
I think I loved this. I may come back and re-rate after a few more listens, but I'm going to err on the side of recklessness and go straight to a 5.
It was a very cohesive album and gave me soft, Dream Theater like vibes. I'm going to dig deeper into this album, and deeper into Mansun. This was a good pick.
January 8, 202six
HL: title track, "Fall Out", "Cancer", "Being a Girl"
Extremely unfamiliar with this band. They're from some place called- let me know if I'm saying this right- England?
Ok, whatever :p
Unexpected Tchaikovsky. Unexpected Tom Baker
Okay, my expectations weren't terribly high, since I may have read Manic Street Preachers and Suede influenced them (they got 3s across the board from me). Something about the reckless overuse of guitar FX and noises (anyone else catch the TARDIS at the end?) ended up making it a more enjoyable experience. Amidst contemporary bands like Suede, Oasis, & The Verve, who were taking themselves maybe too seriously in the late 90s, there were also weirdos like Super Furry Animals and, I guess Mansun, just trying random bullshit and having a lot of it succeed.
Early in I was baffled by the art/prog suggestions of the genre descriptions for this, as it lead in with straightforward new-wave inflicted Britpop. The art shows up pretty quick however, and if anything the sound leans too eclectic, tending to lack of a coherent voice. The artier side didn't always work for me - spoken word stuff rarely does it for me in this context - overall I thought it was good but not great.
Six is an OK album. Sometimes it's better than OK, but then something follows that is clearly over-complex and not working in any way. For example the song "Six" consists of three different songs with a section of the first part reoccurring in the third part. The three parts have varying tempos and the transition between the parts is silence. This does not work in the sense that it does not feel like one piece of music at all. The singer can sing, but is not a great singer. He tries to overachieve (and sounds like Billy Corgan in those moments and that is not meant as a compliment). Also the compositions are not bad, but also not fantastic. In this period other bands (f.e. Faith no More, Suede, Manic Street Preachers and Smashing Pumpkins) make better music with the same intentions.
Wow this was a lot of fun. I liked the sound of it quite a bit, and bonus star for the Dance of the Sugarplum Fairies sample in Fall Out which made things feel a bit more seasonal!
Post Britpop album, which built up some reputation but I fail to see it. It is not bad, .but it is not good either. From memory, I might like Attack of the Grey Lantern a bit more, but also that album is not great.
This was fine, seems a bit before it's time for sure. When I was listening to it, I assumed that it was from the early 2010s. It being late stage Britpop I'm sure was a thing. Because I'm guessing Britpop people don't like more progressive things like this. Anyway, this was an okay listen, too long for sure, nothing super remarkable.
I didn't know how to rate this. It's too long. And the fact that it can't hold an idea still for more than 30 seconds is interesting but more distracting than anything else.
Brit-pop mixed with prog elements, but it somehow kind of works. Reminded me a lot of Be Here Now, from Oasis the previous year, both in how bloated it was (at points) and in showing (through production values and expensive sounding arrangements of the songs) how much money (and drugs) was swishing around the British indie/rock scene at the time. Not as focused as their debut, not as dark or interesting as I remember from hearing it as a kid, but not bad.
I usually love albums that keep you guessing and pivot effortlessly between sounds, unafraid to change a track's feel at a moment's notice. This LP takes that idea so far to the extreme that it suffers as a result instead – the listener never gets a single chance to rest and absorb a base-level idea of what the band is trying to say, instead whisked off to the next motif/idea/progression without a change to digest. The result is an overstuffed, scattered assemblage of pieces rather than any cohesive whole. The random Nutcracker section only invites 'everything but the kitchen sink' accusations, and the band never focuses enough on one track to make them more memorable than this one Christmas quotation. Never thought I would encounter an LP so chimeric it has no personality of its own, but this album seems to have achieved the impossible here.
What’s with the length on some of these songs. Several rhythm and tempo changes with instrumental sections that drag it out for minutes without much impressiveness. This album varies greatly in tone as well. A holiday instrumental to begin one song was really what made me question this album. Way too scattered and not something I’d revisit. 5.2/10
90s? Check. British? Check. Too long? Check.
All the things I hate.
My personal rating: 2/5
My rating relative to the list: 2/5
Should this have been included on the original list? No.