 |
| Track List: 1. Fragile 2. All Is Violent, All Is Bright 3. Forever Lost 4. Fire Flies and Empty Skies 5. A Deafening Distance 6. Infinite Horizons 7. Suicide by Star 8. Remembrance Day 9. Dust and Echoes 10. When Everything Dies Running time: 48 minutes Released: 2005 |
God Is An Astronaut were another LastFM find, on some kind of Post-Rock station, probably based on Mogwai, though there is not really much resemblance between the two - with this Irish group being much more electro/synthy in their approach. I remember being taken in by, I think, From Dust to the Beyond (on The End of the Beginning) and then just picking up a few albums blind. I have no real familiarity with these songs by name, but I am sure I will recognise a few as they play.
Fragile is an interesting opening, slow and gentle to start with, it feels - and this is something I find myself saying about a fair few opening tracks - more like a closer than an opener. I could not say whether this is just me though, perhaps I look for different things in the first song on an album than others. Primarily I want one of two things:
Fragile is an interesting opening, slow and gentle to start with, it feels - and this is something I find myself saying about a fair few opening tracks - more like a closer than an opener. I could not say whether this is just me though, perhaps I look for different things in the first song on an album than others. Primarily I want one of two things:
2. A slow build that grows into the rest of the album.
(3. Bloody lists don't play nicely with the image opposite).
The latter is half true here, but overall Fragile has no build - it starts pretty one-paced and one-tone and maintains that slow, low feel throughout. It is far from an unpleasant listen but it just lacks any X factor as an opener. Thankfully the title track picks up the mantle a bit better, and has some real energy about it by the time it comes to close.
As Forever Lost starts I am noticing a pattern here though. The sounds used in these tunes are all very similar. There is distinction between the songs in tempo, volume, etc. but fundamentally they all sound... if not the same then a bit too close together to really enthuse about them. Moreover I think that extends past this album to the other 2 and a half (one is very short) that I have. I am getting a picture of God is an Astronaut as a "do one thing, but do it well" sort of band forming - but it is unfair to judge that description final just 3 songs into the first listen on the basis of my (already documented to be wonky) memory.
Synth/programmed keys, guitars, drums all present. It is a formula that seems to be doing them well and I'll be clear here: for all the over-familiarity of each song there is nothing here that would move me to remove this album from my library. It just feels as though the tunes are a little too uniform for back-to-back appreciation of the sort this blog is about. The combination of the programming with the live recording settles into a regular pattern. The guitars do "X" the keys do "Y" and the drums do "Z". Often - in the case of the keys and guitars, using similar tones and changing the patterns from song to song. This is almost certainly a grossly unfair criticism in terms of the actual process; I am not a music critic just some dude writing a blog with no real experience.
But you know what? I have a sneaking suspicion that what I see as sameness between the tunes is probably a fundamental keystone of their appeal. GiaA are a "safe" band, you know what you are going to get and if you happen to like that, its all good. And how many people today actually consume music in the way that I am doing for this project? I would guess relatively few, which means those similarities becomes less of an issue, less of an irritation. Those similarities though? They make it really easy to identify a God is an Astronaut track in a rotation.
For my part, I prefer the louder and brasher tunes on this album. When the volume and tempo go up the (by now) genericisms of the format and reuse of the same notes fade as issues, getting lost in the more vibrant sounds, the fuzziness introduced by more notation and the energy transmitted through the songs. The slower, sparser pieces - whilst possibly more melodic - allow my ear to latch onto the common theme(s) and refrains more easily. I wish I could transcribe by ear to investigate my own point more thoroughly, but alas that is beyond me.
Wow, this has been an overtly negative post for being about something I like and will be keeping all of... how can I address that?
First the oddity: there are a few tracks here where the smoothness of playback is interrupted near the end of the song. I cannot tell whether this is an artefact of the rip from CD or a genuine article in the work (where perhaps the original track lines were different). I suspect the former, but if so to have it occur 3 or 4 times in one disc when I do not consciously recall every having heard it elsewhere it interesting to say the least.
Finally, to end on a positive note: do one thing and do it well. We could latch on to two different sentiments in that sentence: limitation, or quality. The rest of this post bleats about the limitation. The quality though? Well, until the last track (which to be honest has a problem with dead air and a hidden track that should probably not exist) they keep track length well in hand, which is unusual in this sort of instrumental rock and there is not a single unpleasant song here. There is a good mix of slower melodies and faster riots and examples of both are sculpted into compelling soundscapes and catchy loops that will stick in your head and be recognised whenever they pop up again. It takes real craft to be that immediately identifiable in a field populated by everyone and their dog using the same tools to sculpt the same material.
It's just that you will never be sure which statue you are looking at.
The latter is half true here, but overall Fragile has no build - it starts pretty one-paced and one-tone and maintains that slow, low feel throughout. It is far from an unpleasant listen but it just lacks any X factor as an opener. Thankfully the title track picks up the mantle a bit better, and has some real energy about it by the time it comes to close.
As Forever Lost starts I am noticing a pattern here though. The sounds used in these tunes are all very similar. There is distinction between the songs in tempo, volume, etc. but fundamentally they all sound... if not the same then a bit too close together to really enthuse about them. Moreover I think that extends past this album to the other 2 and a half (one is very short) that I have. I am getting a picture of God is an Astronaut as a "do one thing, but do it well" sort of band forming - but it is unfair to judge that description final just 3 songs into the first listen on the basis of my (already documented to be wonky) memory.
Synth/programmed keys, guitars, drums all present. It is a formula that seems to be doing them well and I'll be clear here: for all the over-familiarity of each song there is nothing here that would move me to remove this album from my library. It just feels as though the tunes are a little too uniform for back-to-back appreciation of the sort this blog is about. The combination of the programming with the live recording settles into a regular pattern. The guitars do "X" the keys do "Y" and the drums do "Z". Often - in the case of the keys and guitars, using similar tones and changing the patterns from song to song. This is almost certainly a grossly unfair criticism in terms of the actual process; I am not a music critic just some dude writing a blog with no real experience.
But you know what? I have a sneaking suspicion that what I see as sameness between the tunes is probably a fundamental keystone of their appeal. GiaA are a "safe" band, you know what you are going to get and if you happen to like that, its all good. And how many people today actually consume music in the way that I am doing for this project? I would guess relatively few, which means those similarities becomes less of an issue, less of an irritation. Those similarities though? They make it really easy to identify a God is an Astronaut track in a rotation.
For my part, I prefer the louder and brasher tunes on this album. When the volume and tempo go up the (by now) genericisms of the format and reuse of the same notes fade as issues, getting lost in the more vibrant sounds, the fuzziness introduced by more notation and the energy transmitted through the songs. The slower, sparser pieces - whilst possibly more melodic - allow my ear to latch onto the common theme(s) and refrains more easily. I wish I could transcribe by ear to investigate my own point more thoroughly, but alas that is beyond me.
Wow, this has been an overtly negative post for being about something I like and will be keeping all of... how can I address that?
First the oddity: there are a few tracks here where the smoothness of playback is interrupted near the end of the song. I cannot tell whether this is an artefact of the rip from CD or a genuine article in the work (where perhaps the original track lines were different). I suspect the former, but if so to have it occur 3 or 4 times in one disc when I do not consciously recall every having heard it elsewhere it interesting to say the least.
Finally, to end on a positive note: do one thing and do it well. We could latch on to two different sentiments in that sentence: limitation, or quality. The rest of this post bleats about the limitation. The quality though? Well, until the last track (which to be honest has a problem with dead air and a hidden track that should probably not exist) they keep track length well in hand, which is unusual in this sort of instrumental rock and there is not a single unpleasant song here. There is a good mix of slower melodies and faster riots and examples of both are sculpted into compelling soundscapes and catchy loops that will stick in your head and be recognised whenever they pop up again. It takes real craft to be that immediately identifiable in a field populated by everyone and their dog using the same tools to sculpt the same material.
It's just that you will never be sure which statue you are looking at.
No comments:
Post a Comment