If SFBM was Live's First Album, how would it be received? Options

[edstipe]

One thing I have noticed about the reviews that have been posted for SFBM (and not only there, but by members of this board giving their opinions as well), is that many of the reviewers noted what Live used to sound like, and have based part of their judgement of SFBM on their perspective of the band's new sound as opposed to their old sound.

This begs the question, how would SFBM be perceived if it were Live's first album rather than their seventh, thereby giving no opportunity to be judged based on previous notions of the band?

Would it be laughed off as a futile attempt at a band to mimic the sound of U2 and similar established groups? Would it be embraced as a record that shows the potential for a band with serious pop-rock hooks and melodies? Or would it fall somewhere in between?

Any thoughts?

[Costakoui]

That’s a very good question . Possibly it would fall somewhere in between but I don’t think that it would receive such bad reviews. Comparing is very often problematic because it sets definitions and boundaries and thus produces narrowed evaluations. To me, there is no Live sound and no Live roots to compare with; it is only Live songs which I either like or not. I liked some songs from V, BoP and now SFBM and I carry on with listening to a solid and very underrated band.

[seriakiLLa]

Difficult to say, but yeah, I would guess it will be received much better, it would be because they would be identified with another genre, and will be having a considerably different fan base.

Hmm.. this gets me to think then. SFBM being the first album, then followed by TDTH, SS, MJ, TC. Wow, they would be hailed as one of the most progressive bands of our generation.

[serene23]

Difficult to say, but yeah, I would guess it will be received much better, it would be because they would be identified with another genre, and will be having a considerably different fan base.

Hmm.. this gets me to think then. SFBM being the first album, then followed by TDTH, SS, MJ, TC. Wow, they would be hailed as one of the most progressive bands of our generation.

Yeah, the album would be received much better, though, the lyrics really are cringeworthy at times. What happened to Ed as a great lyricist? MJ and TC were great, then they slowly but surely turned to crap. Its funny, "Show" and "Sofia" seem to get the most heat in these reviews, and those are my 2 faves.

This post has been edited by serene23: Apr 21 2006, 2:15 pm

[Heather]

I was wondering that myself. If all of us here had not been Live fans for the past ten years or so and we heard The River on the radio, would it even have an affect on us? I feel like a lot of people can't judge this album objectively because Live is their favorite band. For me personally, if I heard The River on the radio and had never heard of Live, I would not be intrigued enough to buy the album or even to become insterested in the band. I remember when I would hear a Live song for the first time and it would FLOOR me! I Alone, for example, pretty much stopped me in my tracks . I remember the exact place I was the first time I heard it. I don't think The River could have that affect on anyone. I could be wrong, of course. But it does raise an interesting question. I guess it could appeal to a certain audience. I'm just not a part of the audience that it would appeal to.

This post has been edited by Heather: Apr 21 2006, 6:45 pm