My review of the new album Options

[mikkel]

Thanks for the review Dan, if it wasn't already clear what direction this album would go it's by now..
Of course I'm going to buy the album and pick my favorite tracks.. but it's just so sad seeing that Live is going this direction now..

Live has always been my favorite band, even though I listen to far more heavier music in general. Sometimes I don't get it, Ed likes System of a down, Chad T did a very nice guest appearence for Century and even then they pull out a record that the Backstreet Boys would've loved to make someday..

Ah well..

[mfitz804]

I love how people think that Live has made some sort of decision to not "rock" anymore. Like they are sitting around in the studio going, "Hey, I don't want to rock as hard anymore". To be quite honest, Live didn't ever really "rock" that hard anyway. Sure, there were a couple of tracks that did, but there were plenty that would have fit on BOP or SFBM too.

[LiveRoCkS77]

I had the privelage of listening to the new album, so I thought I would write a review and share it with all of you. First, I have to say that the tracks that leaked last year were unmixed demos, some of which had different lyrics. Now on to my review...

1) The River - Not a big fan of this song, esepcially with all the "la la la's" in it, but it does seem to have a pretty good flow to it

2) Mystery - The bridge doesn't seem to fit into the song very well, and I wished Ed didn't sing the word "mystery" so high.

3) Get Ready - Reminds me of anthemic type of song, sort of like "They Stood Up For Love. I can see this song being a fan favorite and being played in concert on the upcoming tour. The acoustic guitar suits the song perfectly, and the tiny solo near the end sounds great.

4) Show - I wasn't a big fan of this song when the demo first leaked, but I guess it has grown on me some. Unfortunately, it's probably the heaviest song on the album.

5) Wings - This is the point at which I start wondeirng if I'm even to listening to Live anymore, because it doesn't sound like them (it's very "poppy"). Very cheesy chorus line, too ("could be the wings").

6) Sofia - Nice guitar intro and great song overall. Some of the lyrics are pretty cheesy, but it's probably my favorite song on the album. The tiny guitar riff/solo near the end is pleasant as well.

7) Love Shines - Not liking the "ooooohhhh" intro or the song that much for that matter. Too much use of the word "shines" throughout the song. The outro is not pleasant either, especially with Ed trying to reach those unreachable high notes again. Another very "poppy" song.

8) Where Do We Go From Here - Starts off with a good beat and rhythm that remains constant throughout the whole song. Some nice riffing action by Chad as well. My only beef is that as the bridge ends, Chad plays a riff that sounds exactly like the one featured on Metallica's "Fade To Black" - I know everyone will know exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to this point in the song. Aside from that and Ed trying to add his falsetto touch at the end, it's a pretty good song overall.

9) Home - Sounds like a rip-off of "What Are We Fighting For?" - even has that silence before the chorus kicks in. Not a fan of this one at all.

10) All I Need - As soon as the guitar intro begins, you know that this song is going to be very "poppy". Another happy, poppy, love song. I begin to wonder again if this is actually Live I'm listening to.

11) You Are Not Alone - Begins with a promising intro riff that sounds like it could have easily come from Elton Johns "The Bitch is Back", but quickly turns into another happy, poppy song. Are you sure this is Live?

12) Night Of Nights - I like how there is a change in rhythm right before the chorus kicks in each time, but can't really get into the song that much. Not as poppy as the previous 2 songs, but too much mentioning of "love" to really do anything for me.

Overall, I'd have to say this album sounds like "Birds Of Pray" older sister, with much more of a Pop feel and less rocking. I guess it's kind of hard to write a non-Pop album when almost all the lyrics deal with love and happiness though. The production seems to be very similiar to BOP too. There really aren't any stand-out tracks like "Like I Do" on this one though, unfortunately. Highlights include "Sofia", "Get Ready", and "Where Do We Go From Here". Too many dull moments to list, frankly. I did take into fact that Live went into the studio trying to make a pop record - and I am fine with that - but I just don't think that they sound good doing this type of music. Maybe it's just that I'm not a big fan of pop music in general - so many of you may have drastically different opinions that that of mine. I just wish that Live could have put some of the vibrant energy so evident in their live show on this album - it just yearns for some heavier music and rougher lyrics, but sadly it doesn't seem to get any help.

Sorry buddy but I have to laugh completely at your review.....I couldn't disagree with you more.

The River and Mystery are poppish songs sure. But aside from those two songs, there isn't really much "pop" on the album at all.

I also see not one single reason to think that this cd resembles BOP at all. It is completely different. BOP was more electric and contrived. This cd is entirely different. Much more melodies and alternative style. I don't see this cd as like anything LIVE has done before as a whole.

I know the majority of people don't like the direction they've been taking. Those people should really just have their say and get the fuck out. Go listen to music you like. Don't listen to LIVE anymore, plain and simple. I did just that when Metallica sold out and started with this SANDMAN crap. I still listen to their old stuff as I fucking love it. But I don't bother bitching about their new direction as it's sure as fuck not going to change anything.

Anyhow, back to SFBM. I don't necessarily think it's an improvement from BOP but the music is definately different. The theme may be the same in some of the lyrics but that's it. There's nothing close to a "rivertown" "sweet release" or "heaven" on this cd musically and I'd honestly think you'd have to be a retard to think so. Well, Mystery might fit on BOP but that's about it. Even The River, it's nothing like anything on BOP really. I mean, it is LIVE and of course you will find similarities, but it's just not the same overall.

I honestly can't believe you review of LOVE SHINES. I think it's hilarious. Taste is subjective but I'm sorry, I think yours sucks. This is far and away the best song on this cd. No contest. When it comes out, just wait and see how many of you agree. It's the Like I Do of BOP as far as a song that sticks out as the best on a cd.

But overall guys, I think it's just different. LIVE'S lyrics have always been about love and god and water......but this cd is so different from BOP it's like comparing the tits on Pam Anderson to those of Gwen Stefani. I think some of the songs just seem to be missing something. It's not LIVE"S usual anthemic style. Some songs you're just waiting for them to explode as they build a bit but they stay very calm instead. I actually would compare most of the cd to something The Dave Matthews Band might make. It's kind of slow and folkish yet alternative at the same time.

I would think McPheezy will be the best to tell you what the differences are when he hears it. But if you're looking for a return to rock? This isn't it. But it's nowhere neare as "pop" sounding as Dan here says it is. Not even close.

[SecretInsomnia]

so.... now I really don´t know what to expect anymore at 10 april

I guess I just have to wait

[mrmcpheezy]

I am 100 percent sure that a jam album with Secret Samadhi-like lyrics and five to 10-minute tracks would be insanely great. Time for a new producer. My vote goes for David Bottrill.

Agreed on all counts.

they need to break out of this 2:50-radio funk by challenging themselves.

Of course, in the end they don't NEED to do a god damn thing, because they're big boys and they can play whatever they want to. But as artists (stop laughing) they could use a real change of pace.

Hella. Don't they get tired of writing three minute pop songs over and over again?

[drewgood]

I love how people think that Live has made some sort of decision to not "rock" anymore. Like they are sitting around in the studio going, "Hey, I don't want to rock as hard anymore". To be quite honest, Live didn't ever really "rock" that hard anyway. Sure, there were a couple of tracks that did, but there were plenty that would have fit on BOP or SFBM too.

check out some concert performances from the mental jewelry or throwing copper eras... believe you me, THEY ROCKED.

most everyone mellows when they get old... Live is just a really old group of people right now. that's really it. when people get old, they get sort of docile. bands like metallica aren't rare bands... they're rare people. whether that's a good thing or a bad thing will always be up for debate.

when i was younger, i just assumed Live would always rock... I was almost in denial when I heard songs like 'Call me a Fool' or even 'Dance With You'... but Ed took his own lyrics too literally, 'calmed the fuck down'... and the rest of the band kind of followed suit. To the detriment of most fans' enjoyment of the music, I might add.

I'm of the opinion that Ed himself is the cause... and the band, the sound, the records, the whole vibe... that's the effect. It's amazing what influence a lead singer really does have on the direction of a band's sound.

[mrmcpheezy]

I don't see "slowing down" as a problem at all. The problem isn't the tone of the music, but its quality.

This post has been edited by mrmcpheezy: Mar 2 2006, 11:03 am

[SJN1279]

Lots of so-called critiques on the board, huh? Just because someone says something isn't good doesn't make it so. I HATE when people start thinking there opinion on what is good music really matters. I like the new songs and think Live has gotten better with age. There are many people who agree with me. On the other hand, there are a few people who miss the harder rock songs that Live used to make. Both sides are valid....I just hate when people make blanket statements like "Live makes pop songs and therefore they suck now."

All 4 members of LIVE are much more musically gifted than anyone on this message board. Jim Wirt is a more successful producer than anyone on here. Epic has produced more hit records than any of us even have in our collections. You don't have to like all of the music that these people create, but it still doesn't mean that it isn't good.

[LiveattheOasis]

I am going to agree with pheezy on that one. They can start doing bluegrass if they want, as long as it's GOOD bluegrass. I have heard plenty of great lite sounding rock/pop and plenty of good rocking alternative and I don't think Live changing means they have to start to suck. They just need to be creative again. I hate that the names of their songs are becoming generic, I hate that most of their songs are now 2:45-3:00 and I hate that there seems to be a more commercial focus with these records. I don't look back on the Mental Jewelry, Throwing Copper and Secret Samadhi days and think they made cds to make money from. They really believed in those songs and they sounded different to me than the majority of songs I had heard. Their new stuff, especially these last two albums, sound boring and done already.

Just to be clear I still love the band, will buy the album, and will certainly find things I like about the songs, but I am in general not as happy with their conception of what constitutes good music

[mrmcpheezy]

I like the new songs and think Live has gotten better with age.

I HATE when people start thinking there opinion on what is good music really matters.

lol.

All 4 members of LIVE are much more musically gifted than anyone on this message board. Jim Wirt is a more successful producer than anyone on here. Epic has produced more hit records than any of us even have in our collections. You don't have to like all of the music that these people create, but it still doesn't mean that it isn't good.

And you liking it doesn't mean that it is good, so stfu.

Why do people on this board always bring up commercial success as an attempt to defend the quality of art?

[Soxwsc]

If you read over Nick's post, he never mentioned once that he thinks Live's new stuff is good. He never stated that they're good. And the fact that he likes the new material isn't an opinion. It's a fact. So he's not contradicting himself there.

The only reason I'm not digging the new stuff as much as the older stuff is because I'd rather hear harder rock from them. The mellow pop sound isn't my cup of tea. But that also doesn't mean that it isn't good. It's just not for me.. but hey, I'm sure a lot of people will dig it.

This post has been edited by Soxwsc: Mar 2 2006, 12:29 pm

[mrmcpheezy]

If you read over Nick's post, he never mentioned once that he thinks Live is good. He never stated that they're good. And the fact that he likes the new material isn't an opinion. It's a fact. So he's not contradicting himself there.

Excuse me? If you read his post, you'll see that he says they've gotten better with age. One cannot correctly use the word "better" without inherently refering to the quality of their subject. So, he makes a comment as to the quality of the music, while also saying that he hates it when people think their comments as to the quality of music are worthwhile. Seems like a pretty big contradiction to me.

[Soxwsc]

Excuse me? If you read his post, you'll see that he says they've gotten better with age. One cannot correctly use the word "better" without inherently refering to the quality of their subject. So, he makes a comment as to the quality of the music, while also saying that he hates it when people think their comments as to the quality of music are worthwhile. Seems like a pretty big contradiction to me.

Nope... you left out a word there. The key word was "think". If he would've said "Live is better with age", that's one thing, but he said ".. "I think Live has gotten better with age". He also says both sides are valid, people who think it's better and people who don't.

Ok, this is getting pretty ridiculous. Soon we'll be disecting every single word in each other's posts.

[drewgood]

All 4 members of LIVE are much more musically gifted than anyone on this message board. Jim Wirt is a more successful producer than anyone on here. Epic has produced more hit records than any of us even have in our collections. You don't have to like all of the music that these people create, but it still doesn't mean that it isn't good.

with all due respect to you, nick, because i think it's cool the way you support a band you obviously still really dig...

but Britney Spears has also attained a hell of a lot more success than anyone on this board... and more than anyone in Live for that matter. Does that make her better?

LiveattheOasis said:
"Just to be clear I still love the band, will buy the album, and will certainly find things I like about the songs, but I am in general not as happy with their conception of what constitutes good music"

That pretty much sums me up as well... except at this point I only LIKE the band. I love what they used to do.

[mrmcpheezy]

Nope... you left out a word there. The key word was "think". If he would've said "Live is better with age", that's one thing, but he said ".. "I think Live has gotten better with age". He also says both sides are valid, people who think it's better and people who don't.

What the fuck are you talking about? If he had said "I like live's newer work more than their older work", you'd have a fucking point. But he didn't, so you don't. All the "I think" does it make it clear that these are his thoughts he's sharing. The statement itself is unchanged.