lazarus
Blue Crack Supplier
Gabriel, your first post was really great and I have to agree with everything you've said. There's a great video for The Perfect Kiss (which you may have seen) that is basically a live performance in the studio. What's cool is that you can see what's actually being played by the band members, and really dispels any illusions one might have about them being a dance/electronic act.
As far as the band getting older, the last two albums have a little filler, but the great tracks are much better than one would expect. These guys were able to pick up right where they left off, sound exactly like themselves, and yet not come off as dated or retro. That's probably because they were usually ahead of their time to begin with.
As for your comment about The Smiths--I'm a huge fan and they have a great number of singles as well. I just find that the NO albums are a bit more consistent whereas all The Smiths albums have a couple really boring or uninteresting tracks. And I'm a huge fan of solo Moz as well. Personally, I think Your Arsenal and Vauxhall and I can stand alongside any of The Smiths albums. He's had some pretty talented guys playing with him over the years, and there's one lineup that lasted longer than The Smiths did.
I always felt NO, The Cure, and DM were part of this trinity of British bands, The Cure being the most organic, and DM the most electronic, with New Order straddling the line. Probably why I've always liked them the best, because of their two-front attack. The Cure and DM were a bit more productive over the years, but they've also had many misfires as well, and haven't aged as gracefully. I don't think the recent output of either comes anywhere near the level of quality of their heyday as well as NO was able to do with Get Ready and Sirens, and perhaps that's because they took so much time off and were able to come at it fresh again.
In the end, each band has a few albums that are all classics, each brought their own thing to modern rock, and each went through a distinct growth and evolution process over the years. And they're all better than Joy Division
As far as the band getting older, the last two albums have a little filler, but the great tracks are much better than one would expect. These guys were able to pick up right where they left off, sound exactly like themselves, and yet not come off as dated or retro. That's probably because they were usually ahead of their time to begin with.
As for your comment about The Smiths--I'm a huge fan and they have a great number of singles as well. I just find that the NO albums are a bit more consistent whereas all The Smiths albums have a couple really boring or uninteresting tracks. And I'm a huge fan of solo Moz as well. Personally, I think Your Arsenal and Vauxhall and I can stand alongside any of The Smiths albums. He's had some pretty talented guys playing with him over the years, and there's one lineup that lasted longer than The Smiths did.
I always felt NO, The Cure, and DM were part of this trinity of British bands, The Cure being the most organic, and DM the most electronic, with New Order straddling the line. Probably why I've always liked them the best, because of their two-front attack. The Cure and DM were a bit more productive over the years, but they've also had many misfires as well, and haven't aged as gracefully. I don't think the recent output of either comes anywhere near the level of quality of their heyday as well as NO was able to do with Get Ready and Sirens, and perhaps that's because they took so much time off and were able to come at it fresh again.
In the end, each band has a few albums that are all classics, each brought their own thing to modern rock, and each went through a distinct growth and evolution process over the years. And they're all better than Joy Division