|
| |
|
|
|
Review Summary: This is great!... As a starting place for an actual good record Going back into some Foo history, at the time of this release, the band had just recruited now-longtime guitarist Chris Shiflett and had already established a pretty good repertoire considering the band's frontman is Dave f***ing Grohl. Aside from that, One By One is the Foo's fourth release and they had already garnered some great singles and even two highly regarded albums. So it would be totally natural to expect the band to responsibly release another equally powerful if not increasingly good album, right? Well, you'd think so. Frankly, all One By One is is just, in essence, a pretty good blueprint for what to do when you want to release a smashing demo with some pals. This is not a record to release when you have a million fans. This is not a record to release when you've established that every member of your band is at least somewhat capable of songwriting. This is not a record to release when you've had almost a decade in the spotlight and a dozen of number one hits with your name attached.
All things considered, One By One's got some pretty catchy tunes. It's a fun album, sure, to put into your stereo and jam once or twice when you're driving down the highway. But that's really about it. On all other accounts -- instrumental work, lyrics, production, cohesiveness, and variety -- the album flounders hopelessly. It's really easy to slip into a trance with this baby on because there's very little breathing room to get away from the standard Foo sound. Every song has that exact same Foo edge, which isn't always a bad thing, but when every single song on a record has that exact sound amount of Foo sound it gets really old and really fast, almost to the point of making you feel like you're suffocating. And as far as the classic Foo tinge goes, it's never been all that great. You've got roaring guitars that tend to cling to the same chords, Dave either casually singing along to the melody of the bassline or flat out screaming at the top his lungs, drums that, honestly, have never had much variation (but have always packed a punch), and lyrics that are ridiculously simple.
That iconic Foo edge is a great idea to start with when writing songs but on One By One Dave Grohl and company take it way too far. Songwriting is far too underdeveloped. In fact, the one and only place where any sort of expansion takes place is in the production: and it's really for the worse. Gone is the classic and warming 90's feel, and instead exists the feared early 2000's over-polished, platinum, soulless, outright Daughtry-sounding crap that frames these very average songs. But I guess when you consider that the Foos spent only two weeks recording and producing, which is something they've never been able to do quickly, you're going to be left with something very thin. And that's all this is.
| other reviews of this album |
|
Album Rating: 2.5
First review, give me suggestions.
| | |
Your summary is grammatically incorrect and should say "actual" instead of "actually."
"considering the band's frontman is Dave f***ing Grohl."
Unnecessary cursing makes the review look unprofessional.
"(let that sink in, TWO WEEKS),"
Bad argument since some good albums have been recorded in a day.
Scrap that part, since the following in your review description does a better job at conveying this.
"Every song has that exact same Foo edge"
Decent review, but it reads a little bit awkwardly.
| | | Album Rating: 2.5
"Your summary is grammatically incorrect and should say "actual" instead of "actually.""
k will change
"Unnecessary cursing makes the review look unprofessional."
i felt it was necessary so as to magnify dave grohl's prominence in the early 2000's rock world
"Bad argument since some good albums have been recorded in a day."
how many foo albums have been recorded and produced in a day. these guys have never been a quick band in that respect. i'll clarify that in the review tho
"Scrap that part, since the following in your review description does a better job at conveying this.
"Every song has that exact same Foo edge""
not following this
| | |
Forget the last part of criticism, I worded it poorly and the stuff you said you changed was more important to change anyway.
| | | Album Rating: 2.5
k cool thanks
| | | Album Rating: 2.5
k cool thanks
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
love this record.
| | |
def a good first time review, but as ars examplified, there were some mistakes. have a pos anyway =)
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
Good review for your first man.
I have a lot of credit to give for this album since it was my gateway to Foo Fighters music when I first listened to it some eleven years ago (back then I only just started secondary school and thought this was the best modern rock record ever). I still hold it in more-or-less high regard (hence the difference in my rating compared to yours) but after listening to the band's first trilogy of albums it seems weaker obviously. Plus "Low" is such a dirty, dirty sounding song. And an even dirtier, albeit so much funnier-than-it-should-be-with-Jack-Black-in.
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
Great review for a first man. My least favourite Foo album, hadn't jammed it in years until a week ago in preparation for their concert in Slane next Saturday.
| | |
ArsMoriendi gave some great advice and corrections, though I personally found nothing wrong with the use of "Dave fucking Grohl," primarily because the first paragraph, and much of the review errs towards a more casual tone.
album is... well you pretty much nailed it. Worth a couple of listens and then it's just sort of forgettable. The first 2 tracks are pretty great though
| | | Album Rating: 2.5
lol ghost neg what a bitch
| | | Album Rating: 2.0
easily their worst
| | |
| |
