Franz Ferdinand - You Could Have It So Much Better
Album of the Week
Date - 2005-09-18 00:00:00
Another long overdue review. Apologies.
Q: How long does it take for a band to become a complete parody of itself?
Normally I would say it would take around 10 years for this to happen, but Franz Ferdinand has successfully pulled it off in the year and a half between the release of their self-titled debut and the release of You Could Have It So Much Better. That is not to say that their latest effort is awful, it just is a lot lacks a lot of the elements that made their first album so damn good.
I have not listened to Franz Ferdinand in a while, but I recall really enjoying "Take Me Out" and "This Fire" and especially "Matinee" because they all were light lyrically and sonically. The first album had bounce and all the songs had bass lines that were pure disco and man it was fun. However, You Could Have It So Much Better has darker lyrics, more distortion, and terrible production at all the wrong times. This adds up to an album that for all its merits just is not fun at all.
The first track is the strongest on the album, which is never a good sign. "Fallen" is just a strong rock song with hints of the Franz Ferdinand sound throughout, but the lyrics are definitely on the dark side of things and all the instruments seem turned up to 11, giving a more distorted, loud sound that is more in line with "sonic rock fury" and less in line with the "disco light bounce" that I think Franz Ferdinand executes so well. This pattern pretty much repeats through all the louder songs, with tracks 8 and 9 ("Well That Was Easy" and "What You Meant," respectively) coming the closest to the sounds of Franz Ferdinand. "Evil and a Heathen" is almost excellent, as is "This Boy," but they both have what seem to be poor production decisions. "Evil and a Heathen" has an overwhelming phaser that is applied without any discretion at all, and "This Boy" really needs to have its arrangement re-evaluated. There are a few misguided ballads mixed in as well, such as the painful track 7, "Eleanor Put Your Boots On," which makes me want to ... well, skip to track 8, I suppose. All in all, not the strongest set of songs.
I don't like it when people automatically dismiss albums because they don't sound enough like previous albums from a given artist. I think experimenting musically is a good thing for a band to do. However, Franz Ferdinand had a very unique sound in their debut, and it is still there in You Could Have It So Much Better, just buried under layers of crap. Again, this isn't to say that the album is awful. It's just really disappointing.
Score: 4.5/10
Q: How long does it take for a band to become a complete parody of itself?
Normally I would say it would take around 10 years for this to happen, but Franz Ferdinand has successfully pulled it off in the year and a half between the release of their self-titled debut and the release of You Could Have It So Much Better. That is not to say that their latest effort is awful, it just is a lot lacks a lot of the elements that made their first album so damn good.
I have not listened to Franz Ferdinand in a while, but I recall really enjoying "Take Me Out" and "This Fire" and especially "Matinee" because they all were light lyrically and sonically. The first album had bounce and all the songs had bass lines that were pure disco and man it was fun. However, You Could Have It So Much Better has darker lyrics, more distortion, and terrible production at all the wrong times. This adds up to an album that for all its merits just is not fun at all.
The first track is the strongest on the album, which is never a good sign. "Fallen" is just a strong rock song with hints of the Franz Ferdinand sound throughout, but the lyrics are definitely on the dark side of things and all the instruments seem turned up to 11, giving a more distorted, loud sound that is more in line with "sonic rock fury" and less in line with the "disco light bounce" that I think Franz Ferdinand executes so well. This pattern pretty much repeats through all the louder songs, with tracks 8 and 9 ("Well That Was Easy" and "What You Meant," respectively) coming the closest to the sounds of Franz Ferdinand. "Evil and a Heathen" is almost excellent, as is "This Boy," but they both have what seem to be poor production decisions. "Evil and a Heathen" has an overwhelming phaser that is applied without any discretion at all, and "This Boy" really needs to have its arrangement re-evaluated. There are a few misguided ballads mixed in as well, such as the painful track 7, "Eleanor Put Your Boots On," which makes me want to ... well, skip to track 8, I suppose. All in all, not the strongest set of songs.
I don't like it when people automatically dismiss albums because they don't sound enough like previous albums from a given artist. I think experimenting musically is a good thing for a band to do. However, Franz Ferdinand had a very unique sound in their debut, and it is still there in You Could Have It So Much Better, just buried under layers of crap. Again, this isn't to say that the album is awful. It's just really disappointing.
Score: 4.5/10
This band likes to have fun. For me, that's what comes out of this more than anything else. You can tell they don't take themselves too seriously, they just love having a good time and making music, and they're going to make the kind of music that they want to make. Their debut album just came out last year, and here they are already with another solid album.
People like to criticize second albums for sounding too much like the first album. People also like to criticize second albums for not sounding enough like the first album. In the end, people that do this stuff for a living just like to criticize, instead of focusing on the good aspects of an album. And that's why you should read our reviews. We're not going to tell you why you shouldn't buy an album, we're going to tell you why you should (unless it really does suck).
This album does not suck. It does, however, sounds a lot like their first album. I don't see why this is a bad thing. Their first album was quite good. I wasn't sure about it at first but it grew on me a bit the more I listened to it. It pretty much sounds like what you'd expect at this point from these guys... short, fun, upbeat songs, with pumping beats and guitars and energetic vocals. Eleven of the 13 songs are shorter than 4 minutes long. Franz Ferdinand gets to the point quickly. A lot of the songs sound similar and sort of blend into each other, which creates an interesting effect if you aren't paying full attention. At one point, I was like "Wow, this song is still going?" when it was two songs later. Again, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. The songs are generally catchy, the type of songs where you find yourself tapping your foot or slapping your leg in time with the beat without even noticing it.
Some of the reviews I read complained about a 'lack of memorable songs'. I mean, that's just not these guys' m.o., and it's all bullshit anyways. It's pretty much impossible to not get caught up in "Do You Want To" (Track 2 and the first single) and for me, depending on my mood, this is much more enjoyable to listen to than some so-called memorable masterpiece of a song that's gonna make me feel feelings. Why is this a bad thing? What's wrong with fun, energetic music that might not be the epitome of arrangement?
Don't get me wrong, this isn't some epicly awesome album. There are some weak songs here, especially towards the end of the album. I would also say that it's not quite as smooth as the first album. And I guess by that I mean that I feel it's kind of weirdly produced at times, like there's more distortion or something. I'm not really a huge fan of the few songs that they threw in that aren't really in the same mode as the rest of the songs, like Track 7 "Eleanor Put Your Boots Back On". I feel like this is a fun album, but they were very close to making it a very very fun album. These guys obviously enjoy what they do and have a lot of good ideas. I'm not ripping them for sounding too much like themselves or not enough like themselves, I just feel like these songs could have been a bit more enjoyable than they are, with the sound and musical philosophy I know they have. So it goes. In the end, it's a good, not great, fun album, and I look forward to more from them in the future.
The verdict: 6/10
People like to criticize second albums for sounding too much like the first album. People also like to criticize second albums for not sounding enough like the first album. In the end, people that do this stuff for a living just like to criticize, instead of focusing on the good aspects of an album. And that's why you should read our reviews. We're not going to tell you why you shouldn't buy an album, we're going to tell you why you should (unless it really does suck).
This album does not suck. It does, however, sounds a lot like their first album. I don't see why this is a bad thing. Their first album was quite good. I wasn't sure about it at first but it grew on me a bit the more I listened to it. It pretty much sounds like what you'd expect at this point from these guys... short, fun, upbeat songs, with pumping beats and guitars and energetic vocals. Eleven of the 13 songs are shorter than 4 minutes long. Franz Ferdinand gets to the point quickly. A lot of the songs sound similar and sort of blend into each other, which creates an interesting effect if you aren't paying full attention. At one point, I was like "Wow, this song is still going?" when it was two songs later. Again, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. The songs are generally catchy, the type of songs where you find yourself tapping your foot or slapping your leg in time with the beat without even noticing it.
Some of the reviews I read complained about a 'lack of memorable songs'. I mean, that's just not these guys' m.o., and it's all bullshit anyways. It's pretty much impossible to not get caught up in "Do You Want To" (Track 2 and the first single) and for me, depending on my mood, this is much more enjoyable to listen to than some so-called memorable masterpiece of a song that's gonna make me feel feelings. Why is this a bad thing? What's wrong with fun, energetic music that might not be the epitome of arrangement?
Don't get me wrong, this isn't some epicly awesome album. There are some weak songs here, especially towards the end of the album. I would also say that it's not quite as smooth as the first album. And I guess by that I mean that I feel it's kind of weirdly produced at times, like there's more distortion or something. I'm not really a huge fan of the few songs that they threw in that aren't really in the same mode as the rest of the songs, like Track 7 "Eleanor Put Your Boots Back On". I feel like this is a fun album, but they were very close to making it a very very fun album. These guys obviously enjoy what they do and have a lot of good ideas. I'm not ripping them for sounding too much like themselves or not enough like themselves, I just feel like these songs could have been a bit more enjoyable than they are, with the sound and musical philosophy I know they have. So it goes. In the end, it's a good, not great, fun album, and I look forward to more from them in the future.
The verdict: 6/10