DAISY album review?

[Chris92]

Can we ever expect to see a staff review of Daisy? I would be really interested to see what some of the staff have to say about it...ahem Jason, Drew and Chris.

[FullCollaspe]

http://www.absolutepunk.net/journal.php?do=showentry&e=227901

[CellarGhosts]

It's about time someone made a Daisy thread.

[Regards]

It's about time someone made a Daisy thread.
lol

[what_ever]

I've stopped thinking about it, so when I see it up finally it'll be a pleasant surprise

[Yellowcard2006]

I think it'll be up by the end of the week. Either that or it's in the same place as the Gabe interview. I say it'll be in the 90s.

[iblamethegovt]

Do you really come to this site for reviews? Really?

[CarouselBoy]

Do you really come to this site for reviews? Really?

why not?

[NateFoundGlory]

Do you really come to this site for reviews? Really?

Um. What's so strange about that?

[Baby for Pree]

Read: I don't know what to think about the album yet. Tell me what to like, AP.

[Baby for Pree]

why not?

Um. What's so strange about that?
They're poorly written.

[Regards]

I don't think I've ever used any of this site besides its forums :shrug:

[LastDeclaration]

They're poorly written.

Ha. Right.

[kbi the crowing]

It's about time someone made a Daisy thread.

hahaha good call

[kbi the crowing]

Read: I don't know what to think about the album yet. Tell me what to like, AP.

what I was going to say, but far more witty

[fake empire]

Why would you want to read a review of this album on ap? You know any staff member will give it a score much higher than it deserves

[anthonydarko]

What is this Daisy you speak of?

[Kurt Retenauer]

I think the reviews are well written. Also, they have a "reviewer's tilt" section, so they factor in their own biases.

But, I did review this for my school newspaper.

[Matthew Tsai]

I think the reviews are well written. Also, they have a "reviewer's tilt" section, so they factor in their own biases.

But, I did review this for my school newspaper.

ugly avatar. why does she always look so synthetic?

[Kurt Retenauer]

ugly avatar. why does she always look so synthetic?

Why do you care if you don't like her?

[Matt Chylak]

ugly avatar. why does she always look so synthetic?

she is synthetic. have you heard her music?

[Kurt Retenauer]

she is synthetic. have you heard her music?

Yeah. Being one of the few pop artists that still writes their own music is truly synthetic. And, don't give me that "she has lots of studio work" bullshit, because that excuse is beat. She puts on a good, consistent live performance.

[Matt Chylak]

Yeah. Being one of the few pop artists that still writes their own music is truly synthetic. And, don't give me that "she has lots of studio work" bullshit, because that excuse is beat. She puts on a good, consistent live performance.

writing your own music does not mean you create well-written music, even by pop standards. she has about five (extremely basic) progressions and puts capos on her teardrop-stained guitar to make them sound different.

[Kurt Retenauer]

writing your own music does not mean you create well-written music, even by pop standards. she has about five (extremely basic) progressions and puts capos on her teardrop-stained guitar to make them sound different.

For one, never said it was well written. I'm not arguing that she's the John Lennon of our generation, just that she makes enjoyable (by my standards) pop music, and I typically don't like pop music. Nothing wrong with being simple. Simplicity is often essential.

[LastDeclaration]

Why would you want to read a review of this album on ap? You know any staff member will give it a score much higher than it deserves

Almost all reviewers are giving Daisy good/great scores.

[underdawg1119]

writing your own music does not mean you create well-written music, even by pop standards. she has about five (extremely basic) progressions and puts capos on her teardrop-stained guitar to make them sound different.
What does that have to do with how "synthetic" she is?

I don't think anyone is calling her the next Radiohead. Who cares if her music is simple? It's fucking Pop/Country.

Edit: Fuck, forgot to quote.

Edit 2: Fixed.

[Matt Chylak]

For one, never said it was well written. I'm not arguing that she's the John Lennon of our generation, just that she makes enjoyable (by my standards) pop music, and I typically don't like pop music. Nothing wrong with being simple. Simplicity is often essential.

so you enjoy listening to poorly-written music. just clarifying, and you'll be glad to know i'll stop talking to you now.

[Kurt Retenauer]

What does that have to do with how "synthetic" she is?

I don't think anyone is calling her the next Radiohead. Who cares if her music is simple? It's fucking Pop/Country.

Edit: Fuck, forgot to quote.

Edit 2: Fixed.

:appl:

I didn't know that music had to be complex to be enjoyable. All of The Beatles material pre- Rubber Soul must be fucking garbage by Matt's standards, don't you think?

People need to accept music for what it is. Radiohead makes incredibly complex/enjoyable music. They're far far FAR better songwriters than Swift. But, Swift appeals to an audience, and she deserves the successes she gets for appealing and fulfilling that audience. Her songs are simple, yet enjoyable.

[Matt Chylak]

What does that have to do with how "good of a musician/writer" she is?

I don't think anyone is calling her good. Who cares about her music?

Edit: Fuck, forgot to quote.

Edit 2: Fixed.

Edit 3: fixed

[Matthew Tsai]

Why do you care if you don't like her?

I didn't say I don't like her, I said she's always drowned in makeup.

she is synthetic. have you heard her music?

Her music is hardly synthetic.

[Kurt Retenauer]

so you enjoy listening to poorly-written music. just clarifying, and you'll be glad to know i'll stop talking to you now.

Because You Me and Everyone We Know was fucking revolutionary, right?

Poorly written music =/= enjoyable music. Something that is simple does not make it poorly written. As I said, can't get more simple than "I Want To Hold Your Hand."

Not to compare The Beatles with Taylor Swift, just saying, The Beatles wrote many simple songs, that were very enjoyable.

[Kurt Retenauer]

I didn't say I don't like her, I said she's always drowned in makeup.



Her music is hardly synthetic.

I can agree with you there. She does often wear a lot of makeup. I think she wears just as much as most girls, but hers looks more accented at the way her eyes are shaped. It makes the makeup look so much darker. Also, in photos she has a synthetic look, but videos/in person, I think it's a different story.

And thank you for not thinking her music is synthetic.

[underdawg1119]

Edit 3: fixed
You're a fucking idiot. Your original argument was that she is synthetic, but now she is a shitty song writer? Which is it? Does she write shitty songs, or does someone write them for her?

[fake empire]

Almost all reviewers are giving Daisy good/great scores.
did you even read my post?

[Matt Chylak]

Because You Me and Everyone We Know was fucking revolutionary, right?

Poorly written music =/= enjoyable music. Something that is simple does not make it poorly written. As I said, can't get more simple than "I Want To Hold Your Hand."

Not to compare The Beatles with Taylor Swift, just saying, The Beatles wrote many simple songs, that were very enjoyable.

never claimed YMAEWK was revolutionary, though their lyrics are about 19 to 20 times better than taylor swift's.

completely and utterly wrong. first, at the time the Beatles' progressions WERE revolutionary. they're simple now because the beatles popularized the progressions. second, "I want tohold your hand" has three part harmonies, round vocal lines, stacato bass, etc. which was new for pop music at the time.

[Matt Chylak]

You're a fucking idiot. Your original argument was that she is synthetic, but now she is a shitty song writer? Which is it? Does she write shitty songs, or does someone write them for her?

they are one and the same. taylor swift's success stems from her ability to fool teenage girls like you two (yes, i'm insulting your genders) into thinking that she's just like them by writing uninspired pop songs about love and loss that read like a fourteen year old's diary entries.

synthetic and a bad writer.

[Kurt Retenauer]

never claimed YMAEWK was revolutionary, though their lyrics are about 19 to 20 times better than taylor swift's.

completely and utterly wrong. first, at the time the Beatles' progressions WERE revolutionary. they're simple now because the beatles popularized the progressions. second, "I want tohold your hand" has three part harmonies, round vocal lines, stacato bass, etc. which was new for pop music at the time.

It's not Taylor's fault she was born after pop had already been mixed with country. People before her popularized country molded with pop, and she followed in those footsteps, and obviously did something unique/catchy enough to capture an audience.

Also, I'm a fan of YMAEWK, just pointing out that their music is simple yet enjoyable, the same qualities that I see in Taylor.

As I said in the other thread, opinions are great. Thanks for sharing yours, you've heard mine.

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb244/sp0rsk/doorslam.gif

[Kurt Retenauer]

they are one and the same. taylor swift's success stems from her ability to fool teenage girls like you two (yes, i'm insulting your genders) into thinking that she's just like them by writing uninspired pop songs about love and loss that read like a fourteen year old's diary entries.

synthetic and a bad writer.

And a teenage girl would say that you are fooled into thinking Chris Carabba's songs of heart break are worth a second listen. Don't you see, it's all in the ear of the listener? Different strokes for different folks.

[Matt Chylak]

It's not Taylor's fault she was born after pop had already been mixed with country. People before her popularized country molded with pop, and she followed in those footsteps, and obviously did something unique/catchy enough to capture an audience.

Also, I'm a fan of YMAEWK, just pointing out that their music is simple yet enjoyable, the same qualities that I see in Taylor.

As I said in the other thread, opinions are great. Thanks for sharing yours, you've heard mine.

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb244/sp0rsk/doorslam.gif

anyone with autotune and lyrics about sex can do what she's done. the only reason she's famous is because our culture has a pop star void that it needs to fill with SOMETHING, and miley cyrus isn't old enough to take the throne alone yet.

it's your inability to argue that makes you useless on these forums. you literally slam the door on a discussion because you can't handle that your preconceptions are wrong.

[Kurt Retenauer]

anyone with autotune and lyrics about sex can do what she's done. the only reason she's famous is because our culture has a pop star void that it needs to fill with SOMETHING, and miley cyrus isn't old enough to take the throne alone yet.

it's your inability to argue that makes you useless on these forums. you literally slam the door on a discussion because you can't handle that your preconceptions are wrong.

Miley Cyrus is selling more than Taylor Swift right now, so you're already wrong. Also, no sexual references in Taylor's lyrics whatsoever, as she's a self proclaimed virgin. And, if anyone's preconceptions are wrong, it'd be you writing off people as "bad writers" without even trying to understand how they attract and audience and what their worth is, and holding it over their head that they can't write guitar solos or fuck around with a Moog.

Also, useless on these forums? Everyone's got a worth, even you. Enjoy your trolling.

[Matt Chylak]

And a teenage girl would say that you are fooled into thinking Chris Carabba's songs of heart break are worth a second listen. Don't you see, it's all in the ear of the listener? Different strokes for different folks.

you can't possibly be comparing chris carabba to taylor swift. here's a hint:

Buried deep as you can dig inside yourself
And covered with a perfect shell
Such a charming, beautiful exterior
Laced with brilliant smiles and shining eyes
Perfect posture, but you're barely scraping by
But you're barely scraping by


She wears high heels, I wear sneakers
She's cheer captain and I'm on the bleachers

[Kurt Retenauer]

you can't possibly be comparing chris carabba to taylor swift. here's a hint:

No comparisons whatsoever. Point being that in the same way you relate to Chris (who, in my opinion, IS a better writer), other people may relate to Taylor, making her a better writer in their eyes. Again, it's perception/relatability (not a word, I know).

[underdawg1119]

they are one and the same. taylor swift's success stems from her ability to fool teenage girls like you two (yes, i'm insulting your genders) into thinking that she's just like them by writing uninspired pop songs about love and loss that read like a fourteen year old's diary entries.

synthetic and a bad writer.
That little parenthetic statement is cute, considering I never said I enjoy her music. I just think your attack on her was a little unnecessary.

[Kurt Retenauer]

That little parenthetic statement is cute, considering I never said I enjoy her music. I just think your attack on her was a little unnecessary.

Very similar to this entire conversation. Pointless attacks based upon opinion rather than fact.

[Matt Chylak]

Miley Cyrus is selling more than Taylor Swift right now, so you're already wrong. Also, no sexual references in Taylor's lyrics whatsoever, as she's a self proclaimed virgin. And, if anyone's preconceptions are wrong, it'd be you writing off people as "bad writers" without even trying to understand how they attract and audience and what their worth is, and holding it over their head that they can't write guitar solos or fuck around with a Moog.

Also, useless on these forums? Everyone's got a worth, even you. Enjoy your trolling.

it seems useless to explain things to you, but i'll try. try to keep up.

1) the fact that miley cyrus sells more albums through her disney goodwill does not mean she's capable (a la britney spears circa 2001, christina aguilera circa 2003, justin timberlake circa 2005, or mariah carey circa 2007) of holding up the definition of pop star by herself.

2) pop "divas" (if you'll allow me to call them that) move in cycles. when miley gets sexual enough to use a real pole to dance with, she'll be britney. swift's a self-proclaimed virgin? sounds like jessica simpson. it's all about image, which goes back to my early statement that she's synthetic.

3) when i say "do what she's done," i mean have a hit single or two. hers are songs that get displaced on the pop charts by auto-tuned songs about drinking (i gotta feeling) and fucking (birthday sex). in no way can you argue that her well-written songs are why she sells so many records, because if that was true they would not be displaced by such trite, trendy garbage

thanks for your (worthless) time, and good night, miss.

EDIT: look up subjectivity. that's how YOU judge music. look up objectivity. that's how music should be and is judged by intelligent people.

[Kurt Retenauer]

it seems useless to explain things to you, but i'll try. try to keep up.

1) the fact that miley cyrus sells more albums through her disney goodwill does not mean she's capable (a la britney spears circa 2001, christina aguilera circa 2003, justin timberlake circa 2005, or mariah carey circa 2007) of holding up the definition of pop star by herself.

2) pop "divas" (if you'll allow me to call them that) move in cycles. when miley gets sexual enough to use a real pole to dance with, she'll be britney. swift's a self-proclaimed virgin? sounds like jessica simpson. it's all about image, which goes back to my early statement that she's synthetic.

3) when i say "do what she's done," i mean have a hit single or two. hers are songs that get displaced on the pop charts by auto-tuned songs about drinking (i gotta feeling) and fucking (birthday sex). in no way can you argue that her well-written songs are why she sells so many records, because if that was true they would not be displaced by such trite, trendy garbage

thanks for your (worthless) time, and good night, miss.

1) Never said she could hold it up on her own. Just saying that in terms of sales, Miley is currently above Taylor, which is not what you said.

2) You must be Raven Symone, predicting the future and all. http://www.eurweb.com/images/articles/200502/raven(004-promo-shot-for-thats-so-raven-med).jpg It must be so easy to make rash generalizations of where Miley will be in a few years.

3) That argument is bullshit to begin with, because if well written songs always topped the charts, Birthday Sex and I Gotta Feeling wouldn't be on there in the first place. Don't we already know that good music doesn't always get heard? Even if everyone agreed that Taylor wrote "good music," that doesn't have anything to do with it being replaced with "trite, trendy garbage"

Thanks for your late night trolling, it must have been late, and you must not have had much to do. Someone was probably just cranky.

[Kurt Retenauer]

it seems useless to explain things to you, but i'll try. try to keep up.

1) the fact that miley cyrus sells more albums through her disney goodwill does not mean she's capable (a la britney spears circa 2001, christina aguilera circa 2003, justin timberlake circa 2005, or mariah carey circa 2007) of holding up the definition of pop star by herself.

2) pop "divas" (if you'll allow me to call them that) move in cycles. when miley gets sexual enough to use a real pole to dance with, she'll be britney. swift's a self-proclaimed virgin? sounds like jessica simpson. it's all about image, which goes back to my early statement that she's synthetic.

3) when i say "do what she's done," i mean have a hit single or two. hers are songs that get displaced on the pop charts by auto-tuned songs about drinking (i gotta feeling) and fucking (birthday sex). in no way can you argue that her well-written songs are why she sells so many records, because if that was true they would not be displaced by such trite, trendy garbage

thanks for your (worthless) time, and good night, miss.

EDIT: look up subjectivity. that's how YOU judge music. look up objectivity. that's how music should be and is judged by intelligent people.

Objectivity: An unprejudiced or open orientation to information about the nature of phenomena being studied.

Kind of like your open orientation to Taylor Swift, right?

[Blake Solomon]

threads often get off topic, but rarely do they get off topic in such an idiotic way. it's commendable, really.

[Kurt Retenauer]

threads often get off topic, but rarely do they get off topic in such an idiotic way. it's commendable, really.
Apologies. It was in a more appropriate thread before, somehow got moved to here. This thread was stupid to begin with, as Jason promised a Daisy review a week or so ago.

[Blake Solomon]

well i mean, you made a raven symone joke, so i don't think there would be any thread appropriate for that.

[xJesusFreakx]

Fearless > Daisy

[The Personist]

The soundtrack to Music And Lyrics > Brand New

[Troggy]

It's about time someone made a Daisy thread.

Do you really come to this site for reviews? Really?

Read: I don't know what to think about the album yet. Tell me what to like, AP.

Nice work, gentlemen. :appl:

[jettison]

so you enjoy listening to poorly-written music. just clarifying, and you'll be glad to know i'll stop talking to you now.
Dude quit being a dick.

[stereokiller]

Read: I don't know what to think about the album yet. Tell me what to like, AP.

haha, hell yes. good one.

The record is growing on me. I used to like Vices only at first, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it. Noice.

[ChelseaRiane]

Daisy is really good. It deserves a good review.

[inthemidst]

Do you really come to this site for reviews? Really?

I like your avatar.