Originally Posted by Nick Lopez

Drew's gonna be maaaaaad.

Hahaha, he's posting a review next week... don't worry

ThriftWhore: hahaha Fizzlewink... true that man

Originally Posted by jawkneephighv

Nice review of their life and NOT the cd.

78%? get outta here.

The review was actually about both their development as a band and where they stand now with this record. 78% is completely legitimate, I will not get outta here.

Originally Posted by jawkneephighv

Hahahaha. It was a neat review of their life and not enough of the CD if you ask me. When you actually spoke of the CD, it was very good -- you pretty much nailed it. I wouldn't agree with the 78% [I'd shoot for a little higher], but hey, it's all good in the hood.

lol, i understand man... i usually do get caught up in the exposition, i'm trying to work on that.

you guys are all torn on this one it seems. "i'd shoot for higher" -- "score may be a bit high" back and forth

Originally Posted by jawkneephighv

I'm actually surprised it got a 78% because I'm seeing a lot of hate on them here. So I guess I kinda thank you in a way. I don't get how that gets a 3 in Alt Pres and Yellowcard got a nice 5.

yeah AltPress reallly did fuck up on that one.

Originally Posted by hickpuff

good review, however i'm still a fan of the first album more.

that's a bold statement... props to you for being honest

Originally Posted by rusinrockt

Garett-

I havent heard this CD yet so I cant really comment on it. But I was wondering if in your opinion the seemingly lack of originality of the record in any way takes away from it? I gather from your article that the music is serene enough to make it a worthy purchase, but do you feel that this CD would be more appealing had its influences not been so transparent?

Definitely, and I really like the way you put that. They're wearing this "original" badge, but techinically they are just borrowing many sounds from other artists who are sincerely original. It would have the potential to be a truly great album if they had made their own sound with it.

Originally Posted by Stubby0918

Yeah I noticed that too.

Good review though.

whoops! thanks for the correction

Originally Posted by CROMagnon

i agree with the review, and fairly well written, except for a few minor gaffs (i.e. "by far and beyond" is a mix of two terms, "by far" and "far and beyond;" use the first one)

a bit verbose, but whatever, i'm usually guilty of that, too

I was actually going for the phrase "by far and away" and I fucked up. Mahhh badddd

Originally Posted by chadders

I enjoyed this album immensely, for the melodies, and interesting arrangements, but I think it says a lot about what is wrong with the US 'alternative' scene, or whatever you like to call it, that you can excuse so much plagiarism and even use the word 'cliche' in a positive context. The NME here in the UK stated it perfectly in this passage:

'You see, the problem is that a rigid adherence to the emo sound template is seen as evidence of talent by both American lavel and American fan alike, whereas innovation is usually rewarded by the sound of a door slamming and the scampering of scenekids' feet'

Aww, bless 'em

Soooo many big UK bands sound alike... not that I can name examples, but like... Brit Rock? There's a freaking genre for that sound!

I think that quote does hold true in some circumstances though, but not in others. It's back and forth, depending on the artist, and the particular maturation. Brand New? Everyone eats it up. Saves the Day? Everyone was repulsed. Go figure!

Originally Posted by lifeis30seconds

i couldnt agree anymore with you on this review
f'real tho

hahah thanks dude f'real