yes, the reviews have often been polar opposites, which makes it confusing for people who have never heard the band before. why is it so hard to read a bad review, read a good review, keep both sides in mind, listen to the band's purevolume page, and then make your own decision?
i'll admit that i've hungout with this band a couple times. they're nice guys with no pretentions, and i like them for that. i may be a bit bias. fine, everyone has their own bias anyway.
a lot of their long-time fans have had the same complaints that you do. i'm not a long time fan, but i have heard the e.p. several times. the difference is just the difference you'd expect between an independently released, DIY ep and an indie record company released, first lp. the exact same thing happened with thursday. the album was produced by michael bimbaum, who also has done coheed & cambria, and straylight run. i'm not a fan of those bands, but thier production is quite good. sure parts of this album are flat, too slick, and slightly uninspired, but let's just take a minute to appreciate that this is a very admirable attempt at a first lp with many great moments as well. four letter lie deserves a fair listen and an open mind just for thier hard work and sheer potential.
first, the underoath they keep on being compared to is on 'they're only chasing safety', which 'in regards to myself' isn't on. but anyway, i decided to go and do just what you sugested. i get what you're saying, but i still only hear similarities. almost all blues is 12 bar. does that mean that everyone playing blues after 1940 is blatantly ripping off robert johnson and sonny boy williamson? no, it is a specific progession of sounds directly related to the definition of the genre. though screamo probably doesn't have the same staying power of blues, i think this is a similar case.
wow, that was a lot longer than i thought it would be. sorry guys.
you raise some good points here...i'm glad people are actually taking the time to read these posts :)...
and no i'm not saying that everyone playing blues after the 40's is ripping off anyone...blues
in itself is a genre...underoath is not
a genre...they have a defined style, but they're not a genre. you can listen to an underoath record and know it's underoath...that is something that i believe all bands are striving to do. a lot of blues/jazz artists have the same quality...i mean you listen to Buddy Guy or BB King play their music you know
it's them...they've taken different spins on the genre and have made it their own...there's a large difference between taking a genre and spinning it into your signature style and taking a signature style and attempting to make it your own.
i think we all as musicians (the musicians out there) have gone through this though...i'm guilty of it myself. as in being way into a record/band/sound and having it heavily influence your own creativeness...almost to the fact where it's ripping off that band's creativeness. this is when the cord needs to be pulled...you should be able to recognize that and change it however it needs to be changed...i feel that this is what happened with this record. i'm sure these guys had the new UO album on regular spin just as much as all of us did...and writing music that is greatly similar to it almost makes you feel like you're in
that band...(if that makes any sense)...so you roll with it because it feels like you're doing something great...but you're not. again...just a thought.