• itsprobablyfine@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I would say at the time they were solid good. They weren’t technically very complex but who cares - half the bands at that time barely even played instruments, just banged out power chords and yelled into a mic. As far as pop music goes those albums were great in my opinion. Wouldn’t talk about them in a music theory class, but we were lucky to have such solid albums getting radio play.

    • pjwestin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s certainly how I feel about Parachutes. Solid little album, even if it’s not reinventing the wheel. I feel more mixed about A Rush of Blood to the Head. Some of their best tracks are on that album (The Scientist may be their best song), but a lot of it is forgettable, and Clocks just sucks, don’t know how that became a big single. I thought X&Y was pretty meh, and then I stopped listening.

      • itsprobablyfine@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I’d generally agree, definitely consider XY completely forgettable. That said, I think Rush of Blood is a great album as an album. Parachutes is a better collection of songs but Rush feels more comprehensive to me. Even clocks, in the context of the album, works. The only other album I enjoy is viva la vida, because while it’s not perfect, I like what they were attempting with that one. I’d like other bands to experiment with those kinds of concepts so even if I don’t think they exactly hit the mark, I appreciate the attempt