Arctic Monkeys

I really do like the Libs. These guys just might be the biggest thing since to come out of england since the Stone Roses.

I don't give an ass what anyone says, Just because a band gets a bit of hype doesn't mean you have to hate them.

Viva la Monkeys!

I just think this band is going to be big in some sort of way.

But hype aside, the last thing anybody needs now is a new Libertines.

All the people that got wound up by the I Predict a Riot lyrics will be going crazy over A Certain Romance:

Well oh they might wear classic Reeboks
Or knackered Converse
Or tracky bottoms tucked in socks
But all of that's what the point is not
The point's that there ain't no romance around there

....

You know, oh it's a funny thing you know
We'll tell 'em if you like
We'll tell 'em all tonight
They'll never listen
Cause their minds are made up
And course it's all okay to carry on that way

And over there there's broken bones
There's only music, so that there's new ringtones
And it don't take no Sherlock Holmes
To see it's a little different around here

etc.

The singer has that really annoying 'check it out man I'm telling you THE TRUTH' voice that has become de rigeur in Brit indie, and they have that stupid half skanking motion that everyone seems to have today as well. They're like a muscular Libertines. I've got a can of lager and it's all lads together innit.

Doesn't excuse the band being shit, though.

I have to say they are fuckin wicked and funny 2. can see why people are comparing them to the libertines in as much as they are british and good. But they are very different too.. for a start there northern and havent got some sort of romantic illusion with poppies/herion that carl and pete seemed to have.

I'm a big fan of the libertines self titiled album and the lad who wrote about that above is dead rigth.. its a classic already.

But there's no need to slag of a band for gettin hype.. if anyone had heard the interviews theyve done they sound like proper decent lads. good luck to em!

and that bird who shagged the lead singer.. haha quality! glad to see rock stars, even lads from yorkshire get groupies and shags back stage!

Live the dream :-)

Looking around a bit seems like you can grab some of their songs here. The first thing that comes to my mind is Libertines.

http://www.dominorecordco.com/site/downloads/Arctic_Monkeys/I_Bet%20You_HIGH.mov

What has become of Domino? You'd think with the Franz money they'd sign some good acts, but instead we've got Artic Monkeys and Archie Bronson Outfit. I don't begrudge Domino having another cash cow, but y'know, Franz are actually good!

I just suspect that there's a better band playing in a bar about twenty minutes from where you are now, wherever that might be.

In that Guardian article Conor McNicholas also recommended Carl Barat's new band, who will surely turn out to be the new McAlmont and Butler, only shit.

this band is utterly mediocre! wtf?

I don't understand the Arctic Monkeys appreciate either. I downloaded a couple of tracks about six weeks ago, and they went straight into the trash. Who has time for this kind of generic British indie? Of course, I see no appeal whatsoever to the Kaiser Chiefs, either, so what do I know.

In real life, I like the online "tastemakers'" picks way more than the print ones, frankly. Give me Fluxblog and Pitchforkmedia's darlings over the NME and BBC, any day.

and they're going nowhere looking like a spotty Coral.

rubbish lite singalong tripe with crap production:

Kaiser Chiefs
Hard Fi
Dead 60s

...Arctic Monkeys

On a site like rateyourmusic.com which has contributors across the world these crap bands are rightly ignored.

Because Britain has useless playlist stations such as Xfm, Virgin, Radio 1 and no weekly competition for NME, rubbish tripe like this rises to the top like slime on a stagnant pond.

AM I MAKING MYSELF CLEAR?

OTM. Nobody talks about it, but I must have ten music TV channels playing what seems like less than a dozen tracks over and over, all day long. This doen't happen by accident. "Taste-makers", my arse.

Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production are privately owned and controlled and which is characterized by competition and the profit motive.

Not sure what you're telling me here though Marcello...

THERE IS MORE TO MUSIC THAN THIS

That, for me is the nub. How much further inward can the horizons and expectations of mainstream 'indie' travel before the whole thing completely implodes? I think the answer is that it's already at that point creatively. The A*ctic Gibbons are not taking us on a fantastic voyage of "whoa! what was that?!" anytime soon.

The NME will be completely fucked (this time) if they fail to catch on to the next big wave of stuff more exciting than this piffle in time.

When students realise that the publication has less than 0.1% of a real clue about music (compare it with it's 1990's self even and it wasn't SO bad, even in the britpop/big-beat years ther was a smidge of diversity) and really is just a (grotty) lifestyle mag, they are as doomed as Melody Maker.

According to one estimate there are already 142 different versions of various Arctic Monkeys songs floating around on the internet, some recorded by fans at concerts.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/news/story/0,11711,1593705,00.html

I like the Sheffield references, mainly as I seem to be loving Sheffield again, for some unearthly reason. apart from that, it's just same old same old. Or as they say in Thailand: same same but different

Googlers?

Linked from another message board?

Street team?

Does street-teaming message boards count as spam?

I want a tribute band called the Artex Monkeys.

Max russull must be as thick as a brick.

What, "Ned"? Ooh, ooh! Do me next!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/gypsyfrocksbedlam/moiravangough.jpg

I could get into the Libertines, despite the complete and utter played-outness of the four piece guitar band/Pete Doherty is the indie Keith Richards narrative. Hell, I even like Oasis. However after downloading some of the 142 Arctic Monkeys tracks that are floating around the net, I only made it about 30 seconds through the first track before deleting the entire lot from iTunes. Thank you, technology, for saving me from spending $7.99 on the import CD single of this crap.

I would rather a decent band be in the charts making music rather than this bunch of silly "teens" with their loutish fans, dumb street team and horrible, untalented overuse of Protools: guitar music doesn't sound like how this band does without computers being used somewhere, you idiot.

Alternatively, I would be happy for Arctic Monkeys to be in the charts WITHOUT making any music.

Arctic Monkeys is #1 on Google for Monkeys. Above actual monkeys. That can't be right.

The debut Arctic Monkeys album, "Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not" (Domino), has been instantly — and accurately — hailed as a modern classic

I'm on google uk. You must be using that commie revisionist Chinese shite that still lists the Beatles as an influential British band.

The poll to establish the 100 greatest British albums ever has the indie legends at the top, just pipping fellow Mancunians The Smiths at two with their 1986 effort 'The Queen Is Dead', and Oasis, who are at Three with their 1994 debut 'Definitely Maybe'.

Arctic Monkeys make an appearance at Number Five in the week that their first album 'Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not' looks set to become the fastest selling UK debut album of all time.

The Top Ten is as follows:
1. The Stone Roses 'The Stone Roses'
2. The Smiths 'The Queen Is Dead'
3. Oasis 'Definitely Maybe'
4. Sex Pistols 'Never Mind The Bollocks'
5. Arctic Monkeys 'Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not'
6. Blur 'Modern Life Is Rubbish'
7. Pulp 'Different Class'
8. The Clash 'London Calling'
9. The Beatles 'Revolver'
10. The Libertines 'Up The Bracket'

Although they wouldn't exist without The Strokes as a precursor, in their favor AM are less fashion-layout-ready and display more musical agility. The Strokes had better songs, though (speaking in past tense 'cause their expiration date passed after the first album).

Verdict: Arctic Monkeys huge in UK, won't mean shit in the US.

they're gonna have to get to used to that

You know, I just finished reading this issue, and my eyes fell out of my head when I saw that.

These kids are going to have such a long, long way down...

Ha ha

O RLY?

That's a thread unto itself. (And, somewhere on here, it probably already is.)

oh you like something, that's so interesting.

music is make-believe, the monkeys know that and their fans live like it. just because it seems a somewhat dull existence to aspire to (naturalism/cynicism), compared to say...glam, doesn't make the role play any less valid.

'oasis are actually very talented.

clever talleneted and sucessful.

the furries, were sh*te, and more like a 3rd rate pub band.

brit pop was a huge movement throught the nineties and very succesful, and i doubt you'd have the sh*t art rock bands that pussy foot around today if if it wasnt for that.

artic monkeys say it perfectly

"the weekend rockstars in the toilets practisicing there lines"
"super cool bands with there trilbys and glasses of white wine"'

And anyway musical history is full of people outside of a music's cultural area of origin wanting to be part of that scene. I think what have people upset here is the Arctic Monkeys are a throwback to a type of music they personally don't much like and don't want to see it gain any traction. Doesn't the UK know they should be listening to Grime?! Dizzee needs to eat too! Come on!

The new tracks on the EP were very disappointing.
As I suspected, they're already on the rocky/rockist road to self-mythologising/self-justification.
They should concentrate on their music instead of getting bogged down over what people, contributors to this thread included, think of them.

http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articles/weekly_article/imperfect-sound-forever.htm

This is another reason why The Drift comes as such a sonic delight (relatively speaking); the emotional peaks and troughs of the music are accurately mirrored and recreated (the truly cinemascopic drum avalanche at the beginning of "Cossacks Are," Donald Duck plus orchestra in "The Escape," etc.).

interesting article, but personally i think its a more sinister problem, relating to the streamlining of sound to make people less aware of 'quality', and making music more easy to manufacture. can you create another pink floyd? no. can you create another arctic monkeys? yes. they both make money. only one is a product that can be made instantaneously. one is legendary, one is crap.. but its relative. and relative to the current state of music lovers, crap is apparently good. :)

X-post - lovethefrench - that's something I'm looking into now, actually, the A&R marketing aspect of it.

Which is off-topic, but came to mind re: looking at marketing and turnover of acts.

or BOTH

re. touring & promo -- yer beatles and stones were always on tour weren't they?

1966: five or six major record labels run by people who had been around since days of al bowlly/glenn miller, didn't really have a clue about what the kids liked so were happy to throw anything into the mixer to see what came out.

2006: three or four multinational shareholder-driven organisations relying on instant returns, usually run by people who weren't even around in days of cobain, decided by committee what the kids should like so unhappy to throw anything into any mixer which doesn't sound like something that already came out, and therefore will make immediate money.

perhaps i should have been more specific... lets say... the dark side of the moon period, the meddle period.. NOT the wall period

okay... hate what you want...

but man, you're missing out

the people who are missing out, are the people who haven't heard it's about time by christina milian.

some of it is kinda boring, but they're just kids n' all.

i like the song "riot van" the best, the slow number.

start from about 2/3 of the way down. my first, but not my last, music-forum flame-war!

I'm really not proud of a lot of what I said (ESPECIALLY the 'saviours of British rock', whoops), not to mention the manner in which I said it, but hey, a rant's a rant!

i guess i had low expectations.

a lot of it sounds like pretty typical u.s. indie rock w/english accents, but the best songs are pretty good. the lead dude has a good way about him sometimes.

ha ha

i guess my default position is that every new "buzz band" of the UK is going to be a big huge pile of shit, so when something's kinda decent i'm all like "oh that's kinda nice, good for them!"

Srsly, are these losers still around?

had to laugh at the reviewer here..what a shoddy review. Of course nothing in guitar based music is groundbreaking anymore,,its just impossible, its all been done before. However as someone who has not been particularly touched by anything musically since the Stone Roses debut this album is phenomenal, as good as you can get.

Someone please explain why "Fluroscent Adolescent" is meant to be a modern classic. Thanks.

that's a clever title.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Drastic_Fantastic.jpg

Would smash the shit out of.

alex turner is a smug, snidey little cunt.

IS he? in person? i'm genuinely surprised if so cause that's not what i've heard.

in the lyrics, obvs. i reckon he is in person as well tho.

i always wondered why people go to such elaborate trouble to "pretend" they're a twat. why not spend the same amount of energy pretending to be funny and engaging and insightful?

-- Tracer Hand, Thursday, October 18, 2007 12:33 PM (4 days ago) Bookmark Link

so true, so true.

This band has a song called "Brianstorm"

new album 'Suck It And See' l£4k£d.

(i kno)

first single sounded a bit non descript/oasis-ish

Single is a horrible choice but the last third of the record is pretty great.

it took a while to sink in but it's a pretty fine album. a couple of dud-ish trax but the good ones are a-ok-imo.

funny to read the haters up thread: pretty sure that a.turner is as far away from a snidey littlecunt as max r and others are close to it.

single worked on the letterman performance. tight band.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr5U1A94IRM

That single is awful.

Good album -- I guess they've entered their Morrissey circa '89 phase where it's all jangle and semi-acerbic couplets.

Like this album a lot.

the lyrics he wrote for the submarine were dreadful. hopefully he doesnt overwrite the life out of each line on this album like he did there.

new single! won't win over any naysayers but it's sweet enough to be going on with

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/musicblog/2013/jun/19/arctic-monkeys-do-i-wanna-know?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Jeez, this is great. Dunno why I didn't expect it because they always deliver, but this is a belter.

When Album?

September

lol. glad i get to bump this thread, some good posts above like that dave matthews thread.

anyway, watch this fucking asshole:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOVT5ujsr8s

lololol

i love the parts when you can see people milling around in the background just not even paying attention or giving the slightest shit

oh well this is old i guess (july) so there was probably already a thread about it. never mind, carry on