Marina & The Diamonds!

I still haven't heard the whole album, but I like Alex Petridis's review (!): http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010/feb/18/marina-and-the-diamonds-cd-review

Although it looks like maybe the whole thing is now streaming on her myspace? Anyway, I'm once again listening through what's there to stream, which is a lot more than what was up before.

don't think there is a bad song on here

I do find that my ambivalence still tends to just get rolled right over by the quality of the songs.

(Mostly talking about the music, and not the lyrics, though they lyrics are by no means all bad or lacking. Some interesting stuff there as well.)

music is great, but her persona, presence, and of course voice, is what does it for me

That Petridis review is terrible. He's getting to the stage where his wacky comedic routine completely crowds out any sense he may or may not be talking:

You could argue that this kind of thing represents a reaction to the post-Mariah-Carey-heavily-melismatic-Waaah!-Bodyform! style that X Factor voters seem to believe represents the apogee of distaff vocal achievement. The more cynically minded might suggest that, at root, it's actually no different: a load of irritating ­vocal tics designed to convey a depth of ­emotion that, if it ­actually existed in the ­performance in the first place, wouldn't need a load of irritating vocal tics to convey it. Certainly, you could argue that it's equally predictable. Just as you know that sooner or later the female singer who tends to the heavily-melismatic-Waaaah!-Bodyform! style will sing a song about reachin' for her dreams, so within ­seconds of The ­Family ­Jewels' opening, you're gripped by the absolute ­certainty that, at some point, this album will feature a Brecht and Weill-influenced oompah-oompah song in which the I'm-a-bit-nutty staccato is deployed as if it's about to be declared ­illegal

This is not the work of a man I consider qualified to talk about irritating tics.

Yeah, well I'm not going to expend any energy defending him, for sure, and I read it quickly, but I thought he got at some of what I am ambivalent about in Marina & the Diamonds.

I should add that some of the time I really like what she does with her vocal theatrics. Once I get the CD I may sit down and figure out when I like them and whether it matters and whether it remains consistent. The bit of friction and ambivalence may actually work to make her retain my long term interest. I don't know.

(This sounds like a surprisingly conservative aesthetic coming from him, but then again he does sometimes surprise me with such comments: a load of irritating ­vocal tics designed to convey a depth of ­emotion that, if it ­actually existed in the ­performance in the first place, wouldn't need a load of irritating vocal tics to convey it. Not necessarily saying I strongly disagree, I just am surprised he would make a comment along those lines. I'm sure I talk that way sometimes, but speaking of emotional depth as somehow "existing in the performance" is leaving oneself open to some pretty tough questions about the place of artifice and the importance (or not) of what a performer is experiencing emotionally during a performance.)

Petridish is a cock, a.p.u.

I'm sorry I mentioned his name on this thread, since it becomes too much of a red flag.

I feel really loyal to the kind of 'bbc pop' axis this belongs to - this and Mika and Little Boots and maybe La Roux feel very unashamed of what they are, smart quirky pop from people of my age of my age and musical background (Alisha's Attic/ Indie Teenhood/ Raving and Xenomania) - it's flattering to me to imagine someone fifteen, hearing those songs and thinking that path wise and full of mystery.

I'm sort of kicking myself now for downloading and listening to the leaked album. It would've been so much more fun to snag this out of the mailbox, hop in the car, and tear down the road listening to "Shampain" at full blast.

That said, I love this record.

went to see her live last night. the diamonds were a little polished and perfunctory, I felt. sometimes they felt like a seasoned pub ska band...not a vibe I've got from any of the recorded stuff. was kind of anticipating/hoping for a little extra oomph and dirt in the live setting.

but marina herself was fantastic - really strong, confident performer, and her voice is utterly magnificent. and she came on dressed as a sheep. victory!

Since she's pretty much it and there is no identifiable band to speak of, it doesn't surprise me that her live backing band might be an issue.

Suprisingly good album - I haven't heard the EPs before, just thought the here's the new Florence Welch, but Marina is much better. Her voice in 'Are You Satisfied?' is totally Ari Up.

yeah, ari up and finish (!!!!!!)

Timing. I'm thinking timing is one of her big strengths musically (and I mean timing in the music, not timing of career moves or whatever). Maybe I mean pacing, but I think I mean timing in a broader sense. I think it's one of the ways she extricates herself from the problematic corners she sometimes backs herself into. But I just woke up.

Inspired specifically by the sudden switch in "Hollywood" when she sings: "Your mind is just like mine. . ."

That's an interesting way to put into words what I like about her too. xp

Thanks.

Another little detail. On "I Am Not a Robot": Could a more gentle delivery be possible for "Don't be so pathetic"? Can you imagine how most people would sing that? I don't even wince imagining myself on the receiving end. (And it's also unexpected that the overall context is telling someone to admit their vulnerability and weakness, in which case the delivery makes perfect sense.)

You know, if it wasn't for the fact that landfill indie is dead and British pop is all about glamorous quirky girls now, I could have sworn this record sounded almost exactly like the Kaiser Chiefs.

I think maybe the little differences make a big difference. Dunno, I'm too ambivalent in my liking for this to wanna think about those lumpen gits just yet.

Plus there's not much that isn't improved by having a woman singing on it rather than the bloke out of Kaiser Chiefs. Plus hell the band aren't that lumpen.

Lumpen is a good word actually, despite the instrumentation it's got that awful Killers/Kaiser Chiefs mid-00s clumsy rock production sound to it. I'm not a Florence stan by any means but she's a million times better than this - she at least understands the value of build and momentum.

And she's a really charmless personality, that opening track in particular. She feels unbearable sneery in too many places - Girls (the *really* Kaiser Chiefs track here) just set my teeth on edge in almost every way.

I haven't heard enough Florence to make a comparison (and what I've heard didn't not draw me in), but I think her understanding of the value of build and momentum is what I was trying to get at as one of Marina's strong points. Maybe build and momentum isn't quite it, but I think she does a good job of sustaining attention by moving things along. To me, she plays very effectively with musical tension (again, I might want to qualify that with "in her best songs," since there are some album tracks I've hardly heard much).

I also really only know the Kaiser Chiefs in name, so now I'm curious to listen to them and see if they have as much going for them in terms of tunefulness as Marina. I am skeptical.

But I can understand being put off by her being too sneery.

tbh I don't hear the Kaiser Chiefs comparison at all. huh?

Listening now and attempting to ignore their awful videos (some of hers are awful too-and they are just bad in a typical rock video way, I don't mean to single them out). Okay, instead of just saying "WTF?" let me ask this: in what way is Marina & the Diamonds like the Kaiser Chiefs?

What Matt said about the middle of the road flatness of the sound I think. Gonzales' re-jig of "Hollywood" offers evidence that the songs - which I mostly think are v. good - could be arranged and performed much more interestingly than they are on the album. Think this is why Joni and Kate only work as references as long as you forget that their records sound unique. Unique sound is missing here.

Still far prefer her to any of her alleged contemporaries tho.

I guess I know what you mean. I think there may be more distinctive layers of sound packed into these recordings than she's being given credit for, but I need to listen more. Maybe I'm confusing "unique/unusual sounds" for an overall unique/distinctive sound. My initial impression of the drum sounds is that they are pretty generic, and I guess the synth washes are pretty much the same (as far as sound goes) although for some reason I tend to really like them.

I do agree that she's not an original Joni or Kate, at least not on the music she's put out so far.

(I don't especially like the Gonzales version of Hollywood, but that's beside the point even if I just said it.)

Okay, instead of just saying "WTF?" let me ask this: in what way is Marina & the Diamonds like the Kaiser Chiefs?

Yeah, as you mention in your subsequent post, it's NOT arrangement I'm talking about here, although as NV mentions there's a 00s indie flatness/loudness in the production.

What I'm getting at is the songrwriting, the lyrics, the melodies, to an extent her demonstrative exaggerated vocal stylings and definitely the blunt social caricature in the lyrics are all smack bang in the same lineage as the Kaisers. She's much closer to tarted-up Britpop than Joni or Kate or whichever names are being thrown around these days. Considering she'd have grown up listening to that music it's not surprising.

Also there's a 'na na na' bit in Girls than I'm positive comes straight out of a Kaiser Chiefs record, although I'm buggered if I'm listening back to their catalogue to find out which one.

'Girls' reminds me to Kaiser Chiefs too with this 'na na na na na' line, but that won't make it a bad song. (And yes, I think there was a couple of good songs on that first Kaiser Chiefs LP, though it's not cool to admit these days.)

With their "na na na na na nas" Kaiser Chiefs remind me of Chris Kenner.

I have listened to 'I am not a robot' many, many, many times since seeing her on friday.

got the album yesterday... been on repeat since. when it's good (shampain, are you satisfied, mowgli, robot, rootless, girls), it's fairly jaw-dropping and completely addictive. but a fair chunk of the second half is markedly less instantly appealing. we'll see... even so, I haven't had a capital-p pop album totally dominate my waking and sleeping brain like this in... well, maybe ever? scary.

absolutely beautiful version of 'robot' from the review show last week:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x94tuTe9wmg

after initially being underwhelmed, oh no! and numb have really blossomed for me.

the former has a really strong PWL vibe on the chorus, which is a phrase I've never used in a positive context before.

numb is gloriously devotional in its shameless soaring, and her voice sounds fantastic here, even though her upper-register veers a little close to the shrill unbearableness of la roux.

Does part of "Are You Satisfied?" remind anyone else of the chorus of Madonna's "American Life" (a song I think I like more than most people on ILM, even though I probably like Madonna less than mostpeopleonILM)? Or maybe it's just the general sentiment, and maybe "Hollywood" has primed me to hear musical echoes of "American Life" where there aren't really any? (For the record I think I fully understand why people would hate "American Life," but I'm a little surprised that so many do.)

Also, I do love that sheep jacket.

Anyhow, I think I'll probably have more to say. My CD finally arrived today.

not really familiar enough with american life to comment...

however, AYS?, along with hollywood, is one of the more lyrically uncomfortable/fascinating songs here, but I can't quite pin down why.

it's a theme which recurs throughout the album – the way in which her overwhelming need to be successful has marred her personal life – but there's something hyper-meta about the first line on the first track on your debut album being about getting the deal that made the album possible. it has a hollowing effect, makes it seem as if this was created in a vacuum.

combined with the somewhat patronising talk of 'average lives' (again, echoed in Hollywood), she makes it seem as if the unconstructed, pre-deal, pre-fame marina barely even existed. it's like she's really trying hard to position herself outside the celebrity culture, but in many ways her naked ambition embodies its worst aspects, to detrimental personal effect, and she's struggling to reconcile the two.

(I have listened to this album non-stop since getting it, btw. I think it's really wonderful.)

I was coming back to post this:

I would kind of say that the maximalism of the sound, the number of effects and touches of this and that, makes up for what some people have called its generic production (though I'm not at all sure I'm bothered by the generic production in this case, if that's what it is).

combined with the somewhat patronising talk of 'average lives' (again, echoed in Hollywood), she makes it seem as if the unconstructed, pre-deal, pre-fame marina barely even existed.

Right, not to mention the rest of us normaloids and nobodies.

I occasionally am reminded of the absurd--intentionally absurd, I certainly think--patronizing tone of the Kinks' Soap Opera (not that I particularly like that album or anything, but at one time I used to listen to it a lot, way way back in elementary school and early high school, so it's sort of there in my head even though it doesn't matter to me).

(Now listening to something from Soap Opera which has nothing really to do with Marina & the Diamonds, but it may be time for me to give it a chance again because it sounds better than it did last time I checked.)

yeah, the production is anything but generic, really. lots of detailed touches, subtlety and dynamics going on.

the most curious thing is that the times where the lyrics become clunky or condescending don't detract from her appeal. if anything, the opposite... without wanting to make any crass 'flaws in the diamond' remarks, it is these slightly awkward, insensitive moments that remind you she's not a slick, polished entity, but a young, arguably naive but self-reflective artist engaged in a continual process of redesigning herself as something bolder and brighter. she's interesting but not always admirable, if that's not too condescending a thing to say in and of itself.

Right, not to mention the rest of us normaloids and nobodies.

I guess being young and carving out an identity for yourself is to some degree ALL about distancing yourself from the normaloids - then once you've done so, realising that you are one, and so is everybody else. a line decrying the lives of the 'average' might rankle the jaded old folks, but inspire the young and hopeful.

without wanting to make any crass 'flaws in the diamond' remarks, etc.

That did make me laugh out loud. . . I think I know what you're saying. Again, I'm a little surprised that I seem to be so willing to drink the shampain koolaid in this case, but it's just coming pretty naturally.

One thing that's been happening for me, which started happening before I got the album, is that I've become much more certain that I like her voice, which has quite a big range. (I don't mean technical octave type stuff, but range of effects I suppose. Even the variety in her English seems interesting. Sometimes it seems more heavily accented in I guess some local way. I mean, I don't really know UK accents in much detail at all, so I can't be specific.)

she adopts an exaggerated estuary english at times, kind of a generic take on a london/street accent, which is a highly malleable concept in and of itself.

a lot of thought has gone into keeping things mobile and protean, vocally. it provides lots of a lovely, playful detail, but it's not the focus. in his review, petridis seemed distracted and discombobulated by the fact that she doesn't have one vocal style that she sticks to. he massively overplays it though, to the extent that I'm almost disappointed that she's nowhere near as wild and allegedly unpalatable as he makes her out to be.

I do tend to think the second half &/or the non-single/not-previously-myspace-posted tracks are weaker than the others, but not bad, and probably good enough for albums tracks considering the strength of some of the stand-out tracks, and even these may grow on me over time. "Hermit the Frog," for instance, is just okay for a while, but when the melody switches up and it's got a more lyrical feeling, it's pretty lovely (I'm thinking around 1:07).

I think I know the bit you mean... it's where she goes all Sparks for a moment, yes?

Sorry, don't really know them.

for shame!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=na8oDCKp6AU

Definite resemblances. I have had my own peculiar, unsystematic exposure to music so there are these gaps. I remember someone who used to post on this board being completely flabbergasted that I had never heard the band Love given the other things I was familiar with.

yeah on second song and this is better than I expected. Rubbish album cover and aesthetic though; and I'm still going to skip that song I hated when it comes up. But in general this is more like the albums before Love and Fear.

However, you look at the replies to her tweet and there are a thousand people saying "yasssss drag us to hell queeeeeeeen."

I'd fucking quit if I somehow attracted these motherfuckers.

This reminds me, what the fuck is this shit: "xxxx it's a cultural reset, a reason to breathe, and an escape from this cruel world blah blah blah" that is incessantly copypasted into 80% of replies to any tweet by any female musical artist? Fuck I hate fans, twitter and the entire world.

Nothing of note, but I've watched a couple of her instagram clips from the current tour and damn she's a fully formed rock star at this point.