Foo Fighters - 'Long Road To Ruin'
Another day, another troublesome band, for people who consider themselves connoisseurs of modern rockular song. Not troublesome because there is anything particularly wrong with the band themselves, or their quality control (it's not Pete Doherty all over again or anything). No, troublesome because saying you like the Foofs is akin, in some people's minds, to saying you don't really have any taste of your own, you just go with whatever the most popular rock-type-band is around at any given moment. It's an argument which was (possibly inadvertently) best summed up in .
And you do have to ask why people feel the need to over-explain why they like the band. I mean they're good, aren't they? They make rock music which occasionally sounds like pop music, and rock music which occasionally sounds like RAWK music. Which has to be a good thing, right? And Dave Grohl is the kind of party-mad rock warrior who would be very helpful and kind if your Rolls Royce got stuck in the mud en route to the swimming pool.
Sure, there's something a little soft and pillowy about their music at times, and it can wash over you a little without making any severe demands on your attention. It's not like you hear a song like this and immediately halt in your tracks, shushing people to your left and right, in order to hear every nuance better. That's probably why they've gone back to making comedy videos again. Anything to keep people's attention for long enough to allow the gentle charms of Mr Grohl's melodic muse to work their tender magic on their tune receptors.
And that's the real reason why it's possible to feel a little foolish for liking the Foofs. It's all about being charmed by the pretty songs they do, and the funny man who sings them. It's not visceral, feral stuff, like Slayer or Nirvana or whatnot. Even a song as goosebump-pacey as 'The Pretender' relied as much on a couple of nicely-timed and unexpected chord changes as it did on ramalama drama. So you can end up wondering if you haven't been a little duped.
On the other hand, it's only credibility-obsessed rock fans who are going to bother worrying about this kind of thing. Ulitmately, the reason the Foo Fighters are as massively successful as they are is because they write the kind of songs that a lot of people want to buy, once they've had time to really get to know them. It's not a con trick, these are good songs, THIS is a good song. It's not a GREAT song, but it doesn't mean the band are corporate rock magicians or anything.
In summary, if you're one of those people who 'secretly' likes a band, or feels that they are a 'guilty pleasure', isn't it time to stop worrying about what your 'music collection' says ABOUT you, and concentrate more on what it does FOR you?
Download: Out now
CD Released: December 3rd
(Fraser McAlpine)
Comments
That last paragraph is inspirational (I'm thinking the same ilk as Churchill, King etc) and is exactly what I decided about a year back when I purchased bpth Backstreet Boys and Britney Spears Greatest Hits albums.
The former sits between Avenged Sevepence (Sevenfold) and Black Sabbath in my collection, whilst Britney is sandwiched between Bloc Party and Bullet for My Valentine.
As for Foo Fighters, they're alright. They've got some belters; Everlong, Learn to Fly, Monkey Wrench, Best of You etc.
However, they also have alot of distinctly average songs and I'm afraid this one falls into the latter category for me.
Why? How? Is it some kind of global joke at my expense? If it is, it's not funny.
The Foo [kin] are just so mind numbingly boring. At least that's when they're not being dull and uninteresting.
Fair enough, Grohl seems like a nice bloke and he bigs up some mighty fine names, hence why I actually bought the Probot album. But, really?
I went to the Hyde Park gig just to see the mighty Motorhead, secretly hoping that live, they might reveal some well hidden majesty. But no, they were dull, dull and dull.
Apart from Lemmy guested.
Then I left.
What is it with you people (not you Mr McA), people out there) and your obsession with raising the blandest of the bland to levels of success so beyond their meagre talents. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
But no, you're out there buying Biffy bloody Clyro records and pretending that the Red Hot Chili Peppers haven't been clinically dead for the last 15 years.
Shocking.
Credibility, for me, has never been much of a concern when it comes to my music collection (one reason why I never read NME* or Q magazine anymore). If it did I would have to throw away my Peters and Lee** cd's! If I like it, I will buy it, end of.
* I don't really need them to tell me who in the music world I should consider being cool, thank you very much!
** If you dont know 'em, Google 'em, you'll thank me in the long run (or not, as it may be!)
['Welcome Home', now that's a TUNE - Fraser]
Hmm 'Welcome Home' indeed Fraser. It's funny, I know of 3 songs with the title Welcome Home and they are all quality tunes. . .
. . .There's the aforementioned 'Welcome Home' by Peters and Lee. . .
. . .there's 'Welcome Home' by Coheed & Cambria. . .
. . .and in my opinion the best of all 3: 'Welcome Home (Sanitarium)'* by Metallica.
Its got me thinking (dangerous I know) could I write a song and call it 'Welcome Home' would it be instantly brilliant?
I'd appreciate anyone's thoughts on this, I think it's foolproof, unless anyone knows of a song with the same title that is rubbish?
* I know it's slightly different, but my theory would be quashed if I only knew 2 songs of the same title.
I googled Welcome Home and it came up with this odd country type song by Daniel somebody
which was not instantly brilliant. So not quite foolproof yet? Maybe there's some hidden formula, like you have to have at least two e's in your name or you have to add a title in brackets?
Foo Fighters are getting a bit dreary by the way.
xx
Hmm good research Soph, it appears my plan is flawed and not foolproof at all.
I Wiki'd Welcome Home and found songs by King Diamond (funny, but pretty awful), Idlewild (as good as Idlewild get), Brian from Backstreet Boys (crap) and Dave Dobbyn (average).
Damn!
Unless your theory works with regards to number of 'E's' in the artists name or something, I'm to lazy to work that out though!
i totally agree with you, its got to the stage when people like music not because of the music but because of the label. i like any music i enjoy listening to, from leona lewis, to avenged sevenfold. lighten up, its music if you enjoy it be proud to like it, even if its not the music youre supposed to like, or its not deep or meaningful enough for you.