Foo Fighters announce new album, release date etc

[Dylan]

DYLAN?????????????POR FAVOR.

????????????????

?

Que?????

 

[chicoazul]

Hiya x

 

[linglong]

Very harsh. They're not that old, mate. They need to do something a bit different, which they did with their last album (and in the process got decent critical acclaim and new fans). However my preference for the Foos is harder stuff, and that's why I'm excited for this new album. I don't expect it to be groundbreaking (I have the dozens of new, emerging bands I'm into -- and Radiohead, hehe -- for that). I'm just hoping for a kickass, raucous record which will be a lot of fun to see live. I don't think Echoes was that album... nor was In Your Honour, either, but the early signs for this record point to a place I want to visit!

I stand by what i said matey hehe but i can see your point of view but to me they're the p1nk of the heavy metal world,wannabe's and never weres.

I do salute Grohl for not sitting back on his nirvana legacy(ok it was pretty small but what an impact,many would have sat back on it)

 

[Seamus Colemole]

Foo Fighters are one of those bands who i don't particularly like, in fact they really annoy me with their crappy try too hard to be funny videos. A few of their songs are ok but thats about it for me.

Apart from one : Everlong. Absolutely brilliant song which i adore.

And i saw them live back in 95, they were ok i guess!

 

[Summerskin]

They are the ultimate filler band to me, you could pick the best tracks off their last 6 albums and barely have enough to fit on a disc itself.

That new single did nothing for me either, just sounds like the opening track off of Songs For The Dead.

 

[RFUS]

I stand by what i said matey hehe but i can see your point of view but to me they're the p1nk of the heavy metal world,wannabe's and never weres.

I do salute Grohl for not sitting back on his nirvana legacy(ok it was pretty small but what an impact,many would have sat back on it)

Foo Fighters are one of those bands who i don't particularly like, in fact they really annoy me with their crappy try too hard to be funny videos. A few of their songs are ok but thats about it for me.

Apart from one : Everlong. Absolutely brilliant song which i adore.

And i saw them live back in 95, they were ok i guess!

They are the ultimate filler band to me, you could pick the best tracks off their last 6 albums and barely have enough to fit on a disc itself.

That new single did nothing for me either, just sounds like the opening track off of Songs For The Dead.

Opinions are like assholes... everyone has one, but mine is the smoothest. Or something.


Anyway, I disagree with you guys, but respect your opinions. And Everlong is a fantastic song (my favourite Foos one) and mmmm Songs for the Dead... actually the Songs for the Deaf album as a whole is bloody brilliant, 5 star stuff. I do actually prefer Grohl's stuff when he's on the drums (Nirvana, QOTSA, Them Crooked Vultures).

 

[linglong]

Filler band..ypu that'll do nicely quite why Zane Lowe creams himself the many times he interviews them is beyond me

 

[RFUS]

I resent the filler statement. Well, post There is Nothing Left to Lose, anyway.

Those first three albums are classics, and their debut is one of the most underrated/underexposed albums I've ever come across. Most of their hits came after that, so that's why it doesn't get as much attention, but a lot of the songs Grohl was working on in his Nirvana days (seeing as it was released in 1995, that's not too surprising), and it shows a bit, in a good way. "Good Grief", "Wattershed" and the more popular "Big Me" are probably the highlights, but personally I think it's filler-free.

My personal favourite came after that; 1997's The Colour and the Shape. "Hey, Johnny Park", "Everlong", "My Hero" and "February Stars" are killer tracks. The whole album's great; 5 star stuff, if you will.


In a long and roundabout way, what I'm saying is, at the very least, the Foos rocked hard at the beginning. It's not unreasonable to say they're not as good as they were, but to dismiss them as perennial filler-floggers, is an unfair and probably uninformed opinion.

 

[linglong]

I agree the first couple of albums where bloody good but they've been in decline since those heady days mate to the point where now it is filler guff,for me at least,their music washes over me leaving nothing behind(a crime in my eyes) in short filler.

I agree everlong was a bloody great song perhaps too early in their career?

I was giving my definition of filler

 

[RFUS]

I agree the first couple of albums where bloody good but they've been in decline since those heady days mate to the point where now it is filler guff,for me at least,their music washes over me leaving nothing behind(a crime in my eyes) in short filler.

I agree everlong was a bloody great song perhaps too early in their career?

I was giving my definition of filler

No band can maintain a high quality throughout 2 decades without evolution. The Foos template was never going to be one suited to progression or extreme variety, and that's probably why Grohl has pursued numerous other avenues of music in his other ventures (working with QOTSA, Probot, Them Crooked Vultures).

So yeah, your opinion is a fair one, but I don't think they're dead yet. They do have some filler on later releases, but they've enough quality songs to justify their existence. They've promised this new album is going to be a harder rock one, so that means a shift in style. To what degree, well we'll have to see (hear, rather), but I like the song they've released already and am justifiably excited for this new album. I don't expect it to be revolutionary, but I have faith they can deliver some kick arse hard rock tunes, which will sound ace when I hopefully see them live.

And besides, not that many bands can boast 3 top quality albums. I feel they can. It's just a shame, I guess, that those 3 were their first 3.

 

[linglong]

Good points mate

Another band you could liken the foo's too are Oasis when you take their first 2 albums out of the picture whats left is patchy at best i found it sad with that band is that some of their classic stuff was on B sides of records(whatever etc).

I always find it a shame when a band,with potential peaks too soon i just think to myself how good could they have been?

On a side note (and in homage to your user name)..

Nirvana where they spent as a band when Cobain died?

I'm going to say...yes they were becuase music had moved on and all the record company wanted was another "smells like" type hit (which when you listen to in utero was never going to happen) with that album i honestly think the band had reached it's end anyways regardless of matters that took its course.

Anyway i'm rambling.

 

[RFUS]

Good points mate

Another band you could liken the foo's too are Oasis when you take their first 2 albums out of the picture whats left is patchy at best i found it sad with that band is that some of their classic stuff was on B sides of records(whatever etc).

I always find it a shame when a band,with potential peaks too soon i just think to myself how good could they have been?

On a side note (and in homage to your user name)..

Nirvana where they spent as a band when Cobain died?

I'm going to say...yes they were becuase music had moved on and all the record company wanted was another "smells like" type hit (which when you listen to in utero was never going to happen) with that album i honestly think the band had reached it's end anyways regardless of matters that took its course.

Anyway i'm rambling.

I'm going to say -- with years of Nirvana based study/devotion to back me up -- they were just beginning. My favourite Nirvana stuff is almost entirely from their unplugged session, In Utero (the former released after Cobain's death, recorded 140 or so days before, the latter their last album) and from a big compilation I have of unreleased demos. My favourite Nirvana song was "You Know You're Right", which was released in 2002 and to my knowledge (iirc) it was the last song Cobain recorded.

So imo, definitely not. Perhaps Nirvana would have peaked, but Cobain hadn't even got started. He showed in the unplugged sessions, and some of these demos and unreleased songs I'm talking about, a different side, and another level of musical genius. He just 'got' music, and was one of the best artists ever when it came to expressing himself and his emotions. The unplugged session is really, really powerful, because of this. And at the end of the day music is emotion, that's what it should be, what it instills and so on.

In a long winded way then, I'm saying to suggest Cobain was spent is something only a casual Nirvana listener might say. You didn't, you said Nirvana, and well that's more speculative. Because of the weighty label they carried as the pioneers of grunge, then I guess it might have been hard for them to shake that. I can't say for sure then, but I know Cobain's genius was vastly untapped... and that's why his suicide still gets me down to this day.

 

[linglong]

Don't get me wrong Matey Cobain (drug and courtney free) could have been something else but i do feel the band was at its end,oddly enough i too have that album "with the lights out" triple cds with a metal plate cover? was for me full of oddities and outtakes but nothing more than that(apart from the single) indeed some of it was vastly better than what came out iirc though i haven't listened to it for ages.

I recall seeing an interview at that albums release time with the "other 2 " from the band and i'm sure they both agreed there wasnt much "in the can" always recall those words and (for what it was worth) an MTV interview a few months before his death Cobain bemoaning the fact the unreleased album wasnt as different as he'd liked,by the way i thought he was wrong Inutero was miles better than the first 2 much darker and all the better for it.

So like punk and the pistols before it grunge went the way of the record companies and for that reason alone (and there are others i feel) Nirvana as a band where a spent force but and here we agree totally Cobain wasnt,not by a long way it's just a shame he married an old slapper and like the juice to much.

What a pillock

 

[RFUS]

Don't get me wrong Matey Cobain (drug and courtney free) could have been something else but i do feel the band was at its end,oddly enough i too have that album "with the lights out" triple cds with a metal plate cover? was for me full of oddities and outtakes but nothing more than that(apart from the single) indeed some of it was vastly better than what came out iirc though i haven't listened to it for ages.

I recall seeing an interview at that albums release time with the "other 2 " from the band and i'm sure they both agreed there wasnt much "in the can" always recall those words and (for what it was worth) an MTV interview a few months before his death Cobain bemoaning the fact the unreleased album wasnt as different as he'd liked,by the way i thought he was wrong Inutero was miles better than the first 2 much darker and all the better for it.

So like punk and the pistols before it grunge went the way of the record companies and for that reason alone (and there are others i feel) Nirvana as a band where a spent force but and here we agree totally Cobain wasnt,not by a long way it's just a shame he married an old slapper and like the juice to much.

What a pillock

Yeah you pretty much nailed it there.


Anyway, I think in a documentary I watched, Kurt explained how his addiction came about.

Long story short, he had chronic stomach pains as a kid and growing up, but they could never find anything wrong. He moved onto heroin because he used to smoke weed to alleviate his stomach pains, but naturally he became (for want of a better word) immune to the pain numbing affect of the weed. So he moved onto heroin as it was stronger...

Now I personally believe he had these stomach problems, which he said were crippling. And then it's a slippery slope. No excuses, but without a good infrastructure of caring family members it's incredibly hard to get off a drug like heroin, obviously. And unluckily for him he fell in love with a soulless harpy who didn't reciprocate the love he clearly felt for her (I guess love's blind, deaf and dumb, eh?).

If he'd had a human being for a wife, maybe he'd have gotten the support he needed. Or maybe not. But when Kurt killed himself Courtney was off with his credit cards running up bills on clothes or some crap. Enough said.

It's a shame he didn't have more willpower and it's a shame he valued his life so little that he thought he was doing his daughter a favour by ending it. But what can you do? It's depressing, but hey, he didn't make much music but what he did was bloody fantastic. He had a short life, but in 100 years people will remember him. I doubt they'll remember me or you!



God I can really ramble, can't I?

 

[linglong]

Hehe always good to ramble mate good post