The Sound of Music

Nestled neatly amongst the largest names in designer brands and sports cars, just two weeks ago I found a flagship Virgin Megastore half way down the Champs Elysees Boulevard. Like a glittering beacon of music industry past, the humongous store sat adhorned by thousands of bustling Parisians all dodging in and around the doors. I take a few intrepid steps towards this seeming mirage: I can’t quite believe that there’s still an operational Virgin Megastore around. With a certain sense of nostalgia, I remember how this would normally be one of my first and last stops on a trip into Manchester. Certainly, it’s a mecca of my childhood: the endless stacks of CDs and the perilous piles of DVD boxsets. It seems somewhat surreal, which is all the more confounding, because I know I can browse the selection at any HMV when I return home.

Nipper has become a symbol of HMV record stores worldwide.
Image Credit:  Lienhard Schulz, Wikimedia Commons.

But this treasured retail paradise is now threatened too. With the announcement of HMV’s administration, there is a huge question mark sat poised above the music industry in the UK at least. HMV is not just a store for music, film and game: it is a British icon and institution. The comic logo of a dog playing with a phonograph is an endearing image renowned worldwide, and branded the company something more than a faceless corporation, but a music shop that was ready to be alert, be active, be intuitive with the music scene.

From irrevocably changing the face of British and world music in helping to launch The Beatles, to today offering free intimate gigs with huge artists up and down the country, HMV has always been at the forefront of the high street music consumption. And some may argue that it isn’t a surprise that this store, which maintained high prices in the face of strong supermarket competition and emerging internet markets, has gone bust. In fact, some may think that it should have happened sooner.

HMV once had rivals in the form of Virgin, Zavvi
and Woolworths. Now, all of these illustrious music
stores look set to disappear from the high street.
Image Credit: Captain Scarlet, Wikimedia Commons.

Yet, consider that HMV still retain close to a 40% share in the sale of physical CDs on the high street. Without the fierce competition of high street giants, such as Zavvi, Virgin Megastore and Woolworths, HMV remained an oasis, a safe haven of the CD back catalogue. Whilst prices of chart and new releases are frequently a couple of pounds dearer than supermarket counterparts, there is no denying both the reasonable pricing and the huge selection available from yesteryear. Without sounding too much like an independent record-store hippie, HMV had become synonymous with the idea of rediscovering music, just as much as it presented the opportunity to hear new music. The catalogue is not only impressive for a physical store, but in cities, such as Manchester, the HMV is a virtual Aladdin’s Cave, hoarding gems to suit all tastes.

Perhaps without the competition of Zavvi and Virgin Megastore, HMV became too complacent, and believed too much in their monopoly on the market. But considering that Woolworths, until now possibly the largest brand to collapse under the crisis, was a leading retailer in DVDs until it folded, it is hard to believe that HMV would not extrapolate some lessons. More than any previous administration, this is probably the most significant of changing markets, and the most evocative of a ruthless industry.

And this ruthless legacy sparks potential for an even more sinister future. As the internet giants that are Amazon and Apple come to dominate the entire market, inundating consumers with rock-bottom prices at marginal profit, the high street fails. With the escalating problems at HMV, the nation’s last specialist record chain may soon face rolling the shutters one last time.

The ups and downs of HMV.
Image Credit: Kantar Worldpanel.

As fewer physical stores are open, the decline of job opportunities and the rise of further unemployment is only further aggravated by the fact that without any competition, the internet stores will soon be able to demand the same premiums that these stores once charged. Only excepting the fact that less VAT will be paid back to the UK, leaving an even greater whole in the financial heart of the country which only ten years ago welcomed the advent of internet shopping as a second coming for economic gains.

More than this, nothing quite beats the record shop. This is why independent stores have gradually made a comeback recently, competing more and more strongly each quarter. While the fall of HMV may spell a boost in custom for these shops, it will certainly see a real shift in the pace of digital takeover. Not even a decade ago, physical sales were more than double what they are now, whilst digital was still struggling to break the mainstream market and was only warily accepted by a few. Should a buyer not be found the endangered chain, not only is the future of the high street uncertain amidst the collapse of GAME and Jessops, but the very presence of the physical CD is undermined.

His Master's Voice: HMV's flagship store on Oxford St.
Image Credit: Getty Images

Without a major store in which to browse an extensive collection of artists and albums, the supermarkets’ charts will become the only token existence of the CD. Even here, there tends only to be CDs available from within the Top 50: if you want to find releases from before the past six or so months, there will be little choice but to turn to download. Personally, this strikes me as a killer blow to music. Just as some may say that nothing sounds like a vinyl, the CD, more than the cassette before it, is proof of the adaptability of music. Sharing and mixing, ready to be played in the car or the house, offering a backup against computer malfunction or meltdown, the CD is versatile. I find myself swizzing an album on Spotify before buying: if it’s something I know I’ll want to come back to decades from now, I buy the CD.

My favourite albums are all owned in the physical. There’s something about being able to hold a CD, point at an iconic cover, finger the inlays of someone’s work, slip in the disc to something that transports you to a time, place, mood, invoking memory and nostalgia. With the close of HMV, this very aspect of music love is also threatened, and it was the very thing that made the store unique. HMV might not be the first place to look for a bargain, but it is the first stop for a boxset bonanza, a CD binge or a gaming back catalogue. Without it, the versatile disc may not be considered versatile much longer.

Stuck On Repeat?

Recently, the BBC ran a feature, posing the question "Can You Shape your Children's Taste in Music?" It is certainly a goal that many parents aspire to achieve, even for the selfish reasons that they can continue to listen to their own favourite albums from yester year, and can have some ‘decent music’ in that traditional five hour car journey to see the family for the holidays.

Every time I return home from university, my parents comment (without fail) on how nice and quiet the house has been without me within approximately two minutes of walking through the door. Hell, I haven’t even had a cup of tea yet. Great welcome, guys.

But mainly, this is due to the instant welcome I get from my siblings, with whom there is an instant need to trade the latest gossip, jokes and musical trends.

Loading up my phone to browse YouTube, the groans of ‘Remember when we were in charge of the music in this house?’ hang heavy in the air.

Perhaps for a good reason. This summer, a Spanish headed report published its findings on modern pop music, only to conclude that, basically, everything sounds the same. Yes, punk and prog-rock happened. That was the 70s. Now, each assault on the chart is bound up in some squiffy basslines and a vapid string of lyrical spew, probably formulated by some questionable tin of value alphabet soup.

No wonder parents try to influence their children’s taste in music. The prolific back catalogue of British music has somehow become an untapped mine of musical sincerity and ingenuity in an age of increased music video circulation thanks to the internet.

You may think that the world wide web would have broadened our horizons, but simply clicking onto YouTube brings up the trending and popular videos that we all just have to watch. Few tracks from the 70s or 80s, hell even the 90s, feature in that promotion list. And thank god for the John Lewis adverts eh? If it weren’t for their constant covers, maybe half the population would never discover the old classics.

I’m not expecting teenagers to suddenly blare out Queen or Duran Duran with the same arbritrary excitement as Gangham Style (admit it, you’re dancing in your head now, aren’t you?!), but it is somewhat surprising in light of the Spanish (music) inquisition that people remain interested and invested in the charts, right?

Well, I find that these articles simplify the plethora of styles afforded by modern pop music. There has certainly been as much diversification as there has been industry monotony over the past decade. R’n’B, hip-hop, rap, dubstep have all come into the mainstream in the past ten years or so alone.

While these appear staple sounds to the modern day chart, their relative time spent being blasted from radio stations is still quite short. How long did the flavour of The Beatles last? Queen’s rock? The Clash’s punk? All these genres have proliferated the charts for short periods, around 10 years at best. Then the next musical innovation is adorned as quick as in the previous era.

Okay, I’ll admit. There’s a lot to be said in favour of the diversity of past musicians. Lyrics are so often more intuitive and reflective of society; instruments are used to convey meaning, not just drive a beat. Finding a classic Red Hot Chili Peppers album, or an Oasis gem is sometimes much more exciting than any new material on the charts.

But then, it’s popular music for a reason. It takes all the popular elements and twists them into a conformist notion of what we all like to listen to. Again and again.

Many of the iconic bands are heralded as true musicians because they allowed their audience a sense of rebellion against the mainstream, and, perhaps more importantly, against their parents.

Well, perhaps there is room for more apathy in a Western civilisation that has undergone a massive change in political and social rights since the mid-60s. But a 21^st century life culture, plagued with social media, increased peer pressure, recession, consumerism and wars is certainly the type of place for musical revolutions to continue. The assault of pop music is not something ‘throwaway’ and repetitive: it is something that in this slightly more apathetic era, the masses can utilise to forget the extent of their problems, before being galvanised into action by the next prog-rock wave.

Besides, my grandparents have expressed their like for Maroon 5, No Doubt, Calvin Harris and even Riri before now. There’s no reason that children shaping their parents taste in music is something that shouldn’t be encouraged.

A Small Step for Internet Censorship

Earlier in the year, the internet came under attack from American government bills, with the infamous SOPA act to attempt to block and take down a number of sites believed to be infringing copyright laws. The result was a resounding victory for the public, who rallied support in order to save their most trusted and most visited websites.

Whilst a number of hosting services fell victim to pre-emptive attack on these streaming hosts, largely, the number of sites taken down was minimal and new domains have sprung up to plug the gaps left.

However, yesterday saw a new invasion into the internet’s freedom of ownership, speech and usage. High Courts in the UK ruled that major internet service providers had to block their subscribers from accessing file-sharing site The Pirate Bay. 

The Swedish based website has come under attack several times in the past, as it is currently one of the most recognised and most visited sites for sharing copyrighted medias. Indeed, back in 2009, Swedish courts ruled that the four founding members of the sites were guilty of helping people to circumvent copyright laws.

Despite this, the site has continued to thrive. Whilst the original founders are found responsible as being the powder-keg for this peer-to-peer service, the onus now rests with public demand.

Under the new laws, Sky, Everything Everywhere, TalkTalk, O2 and Virgin Media must all prevent their users from accessing the site. BT, meanwhile, has been asked for a further period in which to consider its position. Instantly, there is already fragmentation in how this act is to be carried out and monitored on a nationwide scale. Should even just one major provider fail to support the ban, then consumers with little conscious guilt about avoiding purchasing their music and video will simply switch provider.

Additionally, the idea of attacking The Pirate Bay alone is such a limited and naïve outlook from the British Courts. A wide network of these sites are active and removing the most popular offender will only provide the opportunity for another site to rise to prevalence. Consider the closure of the Limewire service, a group that were at one point synonymous with illegal file sharing.

Whilst I empathise with a wide selection of music and film industry persons who are losing money thanks to such services, there needs to be a greater understanding of the consumer demands. 99p for a single song on ITunes or Amazon does not provide great value for money. CD albums and movie releases, which have dropped in price considerably since the mid-90s as consequence of the sharing phenomenon, still need to be introduced to the consumer public at a cheaper price. Although such a suggestion may appear to damage these industries, if it would encourage and stimulate further legal purchases, then the overall effect could be to galvanise a higher gross income and reduce the popularity of these illegal services.

Yet, my own issue with the new court ruling is that which incited many to action back in February: the beginning of internet censorship could lead to a mass cull of websites and information deemed to be illegal or in need of restriction. Wikipedia, for example, is an online encyclopaedia database, where just a decade ago, people would have had to go to a library or purchase an almanac for such detailed results. Or even high street chains, put out of business by online giants such as Amazon. The array of services that could be deemed damaging to different groups are almost infinite.

Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group, called the move "pointless and dangerous". "It will fuel calls for further, wider and even more drastic calls for internet censorship of many kinds, from pornography to extremism," he said.

The popularity of the internet is based on its public orientation, built to offer information and services at the lowest price in the easiest way. File-sharing sites blocked in this haphazard fashion are only piecemeal solutions and at best, short-sighted. Where the demand and software is available, new services will entice the public with offers of free media.

With the advent of free services such as Youtube and Spotify for music, and free film channels on TV, the problem of piracy is none too clean cut. These were seen as things that may kill off their respective industries, but instead provided another outlet to reach an increased demographic. Some may want to watch or listen to material to be sure they want to buy it; others wouldn’t buy the product even without pirate sites. The pros and cons of these institutions are diverse, and whilst it is certainly morally indecent to essentially steal a film or song, perhaps it is also wrong to force the hands of the public in a free state, utilising a free domain.

The Brit Awards 2012

The annual Brit Awards ceremony took place in London this Tuesday night. Despite a questionable reputation, the occasion marks the high point in the British musical calendar, particularly recognising the achievements within the British industry as well as those worldwide. Here, I givesa run-down of the 2012 awards and the winners.

British Male was taken home by Ed Sheeran, who also bagged British Breakthrough. The singer-songwriter has had a fantastic 2011, with his album + going platinum and his gig tickets becoming something akin to gold dust. Whilst predictable, Ed deserved the recognition, particularly within the contenders from the British Male outlet (but Jessie J and The Vaccines were worthy nominations in the breakthrough category that merit recognition).

British Female was awarded to (dramatic pause, as if you couldn’t possibly guess), Adele. Without a doubt, the award ceremony was to belong to Adele’s triumphs in what has been a whirlwind twelve months for the star, starting with her performance of ‘Someone Like You’ at the Brits 2011. In addition, she bagged the British Album of the Year, the big Brit. If she hadn’t have won there would have certainly been a public outcry of sorts, which we shall come back to later when reviewing the show.

British Group was handed over to “We won’t win any Brits” Coldplay, the third time they have snatched the award. Yet this was an opportunity for the Brits to be edgier, with Chase and Status, or Elbow or even Kasabian having released material that, for me, interests the listener more than an enjoyable, but predictable, Coldplay album.

The real and most terrible shock of the night, however, came from the British public themselves. Hang your heads in shame, voters of the Brit awards 2012. British Single of the Year – One Direction: ‘What Makes You Beautiful’. The preppy, sickly pop number fended off the likes of ‘Someone Like You’ (which admittedly a number of people may now be bored of), ‘The A Team’, ‘Changed The Way You Kissed Me’ and even ‘Price Tag’. As a shameful moment in a Brit Awards ceremony, it is possibly only eclipsed by blundering over Adele’s British album (more later).

Elsewhere, Rihanna won International Female for the second year running, which reflects her achievements selling the most records of any foreign artist in the UK last year, and becoming the most watched artist on Youtube. Lana Del Rey picked up International Breakthrough and was wooden as ever in her acceptance of the award.

International Male went to Bruno Mars, which was generally a poor category for mainstream artists, but had the potential to give a voice to some largely unknown people (Bon Iver, Aloe Blacc). Alas, the Brits bosses voted for sales over substance in this case.

One of the toughest categories was probably International Group, which was claimed by the Foo Fighters. Thankfully one rock outlet won an award, otherwise it could have been some over the top sweet-pop fiasco affair. Most people thought Maroon 5 would blag it thanks to their inescapable ‘Moves Like Jagger’. A surprise Brit award, deserved nonetheless.

Outstanding contribution was awarded to Blur, and Critics Choice to Emile Sandé.

As far as the 2012 ceremony went, there had obviously been some effort to make the event seem polished and relevant. The awards were given a Union Jack lick of paint and the event was stylised around rainbows, flowers, suns and flags. All feeling very optimistic in the year of jubilees and Olympics.

However, James Corden received mixed reviews, his comedy appearing somewhat forced and based around song lyrics.

Many performances were bland alongside Corden’s presenting. Coldplay certainly went overboard with pyrotechnics, but that was about as elaborate as the staging was for any act. Adele dutifully performed the same song ('Rolling In The Deep') in the same set up as she had ten days prior at the Grammys. Rihanna blasted out ‘We Found Love’ for the umpteenth time on an award show, though at least she brought colour to the proceedings.

Blur’s performance in particular has divided opinion following the event. Some took to social networks in a frenzy slating the live set, saying they were past their best, drunk, shouting, loutish like a karaoke at a bar. On the other hand, a number, myself included, feel that the Blur set is unduly criticised. Fair play, the act wasn’t the best the band have produced, but there was some 90s pop-punk revival charm about their set that really captured the spirit and reason behind the band being awarded outstanding contribution. It was hedonistic; both reminiscent of inebriated summer evenings and a head pump of adrenaline at festivals.

Of course, stealing the light from all of the above was the shocking moment James Corden stepped over to the podium and cut Adele off as she was making her acceptance speech for British Album of the Year. How do I even begin to vent my spleen on this musical atrocity?

To begin, any sport related telebroadcast would be allowed to overrun by significant amounts of time: I'm pretty sure you could have spared an extra 30 seconds. This woman has made British music en vogue single handedly and continues to break records worldwide, let alone scooping six Grammys. Just a week before the Brits, she talked of her love for the ceremony. She began by saying she was proud to be British, and the organisers didn’t have the patience to let her prove what it means to be British.

More to the point, James Corden should not have cut her off. It’s his second year presenting the awards and both times to mixed reviews. It’s unlikely he’ll get them again: but he’s a comedian staring in an award winning West-End play. He doesn’t need that gig. He should have stood on the stage and let her finish: it wouldn’t have hurt him one bit.

Then, my issue with ITV is that similar mishaps happen each year. The key is to delay broadcast the show by half an hour and get less advertisers. To add insult to injury, this particular year saw segments highlighting the ‘Album of the Year’ category throughout the show. It is nothing but poor foresight and planning should there not be proper fruition of what has been built up and up for two hours.

The Brit Awards 2012 then? Another mediocre set of largely predictable awards, eternally remembered as the year that the most awarded singer to come out of the UK was ignored on her home soil.

ITune Out.

Social dynamics have changed significantly over the past decade, in no small part thanks to the recently deceased Steve Jobs.

Visionary and spokesperson extraordinaire for Apple Inc, Jobs has become a household name and synonymous with the most exciting innovations in consumer technologies.

This month is of particular interest to techies as it marks a decade since the release of the IPod to the social scene. Whilst it may seem to a vast majority that the IPod has been around for eons, that is more a comment of the consumer market: for the IPod specialises in a teen and young adult niche.

Therefore, the relative adopting of the product is something that had been previously unprecedented. Despite it being designed with the rebel teenager and twenty something hopeful in mind, quickly the item was snapped up by peoples of all ages across all social fields and by as early in its infancy as 2004, even president George Bush was spotted using one of the handheld devices.

Marketed under the ‘1,000 songs in your pocket’ slogan, the IPod heralded a new age of personal music.

Previous products came with evident restrictions. The infamous Sony Walkman series operated on tapes and latterly CDs. Of course, this means that only a certain number of tracks were available: usually no more than around 22-24.

A hard drive based device not only revolutionised the medium and options by which we could listen and select tracks, but defined the passing of an era.

For although those twenty songs on the tape player were few, this ensured a continual timeframe for isolation. Periodically, each person would reengage in social activity after a small amount of downtime, of being tuned in to a different world.

However, the current trend is overwhelmingly different. Children sit in the back of cars, not talking or playing games, but listening to their own pop music. Commuters no longer casually browse the newspapers, after all there is little room to peruse at leisure. The choice of music is clearly simpler. People on runs, at the gym, even in their own work spaces all reflect the trend, with white cords stuck into their ears.

Prof Michael Bull, author of ‘Sound Moves’ estimated that by 2007 alone, over half of the Western world had been conquered by the the IPod or its counterpart equivalents. What was once the retreat and solace of the young few, now a viable means for all to zone out, for longer.

The forefather of the headphone indoctrinated nations is Andreas Pavel, who invented the first personal stereo in the 1970s, recalling that his experience was akin to “putting a soundtrack to life so as it becomes a film”.

Indeed, a great deal of the appeal for the headphone generation is to act as a diversion and distraction. A vast majority of today’s youth could not write an essay without a soundtrack, cannot walk to the shop without tuning into a radio station or playlist. It adds a colour to the mundane tasks without disturbing anyone else.

Yet, the frustrations of the headphones are all too numerous. A survey has lately revealed that many people believe that having headphones in restricts conversation, or should be taken as a sign not to talk to the person in question. Headphone etiquette is all the more troubling. Should a person take one or both headphones out in a shop? Or simply turn the volume down? Do we instantly undermine an authority if we keep our headphones blaring?

You may talk to Henry; but for how long?

In addition, Prof Bull's interviews with iPod users confirm this perception. Many iPod users told him they resented people interrupting their listening to talk to them.

“Self-absorbed” and “mindless” are often labels attached to those who indulge in this culture, their music makes them oblivious even to the person sitting next to them. However, would that be someone shouting into their mobile on a train, there seems to be some satisfaction in the opportunity to ignore one’s surroundings.

For all the debate, there is no questioning the scientific realities. With the unprecedented uptake of the IPod and other personal music players, there has come a greater number of people exposed to loud noise on a daily basis. Witness the advent of self-inflicted deafness.

Andrew Goodwin, outreach adviser at Deafness Research UK estimated that a third of 16 to 34 year-olds listen to their MP3 player for an hour a day, while 14% listen for 28 hours a week. Many of them listen at maximum volume.

In order to gain perspective, Goodwin cited that the kind of noise damage that went out with the shutting down of heavy industry in the 1970s, is now coming back. Many tested MP3s reach 100 decibels, 10 decibels higher than a pneumatic drill. We're going to have tens of thousands of people who'll need hearing aids in their 40s.

Consequently, has Jobs popularisation of the media player created a worthwhile diversion or created a temporary state of ignorance for teens that will develop into permanent problems in later life?

Considering the momentous success of the Apple range, there should be more focus on hearing awareness in the marketing process, akin to the ‘Drink Aware’ campaigns. It is all too common that people unconsciously alter their music levels when a favourite track plays, on the tube, to avoid conversation. However, such continued usage encourages anti-social behaviour, a loss of manners and a deviation from health issues.

Poetically, a recent sign read that “10 years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Johnny Cash and Bob Hope. Today, we have no jobs, no cash and no hope”. Perhaps it’s a sign that our society has become stagnant of late, and there need be a revival of social feeling and interaction.

An ironic take on a future dominated by the IPod. 

A + For Ed Sheeran

Both moody and mellow, the first album proper from Ed Sheeran has to live up to a great deal of expectations. Despite having released material for the better part of half a decade now, the young musician has only recently come to light and is now being hailed as one of the most inspiring and talented singer songwriters of his generation.

Broad and sweeping, the release tackles social issues, the idea of self-identity and the problematic twinges of love. 

Sheeran delivers haunting and wholly mesmerising vocals that seem somewhat haggard and worn by years of strife: the album is splattered with regret and retribution in equal measure. No more so is this obvious than the occasionally vicious pre-release ‘You Need Me, I Don’t Need You’, which showcases ability to rap at tongue-twisting, sizzling speeds. (By his own admission, when performing the aforementioned track, he normally is successful in snapping his guitar strings).

Yet, the album is much more interesting and notable once such bravado has been removed. Certainly, the long and difficult lessons of ‘You Need Me’ frame Sheeran’s growth, but the anguish of tracks such as ‘The A Team’ define the musician as coming to the pinnacle of bemoaned success.

For example, a great many of the featured tracks focus on the trails of love amidst attempts of a breakthrough. ‘U.N.I.’ talks of the differences that led to the end of a relationship, and yet with only “a hairband as proof you were here”, the regret hits like a ‘tsunami wave’, such its powerful force. ‘Grade 8’ has a slightly rockier edge granted by the various bouncing drums and piano chords, reflecting in the uncertainty of love: the affections of our musician are the attention of some playfully promiscuous paramour, that so induces “tears of a river filler”, need of “drink for a liver killer”.

Most compassionate and striking of these lost liaisons comes courtesy of ‘Wake Me Up’. In a-capella fashion, Sheeran both demonstrates the soft and hard vocals within his capacity, and delivers a performance that is such a postcard perfect representation of young and idol love, only foreshadowed slightly by the future problems in the breaking of the comedy fairytale ‘Shrek’.

Growing pains of ‘The City’ has the musician a stranger wherever he plays, and this the lesson of a singer who has travelled globally and slept on Jamie Foxx’ sofa. By contrast, the absent baby of ‘Small Bump’, once a map of future plans, taken too soon works in much a best laid plans of mice and men fashion.

Despite the fervent passion evident in Sheeran’s tracks and topics, the flaw of + is that by the close of the album, all this overwhelming onset of weary emotions becomes overbearing and somewhat repetitive, typified by the longing of ‘Kiss Me’. 

Shamefully, a great many of the tracks have their moments of pent up anger, where Sheeran spits and seemingly foams at his microphone, but the hatred lacks direction. Despite the best efforts of quirky ‘Grade 8’ and upfront ‘You Need Me’, there were a great many missed opportunities for inclusion of some rockier numbers: a feature piece for electric guitar, or dark rolling 80s synth would have added an additional dimension that not only would have interested a more diverse fan base, but would also have solidified Sheeran as a compatible artist from his first release and channeled those heavier, moodier vibes (consider features on records with Wiley and Wretch 32 as reason behind this opinion of latter lack of inspiration). 

Whilst the range of the album is also rather pleasantly surprising, there are occasions when lack of considered lyrics unbalances a song. ‘Wake Me Up’ cringingly fumbles through its second verse by recommending a back up VCR, due to lack of Blu-Ray. ‘Kiss Me’ suggests that whilst “falling into your eyes… I’ll forget I’m in love”, all too stereotyped and cheesy after other brash tracks on this release.

However, with continued success and recognition comes the opportunity to experiment in new areas and hopefully Sheeran will consolidate his achievements so far whilst delivering a sound equally as impressive and capturing next time. Indeed, with such an extensive back catalogue, this offering is merely but a taster of the man’s talents, finally being recognised after remaining an underground secret for so many years. There is no doubt that the elevator doors of ‘You Need Me’ will ping open in time for Ed to deliver an even superior 'load' when the follow up is released.

Kids With Beatles Wigs: Why The Kooks New Album Deserves More Praise and Less Mockery.

When indie rockers The Kooks burst onto the scene with the angsty and infectious ‘Naïve’ back in 2006, the band received critical acclaim, with the release going on to sell millions. Whilst the second offering from the band a couple of years later shot to the number one spot, this was later attributed to the reputation and premise of the first lash of material. In an attempt to repeat the formula, Konk was soon perceived as a dry and uninspired copy of its predecessor: the rockier songs had less kick, the sing-alongs had less cheer.

With great disappointment then, I read early reviews of Junk Of The Heart, that indicated the album was to be, at best, average.

Having hidden themselves away in some obscure location for several months, this album was to be a return to form for a group who has now suffered line-up changes and severe delays to production.  Critics however gear negatively towards the offering claiming that “[The album] is a series of half-formed, indifferently performed tracks” [Andy Gill, Independent], or mock the group as “boys next door who've got hold of a guitar and some Beatles wigs” [Caroline Sullivan, Guardian].

After listening, we can all breathe a sigh of relief: the donned Beatles wigs, per se, are rather of the experimental type, and those who regard the album in such an unfavourable light have obviously missed the depth and showcased talent in the new hash.

True, nothing on this album stands out as ‘She Moves In Her Way’ as a summer anthem, nor does it excite rebellious teenagers: but then this album is a passage to adulthood for the band; songs featured are troubled and tinged with first regrets and a desire to regain youth. 

In fact, the third effort is a spine-tingling showcase that plays like an extended version ‘Seaside’, vulnerable and lonely, crossed with an apathetic ‘Ooh La’ (forgotten gems of their debut).

Opener ‘Junk of the Heart (Happy)’ echoes the group’s efforts in reacquainting themselves with their diverse influences. Twisting a sixties swing element, the track amply denotes the guitarist skill within the band, alternating between the relaxed acoustic sounds and the heavier and darker breaks of the electric guitar. Throw in the warbling of lead Luke Pritchard, which was the original source of the band’s uniqueness, and there is established a real sense of melancholy. This blurring of the boundary between positive and negative haunts the album throughout, and separates it from other indie albums in its quest to revive 60s, 70s and even 80s mainstream.

Should Beatle wigs be uptaken in such numbers as the softly reminiscent ‘How’d You Like That?’ they are only for influence and quickly shook off. Rather than a quirky throwaway pop track of love, the sound shifts to tribulation and trepidation. Elsewhere, David Bowie masks are simply skin deep in ‘Runaway’ and ‘Mr Nice Guy’, both alternating dark synths with scathing lyrics: obsession of “Seeing your name on the wall again” in the first, played against the deceit of “Believing in things that don’t believe in you”.

Tracks such as ‘Rosie’, wherein the band are prophetically “followed by the same old cloud again”, and ‘Petulia’ highlight the loss of innocence for the band: love’s fragility and hurt consuming “Be careful with me”. These sentiments are best framed by short ‘Taking Pictures of You’, which merits every moment an individual showcase of both beauty and disgrace.

Regarding the arrangements and instruments that grace the album, there has been some consideration in how to best achieve this revival feel. Credit should be given to the ethereal use of strings in ‘Time Above The Earth’, introducing a stripped back approach that is rarely used in the genre. Lead single ‘Is It Me?’ almost strays into drum n bass territory before switching abruptly to moody 70’s rock ‘n’ roll. A smattering of synths offers a dark edge to many a track; the contrast and clash between the guitars and electronica is to unsettle the listener and reaffirm the changing and unstable emotions and feelings in each piece.

Incorporating such a plethora of influences however means there is a hard balance to achieve. Whilst The Kooks should be praised for their indie stamp on some classic 80s sounds which takes a main segment of the album, the straying inclusion of 60s swing and post millenium drum almost sounds unconsidered in its measure.

Arising from this problem is that none of the tracks offer the simple happy Brit pop that featured on the first two albums. Whilst this is an interesting expansion into other territories, perhaps there has been too wide an area covered too thinly.

With this in mind, it is easily understood how Natalie Shaw, and many others, mistook lack of direction for scribblings: “[The album is] just a messy selection of meandering verses that surely can’t be the product of three years’ work.” [Natalie Shaw, BBC]. However, each track has some reference point to a dark experience: a regret, a mistake, a love lost. The meandering verses serve as a mental riddling of whether the right or wrong was done.

In fact that a majority of the individual pieces lifted from this album is not going to storm any mainstream chart in a hurry is true testament to the quality of the Brindie Pop to be enjoyed.