Stone Gods "Silver Spoons & Broken Bones" Review

Well, now we enter the years where The Darkness were no more. As much as a lot of people probably would like to think that the members didn't do a thing between the break up of The Darkness and their reunion, the truth is that, after Justin Hawkins left the band, they simply moved bassist Richie Edwards up to lead vocals and rhythm guitar, found a new bassist in the form of Toby MacFarlaine (now of a band named O.W.L.S.) and changed their name to Stone Gods. However, the band didn't continue with the sound of The Darkness, instead opting to remove the glam aspect of The Darkness' sound and finding a different sound that was darker and more aggressive than what the band had ever done with The Darkness. They released their debut album in July 2008, Silver Spoons & Broken Bones, which reached a relatively modest (but rather poor when you consider how high the last two albums by The Darkness charted) number 67 in the UK albums chart, but gathered a HUGE amount of critical praise.

But does the album deserve all of that praise and did it deserve to get higher up the charts than it did? Well...yes and no. It's undeniable that the album is a very solid listening experience and it's hard to deny that the songs are very solid, but the fun factor of The Darkness was one of the things that made them so distinctive and, without that to distract you when things get rough, the flaws of this album become harder to ignore.

Let's start with the cover art. I cannot help suspecting that Stone Gods are fans of Metallica, as the basic idea for the cover art is VERY similar to that of Metallica's self-titled album.

I can't be the only person who thinks of Metallica's self-titled album here, can I? Anyway, it's definitely not a bad cover art in its own right (I'd even go so far as to say that it's actually pretty good), but it feels a bit too minimalistic for my taste, in all honesty. I'll admit that it's clever how they managed to reference the album title with the skeletons in the bottom left corner, but it still doesn't stop me from being slightly disappointed that there wasn't more to it.

Anyway, the band provide a pretty surprising amount of variety across the album: you've got your ballads, your fast numbers and your rocking stuff. The problem is that the band also seem to have lost some of the catchiness that made The Darkness so easy to enjoy (or loath, if you weren't fond of them). This isn't an album which is especially memorable on the first listen, which isn't helped by more than a few moments of plagiarism that anyone with a decent knowledge of metal and hard rock music will pick up upon very quickly and get annoyed about. It does get better with repeated listens, though, but that's not the only issue I have with the songwriting. One of them is plagiarism. One moment in particular that stands out is in "Defend Or Die", which takes the famous opening riff of Diamond Head's "Am I Evil" and, without any changes to it, cheekily slots it into the song. While they don't do it a huge amount, it's enough to have me going "Oy, you pinched that, you cheeky buggers!" Another annoying habit is the band's fondness for adding weird sections of songs that would qualify on TV Tropes as a Big Lipped Alligator Moment, with the most bizarre being the faintly holiday sounding acoustic section in "Don't Drink The Water" that comes out of nowhere, lasts for about ten seconds, adds absolutely nothing to the song and doesn't make another appearance during the rest of the album. Clearly, the band knows how to come up with cool things they'd like to put in songs, but they don't stop to consider whether it's a moment that would have made a good song in its own right and just throw it in without any consideration of how it actually affects the song, as the last fifteen or so seconds of "Burn The Witch" sounds like the band are leading into a thrash influenced section that goes absolutely nowhere. Luckily, they don't go to the extent that their material reaches the length where you'd think they borrowed a song from Dream Theater, but it's certainly frustrating to keep hearing moments that would have either made for brilliant songs in their own right had the band opted to use it to make a full song or to hear stuff from already brilliant songs being slipped into the song with all the subtlety of using a bazooka to open a door. This is where I again have to bring up The Darkness: one of their strengths was that they never had those moments. Everything in their songs felt like it deserved to be there, was perfectly placed and managed to avoid sounding like they were plagiarising from other bands (although "I Believe In A Thing Called Love" definitely was one of the most noticeable exceptions to that comment). This, by comparison, feels a bit messy, as if the band haven't quite picked up on the fact that you're meant to trim the useless moments out of songs to make them stronger. This isn't a huge issue in the long run and the band do pull this all off so well that it's not enough to break the album by any measure, but it will leave those of you used to The Darkness' more restrained songwriting style quoting Slappy Squirrel and going "That was pointless" to at least a few sections of a few songs.

I'd also say the band suffers a little bit from my complaint on One Way Ticket in that they don't really try to find their own unique sound on this album. Now, this isn't a bad thing in and of itself, as I said last time, but I'd like to have heard the band put together something a tiny bit more original.

The lyrics have made a rather noticeable improvement across the board, although there are still a few moments that will leave you scratching your head and wondering whether the band had thought about what they'd written properly. They don't get to the depths that "Bald" did by any measure, though, which is always a plus in my book!

The production is also noticeably more retrained compared The Darkness' first two albums. That doesn't mean it's completely flawless, as it's still arguably a bit on the loud side at points, but it's not fairly good. The bass, alas, is still a bit on the quiet side, but, thanks to my bass enhancing headphones, I can attest that there's not a lot that is being missed anyway, so I'll not bang the drum about bassist hazing here.

I will say that Richie Edwards is a pretty different vocalist from Justin Hawkins: he has a voice that will bring to mind Bon Scott and Brian Johnson instead of Hawkins' rather high tenor, which is probably why the band didn't opt to continue under The Darkness name, thinking about it with my comments from the last two reviews in mind. However, he can mix his voice up enough that he doesn't always sound like he's doing an AC/DC audition. Probably the most surprising example of this is in "Magdalen Street" and "Lazy Bones", where he puts on a very soft tone to his voice that fits the song wonderfully. That's a sign of a brilliant vocalist, if you ask me: you can be distinctive, but you can also make your voice suit music that your voice isn't naturally suited for at the same time. While I wouldn't say Edwards is quite the best example of this kind of vocalist (he's no Mike Patton in that regard, if you get my point), he's still a very solid vocalist and I'm honestly slightly disappointed that this seems to be the only album he's done lead vocals on, as I'd love to hear him do more stuff!

So, final thoughts? This is definitely a step up from The Darkness' last album in a lot of departments, but it falls apart in the most important one, the songwriting aspect. It's still a very enjoyable album, but I cannot help finding myself thinking, without Justin Hawkins' more restrained songwriting to trim the unnecessary moments out of the songs, the band were flailing around a bit when writing this album. If all of the fat had been cut from this album, I dare say that this would have been an album that would have been an essential listen and could have been a potential game changer in terms of modern hard rock, but, as it stands, it's just a good album that is frustrating at how much better it could have been!

Final Rating: 6 Out Of 10

A very enjoyable album that, unfortunately, needed more than a bit of trimming in most of the songs to really be a brilliant album. If you didn't like The Darkness at all, this is probably going to be more your cup of tea, but the frustrating songwriting will probably have you wondering why you bothered with it. If you like hard rock in general, this is probably worth at least a listen and you'll probably highly enjoy it, but there's nothing new here and you'll probably find the songwriting lets it down more than anything else. If you're a fan of The Darkness, you might find this takes a bit of time to win you over, but, once you get used to not expecting Justin's voice, you'll probably find this fairly enjoyable.

Personal Favourite Tracks: "Burn The Witch", "Don't Drink The Water", "You Brought A Knife To A Gunfight", "Start Of Something"

The Darkness "One Way Ticket To Hell...And Back" Review

...OK, before I start this review, let me say that I do have sympathy for bands who have to put out second albums. They usually have years to accrue material for their debut album, having had time to road test as many songs as they can in front of an audience eager to forgive them if they fuck up with the quality of the songs and then taking the cream of the crop into the studio to record it and start to make their dreams in the music world...only to then be expected to produce the same results when they're on tour, unable to road test the new material and likely have less time than the band have been together to get the album ready for release. It's understandably daunting and most bands mess it up to at least a minor extent. This is the reason behind the infamous "second album syndrome": bands simply can't pull themselves together under all of that pressure and, almost inevitably, descend into being a mediocre version of the band that gave their debut album of the world. Sometimes, bands will often combine this with a misguided attempt at maturity with their music, going from writing material that is just aiming to be fun to trying to be serious, or, probably even worse, try to experiment with their sound while there's that pressure. Seriously, professional tip for any up and coming bands reading this: do not use your second album to push the boundaries of your sound. Just focus on pulling yourselves together enough to get through your second album cycle by producing a good album that will give the label enough confidence to let you have some freedom regarding when you want to get your next album out and then try experimenting with your sound, as you'll have a bit more of an opportunity to do it right when you don't have the label breathing down your neck and demanding to know when your next album is going to be done.

Anyway, The Darkness fell into the trap of trying to experiment with their sound with this, their second album, with the end result of producing an album that falls apart under its weight due to being too ambitious for its own good. However, I wouldn't stoop to the level of calling this an outright bad album either, as it's still very enjoyable in its own right and, for all of the ambitious experimenting that probably could have been dialled back upon, most of it actually works! It's just that they overdid it a bit.

I already covered the band's history in my review of their debut album, but I'll fill you in on the gaps between releasing their debut album and their second album. Basically, the band became pretty big, but seemed to grow a bit disillusioned with their success, as they walked out an episode of US radio show Loveline in April 2004. This album came out about two and half years after their debut and already people were getting kind of sick of the band by that point (although I'm not entirely sure why myself, as I didn't follow the popular press at the time and, as such, have no idea how frequently present the band were in it). The costly delays in the process of making the album meant that it apparently ended up costing about a million pounds to finally release. When it came out in November 2005, it received mixed reviews, didn't sell as well as Permission To Land did, didn't produce a single as high charting as Permission To Land did (although the lead single apparently got up to number 8 in the charts...although I don't recall hearing or seeing it until I got the album as a Christmas present in 2011, so make of that what you will. Admittedly, I was having difficulties with my private life at the time due to a lot of stuff going on and I didn't exactly have access to the radio or the popular music charts at the time, so it's not like I was listening for them at the time!) and, less than a year later, the band had broken up to become Stone Gods.

Some will say that was a fitting time for the band to disappear: they had no chance of remaining a success any more and they could politely fade away to obscurity while everyone else got back on with their lives. But, as I implied two paragraphs ago, I don't think this album is as bad as the reputation it has would have you thinking it is. Yes, it tears itself apart with how ambitious it is, but it is still a fairly enjoyable album if you look at it without the hype that must have surrounded the album when it was coming out.

First up, the cover art. I won't lie, I love this artwork! Sure, it's not the best artwork out there by any measure, but come on, a train speeding down a railroad track with a demonic head in the smoke clearly controlling the train? You can't exactly accuse them of running out of ideas on the album cover front! Although it does leave the potential open to some terrible puns about how their career derailed after this album, but now they're back on track and that train keeps a-rolling!

...Yeah, OK, I'll stop with the puns. Here's the cover art.

I will admit that a lot of the pitfalls I mentioned last time rear their ugly head here, only they are arguably a bit worse this time. The lyrics are generally better overall (although I'd still be struggling to throw the word "Good" at any of the lyrics on the album), but "Bald" reeks of an almost unseen level of laziness in the lyrics department due to the fact that it reads like it wasn't intended as song writing lyrics, but was intended as a humorous bit of writing which, for some bizarre reason, got put into a song. I'm not kidding, they don't read even slightly like they are written to be sung! Another issue is that Hawkins appears more willing to indulge in the use of his upper range, which can lead to several moments where even those who love falsetto screams will be wishing for the tasteful restraint a lot of screamers have by comparison. The production is also even louder than the last time, which is somewhat perplexing when you notice that the band dialled back on the AC/DC influence (it's still there, just not as noticeable) and got Queen's producer (Roy Thomas Baker) to produce the album, so you'd expect a more tastefully done production job. "Hazel Eyes" in particular has a rather noticeable bit where the second chorus, for some reason, isn't as loudly mastered as the other times the chorus appears in the song, which suggests to me that the mastering on this album wasn't completely finished when the album was sent off, although it's also possible that the guy doing the mastering (Stephen Marcussen) simply missed that bit of the song and nobody else noticed for some reason...

This album also introduced new bassist Richie Edwards, who was formerly the band's guitar tech. However, most of the album's bass tracks were recorded by Dan Hawkins after bassist Frankie Poullain left the band (some sources mention that he left via a window, but I can't confirm the truth of that statement), so I can't say how much of an impact he had on the recording process for this album.

Anyway, moving to the album itself, I have to return to my comment earlier about the band upping the Queen influence in their music: a lot of instruments that are rather unconventional in a lot of hard rock music make an appearance on the album, with probably the most noticeable being the pan flute, an instrument that, to my knowledge, has never been combined with rock music before or since this album. They also dial back the AC/DC influence a bit, albeit not enough to really say that the band have really found their own sound on this album. They sound a bit like they're chasing as many different sounds as they can on the album and, while they do them pretty well, they don't seem to know how to really add them to their sound properly, in the same manner as a dog chasing after a car and, when it catches it, immediately going after a different car. This is the big problem with this album that really starts to sink it once you spot it: there's a huge amount of variety across the album that makes the album really enjoyable to listen to, but the band seem like they don't know how to sound like themselves on this album, which makes all of the variety seem like an attempt to cover up this fact. When Queen did it, you could still detect musical roots that meant you could recognise a Queen album as a Queen album, even if you'd heard instrumental versions of the songs. Here, however, the variety doesn't seem to have those roots holding it together properly. Some songs flat out don't sound like they're by the same band who gave us Permission To Land. This somewhat schizophrenic approach to songwriting just doesn't work properly when the only thing holding it all together is your lead vocalist. Sure, it shows you can be a varied composer (or group of composers, if you don't have only one guy doing the composing for the band), but the problem is that you don't really develop your own sound.

This schizophrenia with the song writing, sadly, also carries over to the quality of the material. Some songs could rival that of the band's debut album pretty easily, like "One Way Ticket" and "Hazel Eyes", but some songs just feel like they didn't have all of their effort put into writing them, like "Bald" and "Seemed Like A Good Idea At The Time". Most songs at least lean towards the former more than the latter, but you definitely get the feeling that there's been a decrease in songwriting quality between this album and the last one.

So, with all of that in mind, why do I say this is still a fairly enjoyable album if all that I've said seems to point towards it being a bad album? Because most of it, surprisingly, still works! Yes, they expanded their pallet so much that they forgot who they were and the material generally isn't quite up to the standards as on their debut, but it's still enjoyable to listen to and I'd still say that nothing on the album is outright bad on it (as much as I don't like "Bald" much). In that regard, I'd still say the album's a success!

Still, I will admit that it might have been for the better that this was the last album by The Darkness before their break up. While I suspect they might have found a much better balance between the sounds of this album and their debut had they kept it together for long enough to release their third album that they were working on for a 2007 release date, I suspect the truth is that the band would have probably released an album that would have suffered from the same issues that this one did, only with diminishing returns in the quality department. Maybe it was for the best that the band did their other projects and came back together later...

Final Rating: 6 Out Of 10

A definitely weaker album than their debut, but still very enjoyable. If you still have The Darkness' debut sitting around and haven't bothered to check this out, I'd recommend doing it, as you might be pleasantly surprised. If you never liked The Darkness, then this probably won't win you over.

Personal Favourite Songs: "One Way Ticket", "Hazel Eyes"

The Darkness "Permission To Land" Review

I suspect most people in the UK who remember following the popular music charts back in 2003 will be going "Hang on, I remember these guys!" around about now. Yes, these were the guys who released "I Believe In A Thing Called Love", a song which most karaoke owners probably have hated since it came out due to how many people will have taken influence from it when singing. But this is not the only album the members of the band have released: they released their second album in November 2005, One Way Ticket To Hell...And Back, then split into two bands after Justin Hawkins left the band due to his drug addiction (he's clean now, as far as I've heard). The band without Hawkins moved their bassist on their second album up to lead vocals, got a new bassist and became Stone Gods, releasing their only album so far in June 2008, Silver Spoons & Broken Bones, while Hawkins put together a new band called Hot Leg, which released their only album in February 2009, Red Light Fever. The Darkness reunited with their original line up in March 2011, released their third album (titled Hot Cakes) in August 2012 and, at the moment, are now at work writing material for their fourth album.

Why am I telling you all of this? Well, because most of you probably only know this record by them (and probably their third album) and I feel like reviewing their stuff as a sort of public service announcement. You know, because I have too much free time...

Anyway, The Darkness originally started out under the name Empire (I cannot confirm any real details about them, but I feel confident in assuming that they were not a Queensryche cover band...) before changing their name to The Darkness. They proved to be rather popular, yet they surprisingly had very little interest from labels, as only two labels showed any interest in signing them before the release of their first album. Apparently, this is because the industry thought they were a joke and weren't cool.

...Well, the fact this album (at least in the UK) went straight to number two in the album charts upon release and then moved up to the top of the charts and stayed there for four weeks probably proved the executives wrong in that aspect. But being popular does not necessarily indicate that you're actually any good, so let's sit down and see how good the album actually is.

First up, the album cover. Erm...I'll be honest, I have nothing to say about this cover art. It's not bad, but it seems like the kind of thing that the 80's would have thought was absolutely hilarious. I'm still not entirely sure whether it's clever what they've done with it or dumb, especially when you think about the title of the album and realise what it's a rather subtle (and probably slightly confused) reference to...

The band's sound can pretty much be summed up as AC/DC as covered by Queen. While that is grossly oversimplifying their sound, it does form the main components of their sound: you've got riffs that should have the AC/DC fans going "HELL, YEAH!" and vocals that will bring to mind Queen at their most extravagant (although saying Justin Hawkins is on the same level as Freddy Mercury is, frankly, an insult to Freddy Mercury. Maybe closer to Roger Taylor...). There's debatably a bit of Judas Priest in Justin Hawkins' singing style, as he reaches for some notes that are ball busting at how high they are (although he doesn't quite reach the point of hitting a note like the one Halford hits in "Dissident Aggressor"), but it doesn't appear in their music at all. Obviously, this is not exactly a recipe for being innovative, but I wouldn't say this is exactly a bad thing, considering AC/DC's best days are pretty far away now and Queen are pretty much a self-tribute band now. Plus, at least the band aren't just writing rip offs of AC/DC songs like a few bands I could mention...

The band's lyrics need to be addressed now: saying The Darkness write painful lyrics should be a textbook example of an understatement. It probably shouldn't matter too much to most people, since, well, you don't usually expect deep lyrics from rock and metal music, but The Darkness occasionally descend to levels where even I have to groan at some of the lyrics (which is saying a lot, considering I usually don't get bothered by lyrics!). I don't think I'd be exaggerating much if I said I've heard better lyrics by punk bands! I guess they can be excused due to The Darkness basically aiming to provide nothing but a good time (You'd not believe how long I've been wanting to drop that reference into a review before now! I know, it wasn't worth it...), but it still doesn't stop me from rolling my eyes at some of the worst examples on the album.

The members are...well, they can at least play their instruments to some degree of proficiency, that's true, but, considering the most complicated thing that is in the music is the guitar solos (which, admittedly, are reasonably complex without requiring you to descend into virtuoso levels of guitar playing ability), it's hard to tell whether I should be praising them for playing well or condemning them for not playing technically amazing music. It's like saying that AC/DC are made up to amazing musicians: you're probably not wrong, but their music doesn't really demonstrate this very well on a song by song basis because that's not what the band are going for.

As I've brought up earlier, Justin Hawkins is a pretty good vocalist, although I will say that if you don't like falsetto singing, you would be advised to avoid The Darkness like the plague, as Hawkins' upper range WILL get on your nerves very quickly. Even as a fan of bands with a fondness for higher range screaming like Judas Priest, Crimson Glory, Queensryche, Iced Earth, Helloween, Gamma Ray, Sonata Arctica and DragonForce (and with a slight appreciation for Manowar when they're not acting like the best thing since sliced bread), I occasionally find myself getting annoyed by Hawkins' upper range, which is, admittedly, not helped by some of the lyrics he's singing in that higher range!

I wouldn't say there's anything really bad about the band's music if you like AC/DC and Queen (and, certainly, on a composition level, most of the songs on the album are fairly good), but I cannot help finding myself vaguely thinking "This needs a bit more of a unique twist to it". Now, don't get me wrong, this album does have some variety to it (they have ballads, for a start: AC/DC haven't done that outside of their debut album, which wasn't even released outside of Australia!) and completely dismissing it as AC/DC worship that only gets away with it because Justin Hawkins doesn't sound like Bon Scott or Brian Johnson would be horribly unfair, but you only have to listen to Stone God's album to realise that the AC/DC influence is so strong on this band that Hawkins voice probably is the only real thing that stops the AC/DC clone tag from being fairly applied to the band on this album and, as such, they could have done with adding a few more influences to their sound to ensure that they avoided that trap.

Now, to be fair to the band, they did what I just recommended they do on One Way Ticket To Hell...And Back and, well, it didn't work out so well for them, so you can probably say that The Darkness did just that and it did them no favours, but here's the thing: I'm not asking them to suddenly dial up the Queen influence like they did on the follow up album, I'm asking the band to add more to their music than just AC/DC influence, which is a surprisingly noticeable difference if you think about it hard enough. But I'll talk about that album when I get to it. For now, the issue with this albums is that the band could have done with a few more touches to their sound instead of borrowing "How To Sound Like AC/DC In 10 Easy Steps" from their local library, ignoring the rule about getting a frontman who sounds like Bon Scott and Brian Johnson and then forming their band. Which, incidentally, appears to be a very popular read among a lot of UK hard rock bands...OK, I'll stop snarking about the UK hard rock scene, as it's not the only scene which does it! Heck, I can shoot my own argument down easily if I wanted to by saying that King Lizard buck the tread by sounding like Skid Row and Guns N Roses and The Morning After don't sound like any other band I can think of and both of them are brilliant underrated bands in the UK hard rock scene that everyone should go check out if they want to dispel that belief! Only doing that would be a dumb idea, so I won't do that!

...Wow, I need to learn to be more subtle with my hints.

Anyway, the production on this album is...loud. Now, to be fair, it's rock music, so being loud kind of comes with the territory, but the production on this album can be fatigue inducing on the ears. There's a fine line between...wait, I think I've had this rant before now. Anyway, to cut a long story short, this album could have done with a bit more restraint in the mastering stage, as it makes the album difficult to listen to for large periods of time. The bass is a bit on the quiet side, but it's not particularly bad in that regard as it doesn't do anything especially interesting.

So, final thoughts? This is a very enjoyable album that's maybe lacking in some originality, has generally poor lyrics and definitely suffers from a mastering job which probably shows that the guy whose job it is to check it's not too loud was off sick that day. You'll probably enjoy the entire album if you're not too bothered by what I've brought up, although I suspect most people reading this probably picked it up years ago and have already formed their own opinions about the album. If you haven't picked up this album and this sounds like your kind of thing, then go do so! Just remember to turn your speakers down before you start playing it for the first time, as you might blow your ears out if you're don't!

Final Rating: 7 Out Of 10

A very enjoyable album that probably has a place in your record collection already (and might want a quick dusting off if that's the case). If it doesn't, then you should consider picking it up if you aren't opposed to AC/DC and high pitched vocals and don't usually have complaints about the quality of lyrics and overly loud mastering.

The Browning "Burn This World" Review

This album has been hanging over my head for nearly two years now, gnawing at me every time I grab a record as if daring me to listen to it again. And every time that has happened, I found myself going "Surely this isn't as bad as I first thought it was?"

For nearly two years, I have refused to touch this album. I have forced myself to look away from it when I had to look at it while tidying up my record collection. I haven't let it leave my record collection to go near the CD player. I have strongly considered selling it off just so that it wouldn't be polluting my record collection any longer. Yet I couldn't make myself get rid of it, for I'm a bit of a collector when it comes to records and I don't want to get rid of anything unless I have a VERY good reason that isn't related to the quality of the material. And so it is that I finally decided that it was time to give this the listen it deserved, knowing that I could put nearly two years of fear behind me once I'd got through this album and could then rest easy, knowing that the album would never torment my soul again once I had finished with it. So, grab your crucifix and light your torch, for you shall descend with me into the depths of hell to find out whether the unholy demon I'd perceived this album to be was truly the terror I'd first thought it was or a poor album that, in my haste to despise it, I'd unfairly built up to become some kind of monster.

For those of you who aren't aware of The Browning, they started in 2005 as a crunkcore solo project for lead vocalist and programmer Jonny Mcbee (who had a brief stint on vocals in As Blood Runs Black in 2009). The band got a rapper named Matt Keck joining them in 2009, but he left in 2010 to become a comedian after recording for the band's first EP. They then became a full band, changed their sound to electronicore (think deathcore (think death metal meets metalcore) meets electronic music), released their second EP in April 2011 and, in October 2011, released their debut album on an unsuspecting world thanks to Earache Records. The band are still going now and even released their second album in October 2013, Hypernova. So, somebody must be buying their stuff!

First, let's take a look at the cover art. I have to say, I'm surprised I didn't guess it might be an electronicore album with the benefit of hindsight, as it does kind of give you a few less than subtle hints in the way it's designed. That said, I'd say it's still a fairly cool cover! It's not brilliant on a lot of levels, but there's something about it which I just think is very appropriate for the genre the band are playing!

Let me get the negatives out of the way now: this album drags a hell of a lot. It's not exactly an album that feels like it goes by quickly, which is a bit of an issue when you consider the band's sound could be fairly nicknamed dance metal if you wanted to. It also sounds rather unpleasant to listen to before you get past the culture shock of it, which means that you'll need to be willing to give it more than one listen before you start to really click with it. This definitely puts it pretty far into love it or hate it territory, which arguably isn't helped by the fact that most people will wonder away from this with a pretty bad first impression of it. Another issue is that there's not a lot of variety in the album: a lot of the songs will blend together if you just listen to the album in one go. This isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, but I personally tend to find that albums without a lot of variety tend to leave me bored. I'd also say that there isn't really any songs that really stand out much, although none of them are outright bad either.

The positives? Well, it's well performed and...that's about it, to be honest. It's got a rather unique sound to it that will take some getting used to, but being unique doesn't necessarily make you better than a band doing the same thing as another band better than you are doing your own unique thing. Since most of the material on this album blends together, this uniqueness stops feeling like a positive after a while and starts merely being something that will occasionally have you going "OK, I've not heard that before...could you do something else with that sound?"

The big issue is that the album just doesn't give me anything to work with and exists in a bit of a paradox: it's not an especially interesting album, as the material just leaves me going "Meh" most of the time, but it's such a unique listening experience that I find myself wanting to hear more of it. It's not necessarily a BAD record, but it's hard to say there's anything wrong with it beyond going into the few factors I've already brought up. It's really weird to describe it, but the best way I can put it is that it's dull, but it's unique at the same time. You can throw this on and won't find a single track that I'd say is worth listening to a lot of, but the band's sound is so interesting to listen to once you get used to it that you kind of find yourself wanting to throw it on again once you've finished listening to it. There's nothing objectively BAD about this record, there's just nothing especially GOOD about it either once you realise that the unique sound the band has achieved doesn't provide you with anything more than a faint "Eh, that's not too bad, I guess".

The production is OK, I guess. Same issues I keep bringing up, but nothing outright bad about it springs to mind. Probably suffers from a few of the cliches of extreme metal production, but not to an extent where I was picking it up.

So yeah...the trip to hell turned out to just be a walk into a small cave. I guess I'm glad I gave this the chance I did when I decided to review it, as it's revealed that my first impressions of it were rather unfair, but I still wouldn't say it's an album really worth owning. There's no material on it that's really worth checking out and the sound the band went for WILL take some getting used to. However, at the same time, I'd say it's worth giving the band a listen if you aren't opposed to electronicore, as it's really quite an interesting listening experience in that regard. So...check it out if you like the idea of electronicore, but don't expect to come away with any real impression of the album beyond "Eh, it's not bad".

Final Rating: 4 Out Of 10

Without any real highlights, the album is a bit of a snoozefest and has a few issues which drag it down a bit more. However, you might want to check this out if you like the thought of electronic music mixed with extreme metal, as it's really interesting to listen to. Just be aware that these guys aren't anything special before you get too excited about them...

Personal Favourite Tracks: technically, none, but I do think "Bloodlust", "Standing On The Edge", "Burn This World" and "Living Dead" are among the best of the bunch and would recommend them if you really want to hear something from this album.

The Singles Collection: "Redeemer Of Souls" by Judas Priest

I figured it was time to try something slightly different. See, with Judas Priest making a return in July with their 17th studio album "Redeemer Of Souls", I figured it was time to start an occasional series where I look at singles for upcoming albums that I'm interested in and see whether the single is building up to a brilliant album or is likely to result in an album that isn't worth going near with a ten foot pole. This is strictly reserved only for the first singles for the albums, so consider this to be a kind of first impression series: if the first single leaves me feeling cold, then it's going to give me an idea of what my opinion of the actual album is likely to be. This doesn't mean I will necessarily hate an album that hasn't been released yet with a burning passion just because the single sucks, it just means that my expectations of the album will likely be set by what is offered with the first single of the album. Like I've said, consider this as like a first impressions set of articles where I basically use what the band provides us with their first single to make an educated guess on how the actual upcoming album is likely to sound.

Anyway, today we start with the return of Judas Priest. Anyone with even a vague knowledge of heavy metal is bound to have heard of Judas Priest, but, for the benefit of those who haven't, I'll give you the basics. Judas Priest pretty much defined a lot of the stereotypes related to modern heavy metal: they pioneered the high falsetto scream prevalent in metal music, they pioneered the operatic singing style that a lot of power metal vocalists tend to use (although Rob's voice isn't exactly operatic in and of itself, it still showed that you could have a strong and clean voice in metal), they pioneered the wearing of black leather that most metal fans are known for wearing and you could fairly argue that, if you don't count Black Sabbath as a metal band because they remained strongly rooted in blues music, they were the first true metal band. Despite having a revolving group of drummers from their first album onwards, the band's core from the release of their first album onwards is very noticeable: vocalist Rob Halford (who isn't a founding member of the band: their original vocalist was Al Atkins), guitarist K K Downing (a founding member of the band who retired from the band in 2011 and, to my knowledge, has no intention to return to the band in the future), guitarist Glenn Tipton (who joined the band before the recording of their first album) and bassist Ian Hill (who is the only founding member of the band remaining as of 2014). The band had some difficult years after the release of 1990's Painkiller: Rob left the band in 1992 to form Fight and Judas Priest basically went on hiatus until they returned in 1996 with Tim "Ripper" Owens on vocals. Their two albums with him are...controversial, to say the least. A lot of people like them as albums, but feel that they aren't especially good Judas Priest albums. I gotta be honest, I'm with the fan dumb here: while both albums do have strong tracks, they just aren't good albums when you compare them with just about every other album Priest has done. I wouldn't say Owens deserves any blame for his time in the band, as he didn't write any of the material on the albums (unless you count a bonus track on Demolition) and, from what I've heard of him on a few live shows, he didn't do a bad job at filling Rob's shoes (which is a lot more impressive than you'd think: in his prime, Rob had an overall vocal range of nearly six octaves...or about double the range of a typical singer, if you aren't knowledgeable of vocal range details and whatnot). Anyway, Rob rejoined the band in 2003 and Owens left to go to Iced Earth, where he would be hated by Iced Earth's fans for replacing another well liked vocalist by Iced Earth fans...yeah, guy's not had a lot of luck when joining other bands, has he? Priest went on to release their comeback album in 2005, Angel Of Retribution, which was...OK. Bit too safe sounding overall, but that seems to happen with just about every reunion album that's ever been released anyway, so I can't complain too much. The band next went into the studio to record 2008's Nostradamus, which was a wonderful album...to cure insomnia with. Too many songs that didn't do anything distinctive and all done as a double album results in an album which requires a ridiculous amount of patience, coffee and determination to get through. That's not to say there weren't any good songs on the album (I particularly like how the album starts with "Dawn Of Creation" and "Prophecy" and I will say that the title track is very good), but it would be fair to say that it's an album which I don't consider to be worth picking up unless you're already an established Priest fan. Anyway, the band went on their Epitaph tour in 2011, which was basically their retirement from doing major tours in the future, and K K Downing retired from the band about a month and a half before the tour was due to start, but a replacement was found in the form of Richie Faulkner (who wasn't even born when Priest's first album came out, so make of that what you will). The band kept working on the album throughout 2013 and this is the first fruits of the band's labour.

And...it's a bit of a letdown, if I'm honest. Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad song, but it just doesn't give me a reaction beyond "Eh, it's OK".

First of all, I have to comment about the production. It's fine on the volume level and Ian Hill has never really shined as a bassist, so my usual complaints don't spring to mind, but the song sounds...hollow is honestly the best word I can think of to describe it. It sounds like a low quality rip of the song, not the final version of it. It might just be youtube making it sound worse than it actually is, but it just leaves me going "Is that really going to be the final production on the album?" Only Rob sounds fine, and even he has his falsetto pushed back in the mix (although whether that's because it's just not very powerful any more or is a fault of the mixing isn't something I can confirm the accuracy of). It just means the song doesn't sound very powerful to me. I know this is going to sound rather hypocritical for me to say this after giving a lot of bands crap for loud mastering, but this could have done with the guitars being put more up front, the drums made a bit louder and made a bit louder with the mastering. I'll hold back from saying the production is unsalvageable, as youtube might have made this sound worse than it will on the actual album, but, as it stands at the minute, I'm not impressed on the production of the track.

Anyway, moving on to the track itself, it's a somewhat mid paced track. That's not really a bad thing, but, in this case, the song feels like it's wanting to go faster and the band aren't letting it get up to the speed it wants to go to. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't feel like it's a safe song in that they deliberately picked a dull song to release, but it just feels a bit too controlled on the speed front. They can afford to cut loose a bit more and go a bit quicker on it, if you get what I'm saying. I'm not asking for them to go to Painkiller levels of speed, but a little bit more speed might have helped give this one a bit more kick, if you ask me. Maybe paced more like "Deal With The Devil", this could have been a more impressive track. Anyway, the song does have a decent chorus, but I can't help thinking it's a bit underwritten. Not hugely so, but just enough for me to think that it could have done with a tiny bit more to it than what we got. Sonically, it sounds a little bit like it could have come from Screaming For Vengeance or Defenders Of The Faith, but with a sort of modernness to it that brings to mind Angel Of Retribution and maybe a tiny bit of Jugulator and Demolition (although the band didn't completely skimp out on writing an actually enjoyable song here, which is more than I can say for a lot of those two albums...). There's also a tiny bit of British Steel in terms of the composition of the track: it's not an especially complicated track in terms of the songwriting.

On a performance level, everyone does well. I will say that Rob sounds the best he has done on any Priest album since he returned to the band: it sounds like he's embraced his lower range more than he had done on Angel Of Retribution and doesn't try so much to reach for the part of his voice that he normally uses, which is a bit of a plus for me, as his upper range was starting to sound uncomfortable on Nostradamus. The other veteran members of the band put in the performances you'd expect from them: Scott Travis is a solid drummer who puts out a solid performance, Ian Hill is his usual nigh-unhearable self and Glenn does his usual brand of guitar work that shows an appreciation for writing songs which are heavy, but without the brand of pretentiousness that Nostradamus fell apart due to an abundance of. Richie Faulkner doesn't really try to do anything too different from what K K Downing probably would have done, to the extent that you'd be forgiven for not knowing that Downing had retired from the band if you hadn't been keeping up to date with band developments!

So, my thoughts? If you're a Priest fan, you really can't go wrong with this track, as it's still a solid track. Just don't expect this to be a highlight on your playlist of favourite stuff. If you've never heard of Priest before now...well, why haven't you, it's not like they're some cult band that nobody else has heard of! But, if you haven't heard of Priest before now, you'll probably find this somewhat enjoyable, but you probably won't get what all the fuss about them is. My advice to you? Get Screaming For Vengeance, dig deeper into their discography if you like that and, if you enjoy what you've heard while doing that, come back to this. If you're wanting recommendations for what to go for (as I said earlier, this is going to be their 17th album, so you'd be forgiven for being worried about where to start with them!) I personally would recommend going for Screaming For Vengeance, British Steel, Defenders Of The Faith and Painkiller (not necessarily in that order, but I'd genuinely recommend saving Painkiller for last if you're not already a metal fan: it's probably one of the heaviest metal albums you'll ever hear without having to go into extreme metal territory, so it's fair to say that it's not really an album you'll want to listen to if you've not got used to metal yet!), then follow them up with Angel Of Retribution so you can get an idea of what Rob sounds like today before you jump into this track. It might sound like a lot to listen to (that's coming up to three and a half hours worth of material to listen to) and will probably be daunting to listen to if you've never listened to Priest before now, but I would honestly say that it's worth it. True, you're glossing over another album of theirs which is highly respected (Sad Wings Of Destiny), but those five albums I mentioned earlier point more towards what the band were aiming for on this song. Plus, who knows, maybe you might want to dig into their other albums after you've heard them at their best...incidentally, if you do decide to do that and credit this article with encouraging you to do that, feel free to drop me a message and let me know!

Final Rating: 6 Out Of 10

A fairly enjoyable song that lets itself down with the production and not really doing enough to become an impressive track. Recommended from Priest fans and probably worth at least a listen for those who aren't familiar with Priest, although only with the understanding that this isn't Priest at their best. If you're don't like Judas Priest at all (as hard as I find that to believe is possible if you're already a metal fan...), this song will not change your mind in the slightest.

"Redeemer Of Souls" is available to download now. The full album will be released in the UK on the 15th of July.

Skid Row "United World Rebellion: Chapter One" Review

Skid Row seem to have one of the most fan dumb filled fan bases out there. You've got the fans who keep insisting that the band should reunite with Bach (despite the fact that Bach barely wrote anything while he was in the band, has his own solo career (if, admittedly, a not especially prolific one), was a HUGE egotist when he was in the band, the fact that his replacement has now been in the band longer than he has, the fact that Bach himself has said he doesn't want to do it (albeit not quite in those words) and Bach's voice has gone downhill since he left the band. Also, Rachel Bolan apparently won't let it happen, although I can't say I don't blame him when you consider those factors I've just mentioned, as a bad reunion show is still a bad show at the end of the day...), you've got the fans who act like Skid Row's change in sound has automatically made them bad (despite the fact that Subhuman Race (which also had Bach on vocals) was a stylistic change from the first two albums and, if you wanted to be technical, even their second album itself was a stylistic change from their first album), you've got the fans who just want the guys to return to their glam metal sound (despite...actually, that is kind of a reasonable complaint, since glam metal's been making a comeback in Europe since the 2000's started, although I think it's still underground enough in America that making a major return to the sound of their debut would be a very risky idea) and you've got the fans who think all of the other guys are being horribly unfair to the band and should just stop following the band if all they have to do is complaint (despite the fact that, sometimes, the other guys might actually have a fair point...although, in this case, it seems to be once in a blue moon when that does happen!).

I'm in the last category. I get that the other guys have some valid complaints, but, at the end of the day, Skid Row did what they needed to in order to survive. I can't really blame them for that. Honestly, I think that poor Johnny Solinger is being let down by the band when it comes to studio material (I've not seen the band live, so it might well be a very different story there...), as his two full length albums with him featured next to no music contributions from him (one co-writing credit on Thickskin (specifically on "Mouth Of Voodoo") and none of Revolutions Per Minute...and none on here either, now I think on it!), so he's only as good as the music he has to sing. Let me put it to you this way: if we assume that the same albums were released with Bach on vocals, they'd probably still be albums that are disliked because they simply aren't strong records. Cut the guy some slack in that regard, at least: it's not really his fault that those albums were released while Rachel Bolan and Dave Sabo weren't producing their best material!

*Cough* Anyway...

Most people will probably have heard of Skid Row for their ballads from their debut album, "18 And Life" and "I Remember You", but the guys have been around since 1986 and, aside from what was technically a break up between 1996 and 1999 (the band never officially broke up, but they didn't have a vocalist in between that period of time and most of the members were in another band named Ozone Monday during that time), have been stubbornly going on to this day, albeit with an ability to release studio albums at a rate that Boston would be impressed with (if you want to count this EP as their first album since their last one, it's taken seven years to get to this album...). You could feasibly order all of their studio albums and this EP for about £25-£30, if you shopped around a bit, although most people would probably recommend you only get their debut and Slave To The Grind. Which is fair enough, as those ARE very good records if you like glam metal and don't mind the fact that they got noticeably heavier for Slave To The Grind... (although, saying that, heavier does not mean they went into extreme metal territory, so don't expect that to mean they suddenly tried to outdo Slayer or Death in terms of heaviness!)

For those who want something resembling a detailed history of the band, Skid Row were formed in New Jersey in 1986 by guitarist Dave Sabo and bassist Rachel Bolan (incidentally, two of the three original line up members still in the band today). The band added their first full line up of drummer Rob Affuso, guitarist Scotti Hill and vocalist Matt Fallon (who had also recently left Anthrax, having joined as Neil Turbin's replacement and even did some recording towards Spreading The Disease before he left the band and was replaced with Joey Belladonna). Yes, Skid Row fans, you read that right: Bach was NOT the first vocalist Skid Row had. Matt was replaced fairly quickly by Bach and the band did some touring before getting signed (thanks in part to Sabo's friendship with Jon Bon Jovi) and releasing their self-titled debut album in January 1989. This sold rather well, going platinum five times in the US alone. The same line up later returned to the studio and released Slave To The Grind in June 1991. It didn't sell quite as well, only going double platinum in the US, but the fact the album was noticeably darker than the band's debut was may have had something to do with this. After a hiatus during 1993, the band would return to the studio (again, with the same line up) to record Subhuman Race, which was released in March 1995. Although it charted well in a few countries, it doesn't appear to have sold enough to have become a platinum selling release, probably due in part to receiving very little promotion on MTV due to the music landscape basically having shifted and decreed that all bands connected to hair metal had to be ignored and hated with a burning passion while the next big thing (grunge) was around. Bach was finally fired from the band in late 1996 after an argument with Rachel Bolan about opening for Kiss on New Year's Eve 1996. The band then faded away for a bit and did their project I mentioned earlier, Ozone Monday, during which time Rob Affuso left the band and was replaced by Charlie Mills. In 1999, the band returned with Johnny Solinger on vocals and started what seems to be an unofficial tradition that every studio album needs to have a different drummer, as Charlie Mills left and was replaced by ex-Saigon Kick drummer Phil Varone. The band would release their fourth album, Thickskin, in August 2003, got Dave Gara as their new drummer in 2004 and would then go on to release Revolutions Per Minute in October 2006. The band's line up was stable until April 2010, when Dave Gara left the band and was replaced by Rob Hammersmith, who is still in the band to this day. And...we now come to as close to the present day as we can be.

2013 saw the band returning after 2006's..."controversial" might not be the best word to describe Revolutions Per Minute. Critically, it's received mixed to negative reviews (although I have seen a few somewhat positive ones out there), but the general fan reaction appears to be best summed up as "BURN, YOU FUCKER!" Honestly, I'm with the critics on this one: musically, it's not what Skid Row did on their first two albums, but I wouldn't say it's outright bad either, as it does have a couple of tracks that are enjoyable in their own right and I wouldn't say it descends to the point where I'd feel justified in getting angry at the record like Boston's Life, Love & Hope did. It's not really a record that those who only enjoy metal music are going to love, as it's got a very noticeable punk influence (which can also be seen on Slave To The Grind: "Riot Act", anyone?) and tries a few different styles of music than Skid Row have done before now. Granted, most of the experiments don't really pay off, but you get the point I'm making: Revolutions Per Minute's bad reputation, at least to me, feels a little bit extreme.

...Wait, I'm supposed to be talking about their EP from last year.

United World Rebellion: Chapter One is the first in a series of EPs (as the title may have tipped you off about) that Skid Row are going to be releasing. The marketing for the EP indicates that they're going to be making three of these EPs, although it also said they would be being released over a 12 to 18 month period, so I guess that turned out to be a bit of a lie, as we're now 12 months after the release of this EP and I've seen no info about when the second EP is going to be released (although some rumours indicate that it might be coming in June), let alone the third! So I guess you could technically argue that the EPs constitute Solinger's third album with the band, as the overall combined run time of the three EPs is likely to end up giving us about an hour's worth of music once they're all finally out!

So, what do we get from this EP? Five songs...and not all good ones, either. Yes, while other bands used 2013 as an excuse to put out two albums that ultimately proved to be a wonderful example of why double albums aren't as easy to do as you'd think they are *cough*FiveFingerDeathPunch*cough*, Skid Row used the opportunity to fail to make an EP full of all killer material.

First, let's start with the positives. If you wanted the band to return to their early sound, you'll be happy to hear that this is about the closest they've come to it since Subhuman Race. You could feasibly pretend that the band didn't release anything for about 22 year after Slave To The Grind and, at least from a musical perspective, not be too far from the mark. Johnny Solinger has also made some noticeable improvements to his singing since he joined the band, as his vocals on "Kings Of Demolition" will bring to mind Bach's voice more than you'd expect (if admittedly, still though a noticeable punk filter and without the vocal acrobatics that made Bach so well beloved). On a performance level, everyone delivered: I wouldn't say there were any performances where I would have gone "Hang it up, dude, you ain't up to doing this any more". Nobody really struck me as doing anything exception, but I guess you can give them a bit of a free pass on that front, as you don't really expect a guitar solo out of the Joe Satriani school of soloing in glam metal and Skid Row have always had a bit of a punk undertone to their music (again, "Riot Act", anyone?). Of the songs, "Kings Of Demolition" and "Stitches" are pretty good! Not flawless by any measure, but certainly are worth hearing if you wrote off Skid Row due to Bach not being in the band.

The problems start piling up after "Kings Of Demolition" (and even that wasn't exactly a flawless song: the lyrics could have done with a bit of work). "Let Go" is definitely a solid track, but the lyrics have gone NOTICEABLY downhill on this song. "This Is Killing Me" has probably Solinger's best attempt at performing a ballad that I can think of, but that doesn't necessarily make it good: his voice still doesn't seem to quite suit doing ballads properly. The fact that the opening guitar part is very reminiscent of that from "I Remember You" doesn't help much. All told, it's not exactly a bad song, but I wouldn't exactly say this is a song that a lot of people are going to want to listen to a lot of times. Which is very disappointing, as their ballads on their debut are all brilliant! "Get Up" is a step up from "This Is Killing Me", but still seems to be at about the same level as "Let Go" musically. I will say that Solinger does do a bit of a Bach influenced vocal acrobatic in this song that is worth hearing, but this song probably won't be a highlight for most people and definitely takes a bit too long to finally fade out.

So, with two tracks that are definitely worth a listen, two that are at least solid tracks and one that probably could have improved the EP by being cut, that's not really a bad track record, is it? Unfortunately, part of the thing that drags this down is that, on an EP, you can't afford to release a single bad song, as you've got less solid stuff to drown out the bad stuff. Heck, you can't even have a song that just leaves your audience going "Meh", as that's usually going to result in the song being skipped. While I will say that, track for track, it's the best record Skid Row have done with Solinger on vocals, that's really not saying a lot, as it's still only five tracks compared to Thickskin's twelve and Revolutions Per Minute's eleven!

On a production level, I think the album is maybe a bit on the loud side, but is otherwise OK. The bass doesn't require you to develop psychic abilities to be able to follow it, the guitars have some punch to them, the drums are pretty good and Solinger, while maybe a bit too quiet at points, is still OK in the mix. All told, pretty good!

So, my final conclusion? It's a fairly good EP that lets itself down by having too many songs which aren't really worth checking out. If you've not bothered with Skid Row after Bach left the band, this probably won't completely win you over, but it's worth picking up, as it's their best release with Solinger to date. For those who aren't Skid Row fans, though, I'd recommend getting their debut album and Slave To The Grind instead of this.

Final Rating: 6 Out Of 10

Skid Row are crawling towards making their first strong release with Solinger, but more work still needs to be done before they can start to win over the "No Bach, no Skid Row" crowd.

Personal Favourite Song: "Kings Of Demolition"

Bands Reuniting & Why I Always Get Concerned By It

A lot of people who were around in the 80's will have long lists of bands which they saw as a teenager or young adult who they wish would just come back, even if only for one show. And, in this day and age, a lot of bands are making reunions. To pick the example that springs to mind at the minute, we now have something that could fairly be considered a reunion by Dark Angel.

So, you'd expect me to be happy with all of these developments, right? Well...not really, no. Don't get me wrong, it's great to see the old legends suddenly coming back and giving the dose of old school metal that a lot of people in my age group don't really have today, but I cannot help thinking that most of the reunions are doing nothing more than proving why so many older metal fans won't acknowledge that it's no longer the 80's and that they need to let the past remain the past, as well as doing little to dispel the suspicion that many of the bands are just doing it to cash in on their legacies, as they could feasibly put on what would have been an underwhelming show when the members were young and full of venom and be hailed as having made a great return to form.

...I see a lot of people have already grabbed their pitchforks and torches. So, let's make a deal: I'll say what I want to say and then, after I've done that, you can continue to mob me to death. That seems reasonable?

Let's start by considering how age affects people. Let's be honest, people change as they get older (...well, most of them do!) and this is no exception to their abilities on their respective instruments: even the greatest guitar shredders in the world will probably struggle to play what they could manage with ease when they were twenty. This means that there will almost inevitably be some deterioration of the abilities of the members, even if they've kept in practice with the instruments over the course of their hiatus by, for example, being in other bands. This hits vocalists worse than people playing instruments, as most people's voices get lower over the course of time. This can often mean that a band simply can't perform up to the standards they're being measured up against. Short of a reunion in name only, there's no real way to get a band to reunite and have them turn out to be up to their old standards. While a lot of fans will voluntarily acknowledge this fact, the question is WHY we are letting bands come out onto the stage who simply aren't up to their standards, as lofty as they are. Because nostalgia is a powerful thing, of course: we want them to come out and give us a good show because we know they have a good reputation. When we get that, we're happy. Whether it would have been a good show back in the day doesn't factor into the equation for a lot of people: they just want a good show in general.

The second point is that most reunions usually have to start for a reason: you don't tend to get people who've not seen each other for a decade to suddenly go "Yeah, let's reunite our old band again" upon meeting up, especially if the band broke up due to bad blood between the members and they've not seen each other for most of that time. Which means that there is usually an incentive beyond the music itself. That's not to say that every reunion has been done due to there being an incentive (some bands are bound to have returned because they genuinely wanted to), but there's usually something that will have made the idea of a reunion turn from "Never going to happen" to "Hmm...we're thinking about it". Some bands will have done it for the fans, some will have done it for the money, some will have done it because their other projects aren't working out...you get the point, I'm sure! As much as we'd all like to think that bands have come back because fan demand has been so high that the band have suddenly gone "Our fans still haven't forgotten us! Guys, you feel like doing some shows to thank them for their loyalty?", the sad truth is that, unless demand is high enough to make the reunion truly worthwhile, most bands probably aren't too concerned about having a reunion unless they're harassed about so much that they can't ignore it. So, if a really small band breaks up, you can probably be confident that they'll never reunite in a million years, while a large band that breaks up will inevitably receive so many reunion requests that members of the band will have talks about it at least once every few years, if not months. Requests for classic line up reunions for bands that don't currently have them will also occur, and nearly always will involve a lot of money being thrown at the band until it happens. As you may have noticed, the actual reasons WHY the band aren't reuniting aren't considered by those who want them to return: they just throw larger sums of  money at the band in the hopes that it will do something. Of course, the original reasons for a reunion CAN turn into an honest attempt to give the fans what they want and have the members of the band wondering why they broke up in the first place, so that doesn't mean that a reunion is completely a bad thing in and of itself once it gets going, but the reasons that got it started usually don't tend to involve the guys just going "Yeah, let's reunite", especially if they now have lives outside of music that they can't just give up to put the band back together.

The third thing is that a reunion often has a set of expectations attached to it by the fans and, depending on how long the band has been away for, the standards the band has to live up simply cannot be met, even if the band could perform up to the standards that they held in their prime. If a band has been away for at least a decade, you can expect expectations for their reunion to be sky high and, if the band don't meet up to them, you'll often find fans picking the reunited band apart for flaws that should have been obvious to anyone who had been paying attention to other projects by the members (assuming they have any). As an example that springs to mind, a lot of people don't like Sanctuary's return due to Warrel Dane not being able to pull off some of the band's classics any more. However, if you'd been following Nevermore's career after Sanctuary broke up, you'd have known that Dane had been dialling down the falsetto screams for a good while since the band had been around, which should have been taken as a sign that he couldn't do them as well as he used to be able to. In that aspect, it's hard to feel sympathy for the Sanctuary fans acting like Dane's ruining the reunion through not being up to the high standards he set for himself on Sanctuary's debut, as he was both about twenty five years younger on that album AND he's been around with another band for long enough that it's really their fault for not noticing the warning bell that should have been going off in their heads (also, his voice sounds VERY different now compared to that album, so what were you expecting, the guy to suddenly do his old Rob Halford impression?). That said, I'll admit that I'd really be interested in seeing what Sanctuary's next album will sound like, so I can't deny that I'm somewhat caught up in some degree of hype regarding them in the studio! Live, though...well, there's a reason why I'd like to see a Nevermore reunion after this album is released and not see Sanctuary continue, even if the next Sanctuary album turns out to be brilliant!

The fourth issue is whenever a new album is going to be made by a reuniting act. Let's be honest, this should have EVERYONE worried when it's announced, especially if the band's been apart for over a decade. People change and what might have been an amazing idea when you're twenty might look rather dumb when you're thirty, so you can usually expect a reunion album to fail to match the high standards that fans will place on it. That doesn't mean there haven't been good reunion albums, of course, but most of them usually tend to be rather safe albums, as the band is in a position where it needs to regain support from the old fans, but can't afford to do something too drastic for fear of people saying stuff like "They shouldn't have reunited if they can't deliver a good album". This leaves a tricky balancing act to try to play: write enough material that is recognisably in their old style to impress the old fans, but throw in some experimental stuff to suit where the band are now to prevent accusations of retreading on past glories. The end result is usually a good, if unexceptional, album that gets hyped through the roof just because it's not as bad as people feared it would be. And that, to me, feels like rewarding mediocrity, as we're basically going "Well, it didn't suck, so it's good!" THIS DOES NOT MEAN BANDS CANNOT PULL OFF STRONG REUNION ALBUMS! Some bands have done it, but most have not done it after over a decade of not doing anything. In those cases, expectations usually are on the level of expecting a godlike album from a rusty band who likely is still trying to pull itself together again to see whether it still functions properly. It's like asking Robocop to hunt down a crime lord when you've only just reactivated him after over a hundred years of him falling apart in a garage: you know that they're out of their depth, but you're still expecting them to do what came naturally to them while they are getting used to culture shock, rust and things not working the way they used to. When put like that, a bit unreasonable, isn't it?

The last issue is that, well, sometimes memories are best left as just that: memories. With all that I've said in the last four paragraphs, it's fair to say that, sometimes, leaving the book closed is honestly the best idea for a band if they want to protect their legacy. There's nothing stopping the members from doing the songs live (and I'm sure an agreement could be drawn up if necessary to allow all of the members to do that if they wanted to with their projects), so there's often little point in a reunion unless the band had made a rule basically saying "You can't play any of our songs if you aren't in the band". Yes, it's nice to see the old guys get on stage and give it a go, but, really, do you want to do that if they can't deliver the material any more? Would you not prefer to hear someone do the song properly, even if it's not with all of the guys in the band performing it?

Think about that...

You may now continue organising the lynch mob if you want to.

(Also, a funny meta fact for my readers: after writing this article, I sent this article off to a friend who is my unofficial second opinion provider/proofreader/quality assurance guy and, after he read it, he mentioned that what I'd brought up was basically what happened with him when Black Sabbath announced their reunion. I would like it to be known that Black Sabbath genuinely did not cross my mind while writing this article and it was only when he mentioned them that I realised that what I'd said could apply to them for all of my comments. When I was writing this, the only bands that crossed my mind for definite were Dark Angel, Death Angel and Sanctuary. Goes to show, though: sometimes, it takes a second pair of eyes to realise just how much you managed to hit the mark!)