Jump to content
 

California Deluxe -- Reviews/First Impressions


boxelder

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, theedge00 said:

I've listened to the Deluxe a couple of times now, and for most songs I can find something that I like. For example the pre-chorus in Wildfire, verses in 6/8 etc.

But I don't like the entire songs. There's just too much lacking imo. 

I think this is what holds them back as much as anything, production, rushing, etc... Is that all the songs, even the best ones will have bad sections that you have to ignore, while the bad ones will have short good sections you wish were the entire song.  For example don't mean anything, has this terrific bridge sounding like vintage Mark, then it ends and we have this gang vocals cheesy chorus build up that you'd get in a random pop song.

They can't seem to just transition all their ideas into a good song start to finish and there's always so much going on you can hardly differentiate parking lot with brohemian with wildfire.

They started to improve on this on Deluxe, you can tell Last Train Home from the rest, Bottom of the ocean from the rest.. But it all blends together too much. Maybe we've gotten spoiled, other bands do this, but you look at even neighborhoods and none of the songs can be mistaken for another, they're all unique and recognizable as their own. Self Titled obviously the best example.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so I'm a little late to the game as I waited til the official release date and I'll say something positive and negative about the cali era: on the upside blink were able to able to survive losing their most influential member and release 2 albums, and I'm glad for that. I would rather have this blink than no blink at all. The down side for me is that out of 25 songs only 3 or 4 songs are standout tracks, the rest is generic shit which is to be expected since they lost tom. So in closing, I guess I'll take the bad with the good and be thankful for the few songs that I really like ??

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a few listens, I enjoy the Deluxe tracks more than the California release because there's more variety. Seems like Matt had more of an influence here. I am not a fan of most of the lyrical work slapped together *"Sitting on the curb at a Target parking lot" or whatever???? Just too much pandering. I recently read an article with Matt too, and though its been discussed here to death, he basically admits that they had an audience in mind to write to for what "blink should sound like", meaning that they think they need to have some certain sound or represent a genre or something which is a bit disappointing. 

In any case, the one thing I still enjoy about the California album is that I got to live one more time with a blink song being popular on the radio in my mid 20s. It was awesome having a summer where "Bored to Death" was being blasted by random cars - or having people really enjoy having that song played somewhere. I've got that album to thank for that - and it will likely be the last time that happens, so I have that album to thank for that memory of blink. The Bored to Death acoustic was a very nice touch and done very well IMO.
 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2017 at 9:47 AM, thongrider said:

I don't think Blink has ever made something as light and poppy as

[in love this way]

i don't think you can argue the point based on one (or two, or three, or four) track examples. "poppy" is more than just the songwriting it's the band's entire ethos, from chords to lyrics to production [and yes, to marketing].  pop in the most basic sense simply means "popular" — and on that score (and many others which are purely aesthetic), i find it very difficult to argue that the descendents are "lighter and poppier" than blink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2017 at 1:35 AM, Ghent said:

I've faced judgmental opinions for listening to blink since I was 13 or so. Nothing to do with Feldmann. It's way "cooler" to like blink now than it was ~2002

no one in the soCal scene took them seriously after dude ranch came out. the last time it was cool to like blink in san diego was 1996 (and, actually, wearing a pre-182 shirt in 95-96 gave you massive amounts of street cred, but after 97 no one cared).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, daveyjones said:

no one in the soCal scene took them seriously after dude ranch came out. the last time it was cool to like blink in san diego was 1996 (and, actually, wearing a pre-182 shirt in 95-96 gave you massive amounts of street cred, but after 97 no one cared).

It's crazy how people thought Dude Ranch was a sellout album. Heck maybe some thought Cheshire Cat was a sellout album. They need to get back to their flyswatter roots! Fuck that! Releasing an album is totally being a selloutl, they need to go back to their garage!

In 2001/2002 there were two types of fans, those that just loved all of Blink, and the haters that couldn't stop moaning about how Blink were "sellouts". They were called "Blink'sync".

I think the 1999-2004 era certainly developed a cult following especially from people who weren't around during those days.

For many Blink is a nostalgia act now and you get a lot of blank stares when you inform people that Blink still record albums.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've listened to this more over the weekend and it's just mostly forgettable trash, to be frank. I quite like Last Train Home and Bottom Of The Ocean is... interesting at least, most of its just a wash to me though. the more I hear Long Lost Feeling the more I dislike it. 6/8 is my jam though, best song they've done with Skeebs I feel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Olidamus said:

It's crazy how people thought Dude Ranch was a sellout album.

you have to consider the nature of the 90s soCal punk scene (the one i grew up in). i'm sure other small scenes were similar.

post-internet, it really doesn't matter. but back then, the only way you could hear about a smaller band, know a smaller band, love a smaller band, was through seeing them live. i.e. word of mouth. you had to go to shows in small shitty venues every single weekend to then luck out and discover a band like blink.

the reason people in the scene resented MTV and major labels is that once bands got signed, and got on TV and on radio, those small club shows were done. bands went on to play bigger places, and the crowds at those places tended to suck. so anytime a band got signed and started playing bigger shows, you dropped them. abandoned them, immediately. and moved on to discover something again that was small and cool.

there is a certain amount of hypocrisy to this position, and the song "know it all" by lagwagon pretty much sums up the argument.

i stuck it out with blink through signing to MCA and playing bigger places, because a.) the music was still great b.) they still played all age, general admission venues almost exclusively and c.) they were relatively unknown to the larger MTVerse.

after travis joined, it broke my heart that my band wasn't my band anymore, but i stuck it out, because of the three reasons above. when enema dropped, it was time (at least for me) to part ways. the band was playing bigger venues, seated venues. the music wasn't the same. and they were huge on MTV, meaning the crowds at their shows started to suck, big time.

the real definition of "selling out" is doing something you don't want to do for way more money than doing what you love. and i maintain that blink has never done that.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, daveyjones said:

you have to consider the nature of the 90s soCal punk scene (the one i grew up in). i'm sure other small scenes were similar.

post-internet, it really doesn't matter. but back then, the only way you could hear about a smaller band, know a smaller band, love a smaller band, was through seeing them live. i.e. word of mouth. you had to go to shows in small shitty venues every single weekend to then luck out and discover a band like blink.

the reason people in the scene resented MTV and major labels is that once bands got signed, and got on TV and on radio, those small club shows were done. bands went on to play bigger places, and the crowds at those places tended to suck. so anytime a band got signed and started playing bigger shows, you dropped them. abandoned them, immediately. and moved on to discover something again that was small and cool.

there is a certain amount of hypocrisy to this position, and the song "know it all" by lagwagon pretty much sums up the argument.

i stuck it out with blink through signing to MCA and playing bigger places, because a.) the music was still great b.) they still played all age, general admission venues almost exclusively and c.) they were relatively unknown to the larger MTVerse.

after travis joined, it broke my heart that my band wasn't my band anymore, but i stuck it out, because of the three reasons above. when enema dropped, it was time (at least for me) to part ways. the band was playing bigger venues, seated venues. the music wasn't the same. and they were huge on MTV, meaning the crowds at their shows started to suck, big time.

the real definition of "selling out" is doing something you don't want to do for way more money than doing what you love. and i maintain that blink has never done that.

Nice post.

Rumours were, back in the TOYPAJ era, that they already wanted to move on without that sound, but the label wanted Enema 2. You heard something then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, dildo69er said:

and we know your opinion is worthless as you have a destiny sig 

:P

Well, I *did* have a destiny sig. it's suddenly disappeared. Don't suppose you'd know anything about that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, daveyjones said:

i don't think you can argue the point based on one (or two, or three, or four) track examples. "poppy" is more than just the songwriting it's the band's entire ethos, from chords to lyrics to production [and yes, to marketing].  pop in the most basic sense simply means "popular" — and on that score (and many others which are purely aesthetic), i find it very difficult to argue that the descendents are "lighter and poppier" than blink.

I just meant the songs! And also added "at their lightest"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The term sellout is so overused, it's embarrassing. 

It's mostly from people who liked a band when they were small and can't accept the fact that they now appeal to the masses and it's not their super cool little band that no one has heard of anymore. 

Can't stand hipster music fans, arseholes the lot of them. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ...Dan... said:

can't accept the fact that they now appeal to the masses and it's not their super cool little band that no one has heard of anymore.

that's the BS scenester reason, absolutely.

but as i indicated above, there are practical reasons as well. for one, if a band is no longer playing smaller, all ages general admission venues, and that is the sort of show that you prefer (and many prefer it exclusively), it makes sense to not follow the band live anymore.

for another, if the band's sound changes to a degree (often to "appeal to the masses")—the most common example is a band who is known for fast, aggressive music, but tones it down to meet the requirements of mainstream radio airplay—it's perfectly acceptable to turn your back if you don't like the new sound.

lastly, even if a band plays the same sort of general admission venues that they used to (but only the scale is increased, from a club to a hall or theater), it's likely the character of the audience will shift. this is just the result of a band gaining a larger audience. the proportion of 'hardcore' fans will drop. the percentage of casual fans will grow. and this sadly gets to the point, like it was when i saw blink on last year's tour, when the majority of the audience is just there to get drunk, goof around, get wild; they don't know the the names of the people in the band, aren't familiar with the bulk of their catalog (only a hit or two). and if you're a fan that's really into a band, that kind of crowd can be a major downer.

all three are legit reasons to stop listening to a band's newer material or see them live.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, daveyjones said:

that's the BS scenester reason, absolutely.

but as i indicated above, there are practical reasons as well. for one, if a band is no longer playing smaller, all ages general admission venues, and that is the sort of show that you prefer (and many prefer it exclusively), it makes sense to not follow the band live anymore.

for another, if the band's sound changes to a degree (often to "appeal to the masses")—the most common example is a band who is known for fast, aggressive music, but tones it down to meet the requirements of mainstream radio airplay—it's perfectly acceptable to turn your back if you don't like the new sound.

lastly, even if a band plays the same sort of general admission venues that they used to (but only the scale is increased, from a club to a hall or theater), it's likely the character of the audience will shift. this is just the result of a band gaining a larger audience. the proportion of 'hardcore' fans will drop. the percentage of casual fans will grow. and this sadly gets to the point, like it was when i saw blink on last year's tour, when the majority of the audience is just there to get drunk, goof around, get wild; they don't know the the names of the people in the band, aren't familiar with the bulk of their catalog (only a hit or two). and if you're a fan that's really into a band, that kind of crowd can be a major downer.

all three are legit reasons to stop listening to a band's newer material or see them live.

I see this like turning back to what made you what you are. I can understand how some people on the scene can turn their backs too to the band which does that.

I know a similar case here in Spain, but it was, of course, on a smaller scale compared to blink (as long as they were not known outside our country, except for latin countries). If anyone is curious I can explain, I was close to them to some extent, so I was able to see what happened behind the public image they were serving to the fans. And it was a total deception. Disgusting shit going on, trial in between and all. That was a massive example of selling out, but in the worse way you can expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, daveyjones said:

lastly, even if a band plays the same sort of general admission venues that they used to (but only the scale is increased, from a club to a hall or theater), it's likely the character of the audience will shift. this is just the result of a band gaining a larger audience. the proportion of 'hardcore' fans will drop. the percentage of casual fans will grow. and this sadly gets to the point, like it was when i saw blink on last year's tour, when the majority of the audience is just there to get drunk, goof around, get wild; they don't know the the names of the people in the band, aren't familiar with the bulk of their catalog (only a hit or two). and if you're a fan that's really into a band, that kind of crowd can be a major downer.

my last show lol. i mean, at the first show i did get wild, i had a great time, i was seeing my favorite band, but it's insane how little the crowd reacted. i guess there's a big tradeoff between record sales and energy of the audience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The crowd at the last blink show I went to was shit.

 

Anyway, California Deluxe is mostly forgettable to me. It was fun on the first day, but I've only listened to the full album once since that day, and I'm already skipping almost every song from the album if they ever pop up on shuffle. That's a bad sign. It's depressing to be so unexcited about brand new music from my all-time favorite band. Eh.

On the flip side, I listened to California non-stop for a few months when it came out, even with all of my complaints about that album. I just don't feel a desire to listen to these new songs much at all. What a bummer. I hope blink can pleasantly surprise me with their next release. My expectations couldn't be much lower at this point. Such a weird feeling to suddenly not really care about blink-182 for the first time in twelve years or so...

 

Anyway, I still really like Wildfire, and I'm loving the acoustic version of Bored to Death. Those two songs and Hey I'm Sorry are the only tracks I love. But at the very least, their attempt at writing slightly darker and more experimental tracks on California Deluxe still gives me some more hope for things to come.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Cheerios4u98 said:

The crowd at the last blink show I went to was shit.

 

Anyway, California Deluxe is mostly forgettable to me. It was fun on the first day, but I've only listened to the full album once since that day, and I'm already skipping almost every song from the album if they ever pop up on shuffle. That's a bad sign. It's depressing to be so unexcited about brand new music from my all-time favorite band. Eh.

On the flip side, I listened to California non-stop for a few months when it came out, even with all of my complaints about that album. I just don't feel a desire to listen to these new songs much at all. What a bummer. I hope blink can pleasantly surprise me with their next release. My expectations couldn't be much lower at this point. Such a weird feeling to suddenly not really care about blink-182 for the first time in twelve years or so...

 

Anyway, I still really like Wildfire, and I'm loving the acoustic version of Bored to Death. Those two songs and Hey I'm Sorry are the only tracks I love. But at the very least, their attempt at writing slightly darker and more experimental tracks on California Deluxe still gives me some more hope for things to come.

I'm done with it faster than I was with California, but I think that's just because I had more hope for California, so of course I put more time into it. No reason for me to do that with this when an album just came out this year with songs like this on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-jYp6R3EiA

Also @daveyjones or anyone who knows some melodic music theory, does anyone know if the chord progressions used in this Japanese skatepunk (the song posted above is a great example) I love are consistently different than western punk? I would like to learn more about that type of stuff, since I only really know about rhythmic music theory (counting, polyrhythms, etc.) since I grew up playing drums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...