M O O Y

A new album titled “Because of the Times” by the Kings of Leon is set to release next week, on April 3rd so I feel compelled to provide my two cents on the matter. At the time of this post the entire album is available for preview on their myspace page.

Full disclosure- I own the previous Kings of Leon album, but hate the first release. You may know this band from by their song “Molly’s Chambers” which is an ok song if you don’t care much for music. I think it was in a VW commercial where white people dance, which I think doesn’t narrow it down by much. Fortunately the Kings have gotten much better, and there are no ads featuring them in case you are a snob like that.

The Kings’ last album made me feel they were tapping into some of what the strokes were doing. I will go as far as to call them anoint them the Southern Strokes, which given the quality of “First Impressions of Earth” is definite praise. There are stark differences between what the NYC rich kids are doing and what the Nashville Leons are up to. They both just like the same things about the Velvet Underground and it shows. The consistent, bouncing backbeat and guitar interplay are always welcome in my book.

KoL carve their niche by being extra smooth though. And I think this is attributed to their southern roots. They and My Morning Jacket are living proof of how “American” a band can sound while still being progressive. If country music had stuck with Cash instead of following Brooks and not gone pop the Kings of Leon would be Nashville Royalty.

OK, enough set up. The album is bouncy-smooth for the first 3rd, then gets raunchy, until completely mellowing out for the last few songs. The songs seem to be grouped in this fashion purposefully as certain instruments are contained to the aforementioned sections.

You can see this band playing at a dive bar where shirt & shoes are not required. I don’t mean in the same sense as a beach bar but more like a bar in a town that is still building up to its first stop light.

The lead singer’s twangy voice will sound completely out of place, much like you don’t expect Ian Anderson’s over Jethro Tull. But it’s there and once you drop your hang-up you understand how it fits perfectly. It doesn’t distract the way Geddy Lee’s always will.

Kings of Leon have always been good at throwing down an upbeat track that begs to have some bourbon poured over it but on this album they seem to make an effort to show they can be so much more. The first few songs seem to be come first just to prove a point. There is also a lot more Stones influence here.

The slower songs are a tad dull, if I have to say something bad about the album. Yet there are still some good noise/fuzz rocking moments, if you enjoy that. Then again there is a reason Sonic Youth’s following is relatively small given their fervor.

“Because of the Times” isn’t going to change the world. It is the first Kings of Leon I can listen through completely with no problem, which suits me just fine since I’m too old to buy my songs piecemeal on iTunes. This is another anti-teeniemobop album that won’t inspire a phone full of ringtones.

Key Tracks:
On Call
Knocked Up
Ragoo
Trunk
Fans
Black Thumbnail

Next 5 albums I want to buy/illegally download:
Because of the Times – Kings of Leon
We Were Dead Before the Ship Even Sank – Modest Mouse
Friend Opportunity – Deerhoof
Sound of Silver – LCD Soundsystem
New Magnetic Wonder – The Apples In Stereo

After reviewing two albums that were farther down the somber scale than you’d care for on a Friday night, or any night where drinks were involved for that matter, I finally have a suggestion to get you up.

No, it isn’t Dr. Dog. I know what I said about reviewing the Philly neo-hippies latest release, and I’ll get to it, but I doubt anyone is clamoring to know my opinion on the matter either way.

“Myths of the Near Future” by the Klaxons is the new standard for party rock or, as NME is inclined to put it, rave rock. That genre name sounded a bit peculiar to me, but I don’t really care for naming sub-sub-sub-genres. I think HMV has better description of the Klaxons, calling their music "acid-rave sci-fi punk-funk.” I had an idea what was meant since I had heard the single “Gravity’s Rainbow” a couple months back. That song seemed interesting to me, but grew old on me quickly, which probably just a by product of being into bands like Ratatat and the Rapture at the time. Thankfully I gave them another chance, which was actually a by product of be able to pirate an internet connection and download more music this week.

As some would say, it’s all about the by product.

Throughout the first listen the album seems exciting akin to being 10 years old and finding a porn magazine left beneath the bleachers. On one hand I am thrilled with my discovery, and at the same time I am so exhilarated to find out what comes next that I am probably glossing over the details. But that’s just fine because I’m taking it home with me.

Before the end of the album all I can hope for is a live performance in my near future.

While it would be hard for some of the songs to be considered astounding on their own merits, as was my issue with "Gravity’s Rainbow", the album as a whole is a great listen from beginning to end.

To be condescending and use another band to put things into context, the Kalxons are deserving of the hype that was bestowed on the Arctic Monkeys. While the Monkeys still have a lot of room to grow, and are tremendous fun b/c of their simplicity, the Klaxons have begun their journey from a much more complex and musically knowledgeable place. The U.K. puts out a lot of famous bands, but no where near the same number of good bands. Don’t let the misses mask the hits.

Flat out “Myths of the Near Future” is upbeat party music that you can listen to after the lights come on.

Like:
Rapture with more rock
Arctic Monkeys with more practice and instruments
Muse without self pity and a need to show off
Kasabian with a genie’s lamp
The Bravery without a need to do coke to be cool

Why is women’s college basketball on television? Does anyone have an answer that doesn’t involve the words “Title IX” or “corporate sponsorships” in them? The only reason that women’s basketball games should be televised is because everything else has already been televised. Which, by the way, is a better reason to stop televising things altogether.

This is not a chauvinistic conclusion. This feeling is more a kin to my questioning the need for Krispy Kreme to produce a donut flavored smoothie. If you need to consume glazed flavored products sans chewing or if you are spending time watching women’s basketball on television then you should stop and find something else to do.

Am I justifying the act of actually attending a game? No, but I’m not against it either. I figure there is some excitement involved in being present for any athletic feat. I don’t judge people who go watch mud wrestling, eating contests, curling, or those fabled ‘lumberjack’ games for that matter. The difference here is that neither of those events is as intrusive. I am required by gender law to watch 10 minutes of women’s college basketball highlights in order to find out if an NBA team won or not. An analogous example of this would be if you had to endure the story of how the person behind the cash register ended up at that job every time you bought something. You don’t care, you don’t want to care, and would feel ridiculous for caring.

My annoyance seems to have some objective support though as my anguish has led me to research how many people are actually interested in watching people only do 75% (super generous estimate here) of what other people can do, and are doing, and are as available to watch.

Finding attendance numbers for women college basketball games is as easy as baking a cake without the use of your extremities. In case you don’t retain information the way I do let me first inform you that Duke, Temple, Pittsburgh, and Tennessee have some of the most praised women basketball programs in the country. The first and latter especially have a recent history almost all other schools would trade for at the drop of the hat. Yet when you look up the attendance it is reported as N/A. Mind you that Duke played Temple in Raleigh, NC and Duke University is located within 25 miles of downtown Raleigh. Tennessee played Pittsburgh at the University of Pittsburgh. You would think that the attendance would be phenomenal to either one of these, worth taking note of at least.

Perhaps you are saying that I can’t come to a conclusion by means of an N/A. Well click on this link and watch the highlights in the right sidebar for yourself. What explanation is there for all those empty seats? Did everyone go buy hotdogs at the same exact time every time they chose to include a shot of the (anti-)crowd in the frame?

Here are some attendance numbers from last night’s games:
N.C. State vs Baylor – 5,225 (Played in Raleigh where N.C. State is located)
Connecticut vs. Baylor – 7,250 (Played in Hartford, CT; 30 miles from Univ of Conn)
Michigan State vs. Rutgers – 8,000 (Played in Michigan State’s own gym)

The only sporting event you can equate those numbers to is professional bowling, and that is televised at the same time as NFL games to tell you that you should not be watching this channel, football is on, what is wrong with you?

Since I try to contribute as well as destroy I will suggest an alternative, because I am sure someone reading this is asking, “Well, what should they put on instead then?” This is a very easy answer- Hockey. There were 8 games last night that could have been televised. Only two of which had attendance below 18,000 (15,000+ and 13,100).

Before you go nuts and claim that no one wants to watch hockey let me put the 1.3 Nielsen rating the average NCAA women’s basketball tournament game receives in perspective for you. That is 500,000 people lees than what watched a rerun of “The War At Home” on Fox this past Sunday.

People who come up with the titles for news segments have to be some of the most passive aggressive people out there.

If you do not know what I mean by news title I am referring to the graphic you'll see while an anchor person is "reading the news." Some examples are "Neglected New Orleans," "Britney Gone Bald," "K-Fed Up."

The reason I think the authors of those blurbs are such scoundrels is because they create powerful negative stigmas without any consequences. We never know who these people are, and for the most part it could be some computer software running an algorithm. Regardless of their origins it would be incredibly naive to dismiss the persuasive power those few words have.

One that stood out to me this morning was "Al Qaeda 3.0," which was provided by the bastion of integrity headquartered in Atlanta- CNN.

CNN, CNBC, and ESPN have to be the most popular channels played on mute. You can find them being played at bars, gyms, offices, and bathrooms. The people running these channels obviously know this, which is why every single one provides a ticker on the bottom. And in most cases they will use graphical bullet points to emphasize the premise of the piece. They are also aware that the largest/brightest thing on the screen will receive the most attention therefore making it ever more important that the segment's title be extremely captivating.

So Al Qaeda 3.0, which I saw on mute, most likely referred to the annual resurgence of the Afghani based jihad every spring. Apparently the promise of 72 virgins isn't quite as persuasive when its fucking freezing outside. Shrinkage could be terrorism's greatest enemy.

I find it appalling that one would equate the resurgence of a nationalistic militia which seeks to oppress all individuality and difference among its people to the rolling out of new computer software. As if Al Qaeda leaders have been investing their funds in the R&D department instead of building up weapons and forces. No doubt they all sat around a table and garnered insight from charts and graphs on how the 'casualty experience' turned out the past few quarters.

Yet to the person in a cube/office/ivory tower in Atlanta that is what it seemed most like. The analogy was evident to them. I would suppose the troops on the ground have a different perspective and other choice words for those who take the coming onslaught as a glib matter.

I don't know what I was expecting though. The news doesn't hope to inform us about anything anymore. The main goal at the end of the day is to entertain and achieve high ratings. Whether that is done by shocking us with imagery or always reffering to the decibel meter to judge who wins the argument is irrelevant.

No doubt freedom of expression is good thing and I in no way am trying to say that the people should not be tolerated. What I am trying to convey is that the words put forth by these people should not be accepted and that perhaps they need to reexamine their values in regard to gravity of war and the sacrifices of others.