Seefeel -Seefeel

The whole album is up on AOL Spinner to stream for a limited time (though they messed up some of the track sequence order)...

 

http://www.spinner.ca/new-releases#/14

Its pretty wild actually. It takes me some time to get into it. The track on Warp20 was much more accessible

  On 1/28/2011 at 10:23 AM, Goiter Sanchez said:

like some kind of horrific mutant guitar-lawnmower sputtering and gurgling in orgasmic limbo as angels dance just out of reach... This is a pretty vivid album for me... Puts pictures in my head!

 

yeah word. airless as well/ superb album

It will take some more time to really get into it

0:51 of Making, is that a mp3 glitch??

anyone able to confirm what i'm talking about? (these are the mp3s from Bleep i'm questioning. nothing dodgy!)

Was searching for a thread on this album over the weekend

 

http://forum.watmm.com/index.php?app=core&module=search&section=search&do=search&fromsearch=1

 

But it did not appear.

 

Glad its a bit twisted, getting my copy this week

Edited February 8, 2011 by feltcher

  On 2/8/2011 at 10:20 AM, pigster said:

anyone able to confirm what i'm talking about? (these are the mp3s from Bleep i'm questioning. nothing dodgy!)

 

Haven't heard that on my CD or record...

Also, the track has been uploaded to YouTube and I can't hear anything odd at 0:51 into 'Making'.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCndh1iaYTI&feature=related

here's the bit i'm referring to, if anyone is interested in looking into this!

as mentioned above, this skip can be heard at :50 of the track.

 

if this is a skip, i may have to roll up my sleeves and contact bleep!!

Seefeel-Seefeel-007-Making (sample).mp3Fetching info...

good album, listening to it makes me wish MBV would get their shit together.

Apparently the Japanese release has an exclusive bonus track called 'Twojam'.

 

http://www.hmv.co.jp/en/product/detail/3958388

Picked up this album today, and instantly really enjoyed it. I felt it sounded like the mutant offspring of Fuck Buttons and Mogwai.

  On 2/9/2011 at 6:38 PM, xxx said:

  On 2/8/2011 at 1:18 PM, pigster said:

here's the bit i'm referring to, if anyone is interested in looking into this!

as mentioned above, this skip can be heard at :50 of the track.

 

if this is a skip, i may have to roll up my sleeves and contact bleep!!

I think I should contact Bleep about "Move Of Ten" then

 

ha! i wasn't tripping!

i compared the bleep mp3 with another sourced file and mine definitely has an audio skip at :50.

very relived because that skip was bugging me, couldn't work out if it was a glitch or just some IDM offbeat : D

 

and now that that's out of the way, i can happily say THIS IS A GOOD ALBUM

pitchfork review

 

one of my favourite albums of 2011 so far just got a 5.6 review on pitchfork ^_^

Pitchfork are a bit silly at times. It's all subjective of course but 5.6 is too low for me personally too, it's an awesome comeback album from Seefeel. Like many good albums do, it doesn't show all it has to offer on the first few listens and now I'm used to it, all my minor concerns are gone. A beautiful record. Sometimes it almost feels like Pitchfork try too hard to stay credible by not rating things as highly intentionally, like Nirvana fans that used to pretend they didn't like "Nevermind" when it came out for fear of being lumped in with the masses.

  On 2/24/2011 at 12:10 AM, Dissolvedpaul said:

Sometimes it almost feels like Pitchfork try too hard to stay credible by not rating things as highly intentionally

I want to agree with you but for this:

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/14880-my-beautiful-dark-twisted-fantasy/

 

oh and this

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/909-the-ascension/

or this

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/178-source-tags-and-codes/

 

and a handful of radiohead albums (duh...)

 

and i havent heard this

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/5607-travistan/

but what assholes

 

i dont know...their whole rating system is totally bogus...i wish they would just admit they are jackasses like christgau (who is now doing a serious stint for msn) instead of clinging foolishly to the worst rating system ever devised. perhaps someone knows, is it just up to one person to give the rating or is it a panel then one person writes the editorial? honestly i dont see how most of the crap that could would get a ten would with the latter. i'd imagine the former plus a nice check in certain circumstances

 

enough about pitchfork though

 

i've given the new seefeel a lot of listens and I really love certain songs but a lot of it still hasn't clicked for me or perhaps that there just isn't enough variation in the atmosphere of the different tracks to keep me listening to the whole album... i still really hope they tour the US...though this is probably not going to happen...oh well...still happy about a quality release in 2011

Edited February 24, 2011 by Scrambled Ears

just the fact that their rating system is so insanely exact is laughable. what criteria do you use to distinguish between a 7.3 album and a 7.4 album?

wasn't ready for this record when I listened, glad that I did.

i listened to it on the way to work, and then again at work. followed by vhs head :D

point is, i love this album. i always had a love for seefeel which i felt was abit underrated considering how good they are. i'm just shocked if this album is gonna be as overlooked as their earlier output :S:S:S::S:S

That Pitchfork review is unreasonable and arrogant, especially the last paragraph. The author contradicts himself at least once. I am usually alright with Pitchfork reviews but I fundamentally disagree with this one...

 

Anyways, here's an interesting interview from about a month back for those who missed it!

 

http://www.themilkfactory.co.uk/st/2011/02/interview-seefeel-a-constant-journey/

 

*Edited for spelling.*

Edited February 27, 2011 by Goiter Sanchez

album is growing on me, very bizarre though still

 

and yeah that pitchfork review seemed overly harsh... like they were supposed to unleash the greatest thing ever but failed so its a 5/10

  On 2/24/2011 at 5:15 AM, nene multiple assgasms said:

just the fact that their rating system is so insanely exact is laughable. what criteria do you use to distinguish between a 7.3 album and a 7.4 album?

Been thinking about this a lot myself, but I do think it's a good way to measure music. You don't necessarily need to dissect any certain criteria to rate one album 0.1 points above other, just feel that "if I had to put these records in order, I'd put them like this". That's nothing final and opinions change, but when you have tons of records that you review that extra scale comes in very handy I reckon. A scale of 1 to 10 is still passable, but 1 to 5 is just too weak in my opinion.

 

That said, gotta express my dislike for Pitchfork while we're at it.

Edited March 1, 2011 by 40days

  On 3/1/2011 at 4:23 AM, 40days said:

  On 2/24/2011 at 5:15 AM, nene multiple assgasms said:

just the fact that their rating system is so insanely exact is laughable. what criteria do you use to distinguish between a 7.3 album and a 7.4 album?

Been thinking about this a lot myself, but I do think it's a good way to measure music. You don't necessarily need to dissect any certain criteria to rate one album 0.1 points above other, just feel that "if I had to put these records in order, I'd put them like this". That's nothing final and opinions change, but when you have tons of records that you review that extra scale comes in very handy I reckon. A scale of 1 to 10 is still passable, but 1 to 5 is just too weak in my opinion.

 

That said, gotta express my dislike for Pitchfork while we're at it.

 

is your name "40days" inspired from Slowdive's "40 days"?? just curious.

So is this worth getting or?

  On 3/1/2011 at 4:30 AM, beatfanatic said:

is your name "40days" inspired from Slowdive's "40 days"?? just curious.

Yup, and that only.