Is TH "cheap"?

If the album is supposed to be a kind of palindrome, is it just that BoC played half an album backwards and rewrote the songs to supplement the other half? Did I pay twice for an album I could have played once and then reversed to get the full effect?

halp

TH is very cheap

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

I dunno if cheap's the right word. But it's element is shite (earth)

Yeah, "cheap" is not how I would describe it. There IS something I miss in it tough.

What the hell are you people smoking?

No, it's perfect.

Sounds cheap to me.

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:09 AM, Zeffolia said:

TH is very cheap

 

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

unfortunately, agree.

to expand: I was listening to Shackleton today. Although he has some super cheesy moments (arguably bad spoken word stuff), his music has what I feel TH lacks, that voodoo element, that dangerous pagan vibe. To me TH seems rather safe and bloodless. Too contained, not wild enough...

TH is a bargain, yes; especially considering there was no overpriced special edition box-set!

Nice work jerks

I hate to say it but yeah I feel that way. It's not as enchanting, absorbing, or evocative as the past releases. Good thing I'm getting my TCH vinyl.

I think there really hasn't been enough time to determine if TH is "cheap" or the "greatest BoC yet" - look at how TCH was similarly dismissed by most, and today it's clearly stood the test of time in comparison to the other BoC albums. Is TCH the best of the 4 LPs? Probably not, but it yielded some songs that are now considered classics.

Let's revisit this in a year or two, and see if opinions remain the same.

People will start liking TH by the time the next album is out. Whenever it's out.

  On 7/5/2013 at 5:16 PM, cult fiction said:

Nice work jerks

*Marcus checks watmm*

*changes mind to release new album after 16 years instead of two*

  On 7/5/2013 at 11:32 AM, Friendly Foil said:

No, it's perfect.

i always felt boc is not as refined, innovative or technical as afx/ae, but they do have a great knack for melody, atmosphere and mood.

while i might describe TH as "cheap", it is consistent with the rest of their work. it captures the late 90s/early 00s aesthetic pretty well in my opinion, an aesthetic that boc helped to create.

  On 7/5/2013 at 1:04 PM, lumpenprol said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:09 AM, Zeffolia said:

TH is very cheap

 

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

unfortunately, agree.

 

to expand: I was listening to Shackleton today. Although he has some super cheesy moments (arguably bad spoken word stuff), his music has what I feel TH lacks, that voodoo element, that dangerous pagan vibe. To me TH seems rather safe and bloodless. Too contained, not wild enough...

 

I agree with both of you. I really thought this was a fan-made fake when I first heard the leak. I had already bought it and have since listened to it probably 30 times to see if my views change, but it's funny how something like that can make you see through the hype...

  On 7/5/2013 at 1:04 PM, lumpenprol said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:09 AM, Zeffolia said:

TH is very cheap

 

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

unfortunately, agree.

 

to expand: I was listening to Shackleton today. Although he has some super cheesy moments (arguably bad spoken word stuff), his music has what I feel TH lacks, that voodoo element, that dangerous pagan vibe. To me TH seems rather safe and bloodless. Too contained, not wild enough...

 

I think what BOC set out to make and what you expected them to make are just two different things...

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:25 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 1:04 PM, lumpenprol said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:09 AM, Zeffolia said:

TH is very cheap

 

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

unfortunately, agree.

 

to expand: I was listening to Shackleton today. Although he has some super cheesy moments (arguably bad spoken word stuff), his music has what I feel TH lacks, that voodoo element, that dangerous pagan vibe. To me TH seems rather safe and bloodless. Too contained, not wild enough...

 

I think what BOC set out to make and what you expected them to make are just two different things...

 

I think what BOC wanted listeners to hear and what some of us actually hear are just two different things...

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:27 PM, oscillik said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:25 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 1:04 PM, lumpenprol said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:09 AM, Zeffolia said:

TH is very cheap

 

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

unfortunately, agree.

 

to expand: I was listening to Shackleton today. Although he has some super cheesy moments (arguably bad spoken word stuff), his music has what I feel TH lacks, that voodoo element, that dangerous pagan vibe. To me TH seems rather safe and bloodless. Too contained, not wild enough...

 

I think what BOC set out to make and what you expected them to make are just two different things...

 

I think what BOC wanted listeners to hear and what some of us actually hear are just two different things...

 

I don't think BOC makes music primarily for their listeners; they make it for themselves first and foremost. Also, music is subjective, and water is wet.

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:32 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:27 PM, oscillik said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:25 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 1:04 PM, lumpenprol said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:09 AM, Zeffolia said:

TH is very cheap

 

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

unfortunately, agree.

 

to expand: I was listening to Shackleton today. Although he has some super cheesy moments (arguably bad spoken word stuff), his music has what I feel TH lacks, that voodoo element, that dangerous pagan vibe. To me TH seems rather safe and bloodless. Too contained, not wild enough...

 

I think what BOC set out to make and what you expected them to make are just two different things...

 

I think what BOC wanted listeners to hear and what some of us actually hear are just two different things...

 

I don't think BOC makes music primarily for their listeners; they make it for themselves first and foremost. Also, music is subjective, and water is wet.

 

That's kind of the point I was trying to make.

as for the main topic of this thread, I think the whole point is that it is meant to sound a bit more stripped down, as evidenced by tracks such as Semena Mertvykh), however the album is juxtaposed by tracks like Reach for the Dead, and to me the concept is lost a bit. But I didn't make the album, so I dunno with any certainty what the concept was.

watmm.

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:27 PM, oscillik said:

I think what BOC wanted listeners to hear and what some of us actually hear are just two different things...

 

 

 

 

 

This. I think it's what happens when you lock yourself in a cabin and refuse to listen to any other music. You become out of touch. Who woulda thought?

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:38 PM, oscillik said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:32 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:27 PM, oscillik said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:25 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 1:04 PM, lumpenprol said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:09 AM, Zeffolia said:

TH is very cheap

 

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

unfortunately, agree.

 

to expand: I was listening to Shackleton today. Although he has some super cheesy moments (arguably bad spoken word stuff), his music has what I feel TH lacks, that voodoo element, that dangerous pagan vibe. To me TH seems rather safe and bloodless. Too contained, not wild enough...

 

I think what BOC set out to make and what you expected them to make are just two different things...

 

I think what BOC wanted listeners to hear and what some of us actually hear are just two different things...

 

I don't think BOC makes music primarily for their listeners; they make it for themselves first and foremost. Also, music is subjective, and water is wet.

 

That's kind of the point I was trying to make.

 

as for the main topic of this thread, I think the whole point is that it is meant to sound a bit more stripped down, as evidenced by tracks such as Semena Mertvykh), however the album is juxtaposed by tracks like Reach for the Dead, and to me the concept is lost a bit. But I didn't make the album, so I dunno with any certainty what the concept was.

 

watmm.

 

Yeah, but the OP's query was whether it sounded "cheap" as in they put out something substandard or below their standards - I don't think anyone here could argue that after 8 years, with some of the tracks conceptions going back as far as 2006, that they rushed something out or half-finished. I'd also add that BOC's production on this album is top-notch, sounding just as good through a shitty phone speaker as it does on a home theatre system. So in short, hardly "cheap".

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:40 PM, Candiru said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:27 PM, oscillik said:

I think what BOC wanted listeners to hear and what some of us actually hear are just two different things...

 

 

 

 

 

 

This. I think it's what happens when you lock yourself in a cabin and refuse to listen to any other music. You become out of touch. Who woulda thought?

 

You're making the (wrong) assumption they isolated themselves this whole time - didn't you read where they traveled to New Zealand? Also, considering who we're talking about, I wouldn't ever say BOC are not aware of other music around them. Quite the opposite I would imagine.

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:42 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:38 PM, oscillik said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:32 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:27 PM, oscillik said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:25 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 1:04 PM, lumpenprol said:

 

  On 7/5/2013 at 7:09 AM, Zeffolia said:

TH is very cheap

 

There's little to no subtlety to the quality standards that Geogaddi and TCH set. The tracks aren't lush or well layered, nor are they very progressive or even interesting. They're just boring despite their beauty

unfortunately, agree.

 

to expand: I was listening to Shackleton today. Although he has some super cheesy moments (arguably bad spoken word stuff), his music has what I feel TH lacks, that voodoo element, that dangerous pagan vibe. To me TH seems rather safe and bloodless. Too contained, not wild enough...

 

I think what BOC set out to make and what you expected them to make are just two different things...

 

I think what BOC wanted listeners to hear and what some of us actually hear are just two different things...

 

I don't think BOC makes music primarily for their listeners; they make it for themselves first and foremost. Also, music is subjective, and water is wet.

 

That's kind of the point I was trying to make.

 

as for the main topic of this thread, I think the whole point is that it is meant to sound a bit more stripped down, as evidenced by tracks such as Semena Mertvykh), however the album is juxtaposed by tracks like Reach for the Dead, and to me the concept is lost a bit. But I didn't make the album, so I dunno with any certainty what the concept was.

 

watmm.

 

Yeah, but the OP's query was whether it sounded "cheap" as in they put out something substandard or below their standards - I don't think anyone here could argue that after 8 years, with some of the tracks conceptions going back as far as 2006, that they rushed something out or half-finished. I'd also add that BOC's production on this album is top-notch, sounding just as good through a shitty phone speaker as it does on a home theatre system. So in short, hardly "cheap".

 

I guess it depends on which context the word 'cheap' is being used. As for 'half an album', MDG said many times that this would be a double album...

I can understand you defending the album, but as you said - it's all subjective. If the album feels half finished to some people, then that's for them to say and for them to be correct. They feel it. 'the brothers' don't feel it for them and tell them that they're wrong.

  On 7/5/2013 at 5:44 PM, Joyrex said:

I think there really hasn't been enough time to determine if TH is "cheap" or the "greatest BoC yet" - look at how TCH was similarly dismissed by most, and today it's clearly stood the test of time in comparison to the other BoC albums. Is TCH the best of the 4 LPs? Probably not, but it yielded some songs that are now considered classics.

 

Let's revisit this in a year or two, and see if opinions remain the same.

Hate to be the teachers pet, but this is bang on.

I have this 50/50 feeling that firstly its a brilliant album and secondly there is just some special ingredient missing from the cauldron, but I couldn't tell you what that ingredient is.......