Mumford and sons

Spiritoftheseventies

Have been hearing this band a lot and I've noticed that a lot of their songs seemed to be structured in the same way. Three songs i have very identifiable banjo solos, and two of them have the pretty much the same harmonies.
Would just like to hear something a bit different from them. Initially liked Little Lion Man but needless to say the endless playing of it on every single show just killed it for me.

Xavi6

'Dustbowl Dance' is a work of genius

Spiritoftheseventies

Xavi6 wrote: »

'Dustbowl Dance' is a work of genius

Not convinced Xavi for reasons outlined above. Lyrically its a bit laboured as well.

nommm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK9XWyINMoA

My favourite Mumford and Sons song.

I think they said they want to do one continous song for the next album.

Xavi6

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Not convinced Xavi for reasons outlined above. Lyrically its a bit laboured as well.

What's the problem with using a banjo? It makes a nice change from the usual guitar/bass/drums setup.

There's good use of piano as well, and the backing vocals are effective imo.

The fact the your man is playing drums while signing 'Dustbowl Dance' also adds to the song for me. Takes a lot of talent to do that effectively.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ4COGXU5B0

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

Spiritoftheseventies

Nothing wrong with using banjos xavi. REM used Banjos very well in the intro to "I believe" and also on Wendell Gee. But last songs I have heard of them have pretty much used the same Banjo solo on The Cave and Roll away your stone.
Like I said would like to see them just try something a bit different re the way they write their songs. The sound is generally good but wears a bit then when reproduced.

Zak Flaps

overrated band...their songs sound the same...nothing against banjo, except when it's played the same way for every song...they are a commercial band, a mainstream act...they are by no means alternative....so why in this thread?

Alan Noir

The chorus of that song 'The Cave' just reminds me of the 'I am gopher boy' song off the original south park album.

Teferi

Zak Flaps wrote: »

overrated band...their songs sound the same...nothing against banjo, except when it's played the same way for every song...they are a commercial band, a mainstream act...they are by no means alternative....so why in this thread?

*clicks profile*

*statistics*

*find all posts by user*

Ah...I see.

df1985

i love the album i have to say, really impressed with their sound. i have a few "too cool for school" mates who dont like them anymore since everyone else likes them. not alternative enough anymore apparently!

Zak Flaps

Teferi wrote: »

*clicks profile*

*statistics*

*find all posts by user*

Ah...I see.

good for you....touched a nerve?

Teferi

Haha, not at all. I was amused by the fact that you seem to dislike 3 pretty popular bands for little more than the fact they are popular.

S.M.B.

Don't like them. Not alternative enough for me really.

Zak Flaps

Teferi wrote: »

Haha, not at all. I was amused by the fact that you seem to dislike 3 pretty popular bands for little more than the fact they are popular.

What makes you think I don't like those bands because they are popular? I presume there are over 20 popular bands you don't like,as there are hundreds of popular bands. I don't like those bands because I don't like their music. I was just wondering why they were in the alternative section, that was all. Alternative to me is music that is left of centre, music that may be even considered risky or has a lot of originality. To others it could be something else. I see these bands as playing very safe music with not a lot of originality,it's a personal taste thing. I wish these bands no harm!!
I dislike a lot of popular bands, but not because they're popular. I just think it's not a great time for music at the moment.

lordgoat

Alternative, to me, is the most ridiculous of all genre titles, every band can could classed as alternative depending on ones outlook to music.

Teferi

Zak Flaps wrote: »

What makes you think I don't like those bands because they are popular? I presume there are over 20 popular bands you don't like,as there are hundreds of popular bands. I don't like those bands because I don't like their music. I was just wondering why they were in the alternative section, that was all. Alternative to me is music that is left of centre, music that may be even considered risky or has a lot of originality. To others it could be something else. I see these bands as playing very safe music with not a lot of originality,it's a personal taste thing. I wish these bands no harm!!
I dislike a lot of popular bands, but not because they're popular. I just think it's not a great time for music at the moment.

I think you are misunderstanding what alternative rock is. Alternative rock has been popular since the early 90's with Oasis etc. and doesn't really mean that the music is for the alternative listener. If you are looking for stuff that is on the bleeding edge then you should probably go to the experimental forum...

flahavaj

lordgoat wrote: »

Alternative, to me, is the most ridiculous of all genre titles, every band can could classed as alternative depending on ones outlook to music.

I tend to agree.

I have only two genres into which I categorise music. Music I like and music I don't like.

People getting bogged down in arguments as to which genre a band is, or worse still using it as a reason to criticise a particular band is a bit stupid IMO.

Spiritoftheseventies

flahavaj wrote: »

I tend to agree.

I have only two genres into which I categorise music. Music I like and music I don't like.

People getting bogged down in arguments as to which genre a band is, or worse still using it as a reason to criticise a particular band is a bit stupid IMO.

Normally speaking that would apply flah. But seeing this is the Alternative and Indie it doesnt. We are trying to determine if Mumford and Sons musically can be defined as alternative for the purpose of the forum.

Zak Flaps

flahavaj wrote: »

People getting bogged down in arguments as to which genre a band is, or worse still using it as a reason to criticise a particular band is a bit stupid IMO.

I would agree with you in that point.
But I wasn't criticizing the band because of their genre, I don't like their music because I just don't like it. I just thought it was inappropriate that they were heralded as an alternative/indie band.

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Normally speaking that would apply flah. But seeing this is the Alternative and Indie it doesnt. We are trying to determine if Mumford and Sons musically can be defined as alternative for the purpose of the forum.

I agree here.

Teferi wrote: »

I think you are misunderstanding what alternative rock is. Alternative rock has been popular since the early 90's with Oasis etc. and doesn't really mean that the music is for the alternative listener. If you are looking for stuff that is on the bleeding edge then you should probably go to the experimental forum...

You think wrong.
Where was the word rock mentioned?
what about the 80's (Pixies,Smiths,Cure etc...).
70's (Velvet Underground,Joy Division,Talking Heads etc...)
60's (Zappa, Doors etc...)
Showing your ignorance youngster.
You've gone way off the point by the way.
Would you class M+Sons as an alternative/indie band?

Teferi

Zak Flaps wrote: »

You think wrong.
Where was the word rock mentioned?
what about the 80's (Pixies,Smiths,Cure etc...).
70's (Velvet Underground,Joy Division,Talking Heads etc...)
60's (Zappa, Doors etc...)
Showing your ignorance youngster.
You've gone way off the point by the way.
Would you class M+Sons as an alternative/indie band?

And you are just showing your ignorance. I should have said "brought to the mainstream" and perhaps you would have been better able to understand. The bands you mentioned are rock bands by the way and I would class Mumford to be somewhere between indie and folk.

Also, trying to dismiss my argument by calling me young is both silly and insulting.

lordgoat

Zak Flaps wrote: »

I would agree with you in that point.
But I wasn't criticizing the band because of their genre, I don't like their music because I just don't like it. I just thought it was inappropriate that they were heralded as an alternative/indie band.



I agree here.




You think wrong.
Where was the word rock mentioned?
what about the 80's (Pixies,Smiths,Cure etc...).
70's (Velvet Underground,Joy Division,Talking Heads etc...)
60's (Zappa, Doors etc...)
Showing your ignorance youngster.
You've gone way off the point by the way.
Would you class M+Sons as an alternative/indie band?

These are all rock bands imo.

Not directed at quoted poster.


TBH i'm sick of people saying x band shouldn't be in alt indie, for the majortity i will let stay here as these petty little tit for tats detract from a pretty decent community in here. So M&S regardless of ones opinions on them will not be moved from alt/indie.

punchdrunk

they are bit bland to be honest
it all sounds a bit forced

Zak Flaps

Teferi wrote: »

And you are just showing your ignorance. I should have said "brought to the mainstream" and perhaps you would have been better able to understand. The bands you mentioned are rock bands by the way and I would class Mumford to be somewhere between indie and folk.

Also, trying to dismiss my argument by calling me young is both silly and insulting.

I know they are rock bands,i was just using examples of popular alternative bands to show you that alternative music didn't just become popular in the 90s as you had claimed.
But there are plenty of alternative acts out there (and in the past) that would not be classified as rock. You seemed to suggest that alternative is alternative rock.
Ok if that's what you class M+S to be, that's your opinion and I will respect that. Apologies if I came across too strongly.

Zak Flaps

lordgoat wrote: »

These are all rock bands imo.

Not directed at quoted poster.


TBH i'm sick of people saying x band shouldn't be in alt indie, for the majortity i will let stay here as these petty little tit for tats detract from a pretty decent community in here. So M&S regardless of ones opinions on them will not be moved from alt/indie.

Apologies Lordgoat, i have just tried to end the particular "tit for tat"...i was just offering my opinion on M+S in the beginning and it got a little out of hand....

Doc

I like them.;)

lordgoat

Zak Flaps wrote: »

Apologies Lordgoat, i have just tried to end the particular "tit for tat"...i was just offering my opinion on M+S in the beginning and it got a little out of hand....

Def no need for apologies, i have no problem with a thread going a bit off topic as long as the discussion is decent and not agressive (which it wasn't)

maccored

Mumford and Sons have the same crap format for every single - quiet vocal accoustic that then breaks into duelling banjos with a dance back beat. I wouldnt call them alternative, I'd call them crap.

Beeinmybonnet

Xavi6 wrote: »

'Dustbowl Dance' is a work of genius

LOVE it!

Although they do border on being a bit diddley eye!

Woden

Yeah I like them. Saw them on Monday in Stockholm and the gig was really enjoyable they played some new stuff also and the venue was quite small.

As an aside then happened to stumble across the Pitchfork review of the album yesterday. Twas fairly slammed.

thesultan

Great performances the other night on Jools Holland

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTqcnFDWCvU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzjyU7R4zjI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmrtyuSiTYU

There should be a second album soon enough one would think

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

Miguel_Sanchez

Threads merged.

hon pa

I think they are great to be honest! Maybe they aren't alternative but they're certainly different to the rest of the stuff out there.

Sútalún

thesultan wrote: »

There should be a second album soon enough one would think

Don't know who'd be thinking that!?? Very soon to be releasing something new. In fact while I think they're album was quite good and very listenable, I think if they brought out a quick album without any progression it would be a travesty. The big thing holding them back is an element of "sameness" to their songs.

me-skywalker

Sútalún wrote: »

Don't know who'd be thinking that!?? Very soon to be releasing something new.

Many bands have a fierce creative passion and songs can just spill out and albums spill out of them. Not every band follows the traditional mould of album tour break record, album tour break scenario. I dont think in this instance they will be releasing soemthign so soon but dont always discount it.

I think people can get abit uptight about bands releasing albums too soon or sometimes too long in between. Just enjoy what is there at the moment and let them do their own thing in their own creative zone.

Spiritoftheseventies

Sútalún wrote: »

Don't know who'd be thinking that!?? Very soon to be releasing something new. In fact while I think they're album was quite good and very listenable, I think if they brought out a quick album without any progression it would be a travesty. The big thing holding them back is an element of "sameness" to their songs.

Agree there. Its seems to be a very big problem with them. As explained in OP the songs seem to have same ingredients in all of them.
Looking for them to come out with something really different with their next single

thesultan

It didn't hinder the Beatles in any way! I remember hearing 'Little Lion Man' a good while back. Amazing too that they have no drummer.

The intro to 'Roll Away Your Stone' reminded me of Blind Melon but what great song it is.

Twee.

I didn't think I'd like this band as much as I do! I picked up the album after hearing two tracks and it has really grown on me. It's not exactly musical genius, but hell not everything has to be to be enjoyed. I really like Awake My Soul.

Spiritoftheseventies

Twee. wrote: »

I didn't think I'd like this band as much as I do! I picked up the album after hearing two tracks and it has really grown on me. It's not exactly musical genius, but hell not everything has to be to be enjoyed. I really like Awake My Soul.

Some of the harmonies are good but just seems that in terms of the metre to many of the songs are forced.
Would like to see a bit more depth to their lyrics as well.

Reckoner91

Have only heard Little Lion Man, The Cave, and one other song that had them walking and there was a huge wind. Don't remember the name of the song.
They're alright I guess, a little bit too 'Pub Music' for my taste, but still pretty good nonetheless.
One problem I have is that 'Little Lion Man' is very corny and cliché for my taste. The very end where he goes "Didn't I my Dear? (Didn't I my Dear...) just made me cringe....a very slight cringe, but still a cringe nonetheless. The rest of the song is just the chorus mixed with filler for verses, and also one part where he's just going 'Ahhhh' higher and higher. That part I actually loved, and when he's also banging a drum on the ground with his foot while also playing guitar AND singing, shows true skill.

TL;DR, respect them, but not really my thing