For my 1st post, I'll be talking about 'Under The Gun'
Posted: 20 Feb 2008, 23:28
Greetings.
I'm a new Sisters fan. I admit I don't know a whole lot about the band. I used to frequent goth clubs and heard the hits played all the time (This Corrosion, Dominion, Alice, a few others). A friend of mine, who is a huge fan, showed me the b-side 'Afterhours', which I personally love. So, I decided to do some reading up on them, as well as sampling a few tracks from the internet.
One of the things that caught my fascination was reading fan reviews/reactions to the greatest hits comp, specifically the song 'Under The Gun'. There seemed to be a lot of hate built up towards it, so that interested me enough to check it out.
Anyway, I ended up playing the song again and again. It hooked me. Now, I know their other songs don't sound exactly like this, but because of this song, I want to buy their albums. But more importantly than that, I want to discuss the negativity that this song seems to generate.
What the f**k?!
The melodies are great! Great synth lines, great simple guitar, great dueling vocals. Sure, it's bombastic as hell, but isn't 'This Corrosion' at least 10 minutes long and has a chorus of children singing in it? (I've made this comparison before and gotten negative feedback from SoM fans...'Don't compare that song to This Corrosion!!!' etc) Sure, it's slickly produced, but it was 1993. Production can change with the times. That's why an 80s synth album like Floodland isn't going to be replicated again anytime soon. I actually think the slick production serves the song better.
It's also one of their 'different' songs. 'Afterhours' is different because it's a noise/mood music experiment, UTG is different because it's a 'mainstream' sounding pop song with a female vocalist.
So it's pop, it's bombastic, it's different...but it's still dark! And the lyrics aren't bad at all! I say give it another chance.
I feel kind of strange that this is the song that drew me into the band, but there you go.
I'm a new Sisters fan. I admit I don't know a whole lot about the band. I used to frequent goth clubs and heard the hits played all the time (This Corrosion, Dominion, Alice, a few others). A friend of mine, who is a huge fan, showed me the b-side 'Afterhours', which I personally love. So, I decided to do some reading up on them, as well as sampling a few tracks from the internet.
One of the things that caught my fascination was reading fan reviews/reactions to the greatest hits comp, specifically the song 'Under The Gun'. There seemed to be a lot of hate built up towards it, so that interested me enough to check it out.
Anyway, I ended up playing the song again and again. It hooked me. Now, I know their other songs don't sound exactly like this, but because of this song, I want to buy their albums. But more importantly than that, I want to discuss the negativity that this song seems to generate.
What the f**k?!
The melodies are great! Great synth lines, great simple guitar, great dueling vocals. Sure, it's bombastic as hell, but isn't 'This Corrosion' at least 10 minutes long and has a chorus of children singing in it? (I've made this comparison before and gotten negative feedback from SoM fans...'Don't compare that song to This Corrosion!!!' etc) Sure, it's slickly produced, but it was 1993. Production can change with the times. That's why an 80s synth album like Floodland isn't going to be replicated again anytime soon. I actually think the slick production serves the song better.
It's also one of their 'different' songs. 'Afterhours' is different because it's a noise/mood music experiment, UTG is different because it's a 'mainstream' sounding pop song with a female vocalist.
So it's pop, it's bombastic, it's different...but it's still dark! And the lyrics aren't bad at all! I say give it another chance.
I feel kind of strange that this is the song that drew me into the band, but there you go.
But he, why would u try 
