Does anyone here actually LIKE the new Trail of the Dead album?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Ok, it's been a few months, you've had your time to digest it.

Do you like this "brilliant" album that many magazines and music critics have been raving about?

Sadly, my personal experience with it was that it was mediocre from start to finish, didn't break any new ground, and was in fact, pretty irritating. Then again, I just couldn't bear to listen to it more than twice. Was your experience different?

Manny Parsons, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

hardly man...it's this year's wearer of the emperor's new duds.

the only thing that's cool about it is the sleeve art.

has anyone seen these guys live ? are they really so "incendiary" and "crazy" ? in pittsburgh they threw some water bottles around, and the schtick ended there.

mike bott, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Alright so i love the album. Start to finish.
The Live show is another story. Great, they have 10 different guitars changes each song. Great, they break their pricy shit at their "big" shows. I just was not all that impressed. It lacked something that i can't put a finger on.

Brock K., Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The new album is perfect.

They are a lot of fun live.

Yancey, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

...zzzzz...

Dave M., Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Very 7/10. I've hardly listened to it since the original purchase, but it wasn't offensive or anything.

Dom Passantino, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Given their outrageous name, I thought they would be a lot more abrasive, violent, and hardcore than they are. Last summer I borrowed their first two albums from my friend, and to my immense surprise they were incredibly poppy.

At any rate, regarding the new album: is it one that takes many listens to really appreciate? I thought it was annoyingly cliche when I heard it, which is why I didn't really give it much of a chance.

Manny Parsons, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

shouldn't a record that's a *very* 7/10 be demoted down to 4 or 5 based on its mediocrity alone?

Dave M., Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

i'm the biggest prick about music sometimes. i hate ANYTHING that gets described as "fun" or "unapologetically rock'n'roll" or "energetic". the white stripes are the worst band i can think of right now ... i'd probably rather listen to culture club or something.

BUT! i really like the new trail of dead album. i really like the guitar playing and the drumming and the singing (but i suppose the lyrics are a bit suspect). the whole record has this kind of epic feel to it (sounds lame i know) and a lot of real power!

i think more people should like this record. no it's not "10.0" or "five stars" but it's pretty fucking good. i don't think there's been a lot of good punk/rock music released this year so this definitely stands out.

fields of salmon, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Christ. Do we have to bash the White Stripes in every fucking thread?

Nate Patrin, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

It's cheap, easy entertainment!

Ned Raggett, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

But I thought the White Stripes were "cheap, easy entertainment" which was considered a problem and oh fuck it.

Nate Patrin, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

yes the new grateful dead alb is good. this 22nd version of 'Dark star' i rank as the 5th best I've EVAH heard. MAN!

Julio Desouza, Friday, 12 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I downloaded some songs and I thought they were absolutely rubbish - yeah yeah big surprise but honestly, what do they do which other bands don't do?? I *really* don't get it. I can see why people like the White Stripes (for instance, sorry Nate!) and I can hear that they're doing something different, it just doesn't appeal to me.

(NB Nate the focus group when it goes up will let you know that there are loads of closet Stripes lovahs! Hang on in there - you are not alone!)

Tom, Saturday, 13 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

What I thought was funny was how Pitchfork hated the Andrew WK album, the justification being that it was loud, catchy, bombastic, rockin', but completely empty and soulless. Which is exactly what could be said about the Trail of Dead, except they gave it some ridiculously high rating, solely because the TOD album has pretensions of intelligence (but no actual intelligence), and the Andrew WK album has none. So as long as you PRETEND you have something to say, it's okay to be loud and obnoxious.

Nick A., Saturday, 13 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The first song almost carries the album, but I dropped it behind the fridge.

adam, Saturday, 13 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

"they gave it some ridiculously high rating"

Yeah -- 10.0 out of 10.0 . Jeezis.

Nate Patrin, Saturday, 13 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Nate made a good point about the ToD v. WK reviews, and about ToD the band. They strike me as a bunch of stupid assholes. I found nothing about their live show to be amusing, least of all the smashing of the instruments. Plus, their lyrics blow. Atleast WK doesn't front about that stuff.

That said, I dig Source Tags. Not a ton, but I'd give it an 8.0. It baffles me how anyone could call it "perfect." The sound and production are really solid, but the songwriting is weak. It's even weak compared with Madonna.

Allyour Base, Saturday, 13 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, the first thing that struck me about it was that the songs weren't that hot. Someone on the PFM message board astutely pointed out, "any album that has 'relative ways' on it couldn't be a 10.0."

Manny Parsons, Sunday, 14 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Uh oh...looks like I'm outnumbered here...

I love this album to death. So sue me. It seems to me like it's a very easy album to pick on. But unless you're diametrically opposed to anything with guitars in it (and there seems to be a few of you), you must surely see SOMETHING of merit in either "Baudelaire", "It Was There That I Saw You" or the title track.

I can't really put my finger on it - there's just something seemingly, well, CLASSIC about the album to me, and not just because it's a rock record or anything like that.

Simon H., Sunday, 14 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I like it but there's definitely nothing that's quite as amazing as "Mistakes and Regrets" on it. There's a few in the league of "Mark David Chapman" though so that keeps me kinda happy.

electric sound of jim, Sunday, 14 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

agreed. mistakes and regrets is the shit. there is an amazing "rough mix" of that that used to be available through the website. it's edgier and more aggressive than the album mix. get it if you can.

fields of salmon, Monday, 15 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

To say that someone's songwriting is "even weak when compared with Madonna" says pretty much nothing!

Clarke B., Monday, 15 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

six years pass...

this album sucks bigtime, and it seems that it has already been forgotten despite the initial critical acclaim

res, Tuesday, 12 August 2008 21:45 (seventeen years ago)

Source Tags and Codes? I think it's still a winner. "Relative Ways" seems to come in for a bit of stick upthread but it's one of my faves and they still play it live. The spoken bit at the end of "Days of Being Wild" is pretty much as white-knuckle intense as anything off Madonna. And it's so well put together, with all the little interludes and lead-ins.

ledge, Tuesday, 12 August 2008 22:15 (seventeen years ago)

i haven't heard it, but i bet pitchfork regrets its rating.

Tape Store, Tuesday, 12 August 2008 22:18 (seventeen years ago)

i still like source tags and codes a lot.

M@tt He1ges0n, Tuesday, 12 August 2008 22:20 (seventeen years ago)

i was into this album for a few weeks after reading the pitckfork review. it was actually one of the pitchfork reviewed albums that made me decide to give indie a chance.

all i really remember of it now is that there were liked 2, maybe 3, good songs toward the middle surrounded by a bunch of artsy filler. days of being wild was one of those stand-out songs for me. if the whole album had been full of that, i might still listen to it on occasion.

rockapads, Tuesday, 12 August 2008 23:07 (seventeen years ago)

source tags and codes is good

latebloomer, Tuesday, 12 August 2008 23:32 (seventeen years ago)

one year passes...

century of self seems pretty good!

to the sound of old g-dep (M@tt He1ges0n), Monday, 17 August 2009 17:08 (sixteen years ago)

three months pass...

it *is* pretty good!

like i've said elsewhere, 'luna park' is possibly my song of 2009. i don't know how this has happened.

threadbump brought on by hearing 'intelligence' which is an awesome dance experiment they did on an ep

'worlds apart' is fucking ace btw, their best album. might even put it in my top 20 of the decade. well. hmm.

a. cole, u thic (acoleuthic), Thursday, 3 December 2009 02:16 (sixteen years ago)

four years pass...

At some point, I wondered if Pitchfork had made a mistake in awarding this album a 10.0. But each time I go back to Source Tags & Codes, I hear the same things that drew me in the first time, and what became exponentially louder with each listen: this album takes everything one can learn from indie rock and applies it to such a broader spectrum, where it can reach rock fans of all ages and tastes, where it can open the door for teenagers who aren't ready for Sonic Youth and My Bloody Valentine, and make the rest of us realize why we love this music to begin with. It's not a groundbreaking record. It's not even an original record. But you can draw a line to Violator, Siamese Dream, and Automatic for the People-- albums that indie snobs just could not understand in the early 1990s, but that spoke volumes to the rest of us, ready for something with more to offer than commercial pop. This is that kind of an album: tormented and juvenile, but god, what a fucking record. Trail of Dead are fooling no one: they came of age to these albums in the 1990s, and like the bands they grew up with, drew from the best of counterculture rock to create one of their own, for the kids. Their influences are not Berlin-era Bowie and New Order, not Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd, not Woody Guthrie and The Flying Burrito Brothers: they're Sonic Youth, Fugazi, Drive Like Jehu and Jawbox. And when I listen to it, I feel as though I'm 15 years old discovering this world for the first time. --Ryan Schreiber

jaymc, Saturday, 1 March 2014 07:01 (twelve years ago)

ha at first i was like "omg does ryan schreiber still talk about indie snobs in 2014" but that's actually from 2002

da croupier, Saturday, 1 March 2014 17:03 (twelve years ago)

Yeah, I was looking through Pitchfork's best albums of 2002 list, and that blurb stood out as very much of its time.

jaymc, Saturday, 1 March 2014 17:45 (twelve years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.