Samples from Fundamental

Message

Undertaker · #91 Post by **Undertaker** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 4:07 pm

One of the crowd wrote:
Undertaker wrote:
glennjridge wrote:in any case I am blown away!
fundamental is a big dreamy beautiful masterpiece.
I'm not a big fan of slow songs but by hearing snippets, the ones of Fundamental sound very good.

Dave
Its a sign of getting old, David!!

You are probably right. I've even been listening to Friendly Fire. I'm worried now

Dave

Vicki · #92 Post by **Vicki** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 4:45 pm

Undertaker wrote:
One of the crowd wrote:
Undertaker wrote: I'm not a big fan of slow songs but by hearing snippets, the ones of Fundamental sound very good.

Dave
Its a sign of getting old, David!!
You are probably right. I've even been listening to Friendly Fire. I'm worried now

Dave

Oh my God! I love Friendly fire and other slow ballads by the PSBs... Think I must be getting old either...

AndreasNystrom · #93 Post by **AndreasNystrom** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 5:10 pm

Can i find the samples on any site? they seem to have been gone now.

microramses · #94 Post by **microramses** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 5:17 pm

They are indeed gone... sorry.
BTW, Minimal & Integral are the real potential hits from Fundamental.

I think it will be their 3rd best album after Behaviour and Actually.
It's quite good actually... but the 1st single is a gay-ish stupidity (in my opinion).

gareth · #95 Post by **gareth** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 5:20 pm

microramses wrote:They are indeed gone... sorry.
BTW, Minimal & integral are the real potential hits from Fundamental.

I think it will be their 3rd best album after Behaviour and Actually.
It's quite good actually... but the 1st single is a gay-ish stupidity (in my opinion).

How do you define "gay-ish stupidity" just out of interest?

G

microramses · #96 Post by **microramses** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 5:27 pm

well... it's just a play of words. It's indeed gay-ish 'cause they reflect the Bush-Blair relationship in the way they describe a gay relationship not based on real political criteria (unlike Integral which is quite good lirically).

It's a stupidity not just 'cause the single is called "I'm with stupid" but because having Minimal and Integral on the album IT IS A CRIME, A REAL CRIME to release this single as the lead single. The album will die in 3 or 4 weeks... they will need m much more than "the resurrectionist" to rise the album from the death...

Pity!

microramses · #97 Post by **microramses** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 5:30 pm

Unless... they bring the 2nd single release foward.

Darkstar · #98 Post by **Darkstar** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 6:18 pm

I'm arrived to late to hear these samples....

Janet Street-Porter · Wed 26 Apr 2006, 6:36 pm

I didn't listen to the samples but reckon the album will be rubbish. What I haven't heard really pisses me off, particularly Minimal. I think the sample I haven't heard of Indefinite leave to remain is pretty crap too. Give up now.

b@man · #100 Post by **b@man** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 6:47 pm

Janet Street-Porter wrote:I didn't listen to the samples but reckon the album will be rubbish. What I haven't heard really pisses me off, particularly Minimal. I think the sample I haven't heard of Indefinite leave to remain is pretty crap too. Give up now.

Nice irony. Do you refer to the people who said they don`t like it??? Must everybody say wow what superb clips this will be the greatest Album of all time???

Frequency · #101 Post by **Frequency** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 6:50 pm

In that case JSP, I look forward to your full review of the album when you've had the chance to not listen to the tracks in all their glory

Janet Street-Porter · Wed 26 Apr 2006, 7:04 pm

b@man wrote:Must everybody say wow what superb clips this will be the greatest Album of all time???

Certainly not. But how the hell can you judge the album from random 30 second clips? When you go to the cinema do you wander in half way through, watch the film for quarter of an hour and then leave? Do you read a chapter of a novel then throw the book away?

pulse · #103 Post by **pulse** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 7:36 pm

Undertaker wrote: You are only on here because everyone was slamming Erasures w*nk effort of an album and that it reached a massive 102.

Some people seriously don't put as much value on chart positions as *you* do... especially for a *side project* LOL!

Undertaker wrote: Like i keep saying, you have only started posting 2 weeks ago, mainly in the Union Street thread. Have an opinion all you want, but don't expect people to keep quiet when all you are doing here is criticising PSB and posting about Erasure.

Once again, and for the last time, I have lurked around under a different name for a long time. I wasn't criticising PSB - re-read my post. I said they unfairly chose some wrong parts of songs so I'll reserve my judgement... but not impressed so far. Is that a sin? And who said I expect people to keep quiet when I voice my opinion? It seems that you are the only one getting your back up over a non-existent issue. Is bullying like this condoned on this forum?

Undertaker wrote: Oh, and i'm not the Undertaker over at your Erasure towers. How many times do you need telling.

Right.

So which of your many banned incarnations are you then on that forum? In your avatar, you are wearing your underwear, sitting in the dark in a few of them I think. Don't forget that we see IP addresses.

Undertaker wrote: you also have said before that working with Trevor Horn ''is a step backwards''

Yes. I still think it is. It's a cheap, cacophonic, hollow production sound from the past that I think should remain in the past. I think PSB deserve and should aspire to better, more forward things. Oh, I'm sorry, is that a sin as well? To hope for a band you like to take a certain direction?

Regardless, I hope to hear samples of these songs at their choruses at least. Then I will judge them accordingly... and that will be *MY* opinion.

Flaffer · #104 Post by **Flaffer** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 7:40 pm

an Erasure fan talking about sounds from the past, that truly is ironic. A covers album, acoustic re-interpretationa and Vince Clarkes obsessions with old synths, truly progressive

pulse · #105 Post by **pulse** » Wed 26 Apr 2006, 7:59 pm

Flaffer wrote:an Erasure fan talking about sounds from the past, that truly is ironic. A covers album, acoustic re-interpretationa and Vince Clarkes obsessions with old synths, truly progressive

A covers album (my least favourite album of theirs) is a re-interpretation of old standards from as far back as the 50's, brought into the synth world.

Acoustic reinterpretations were recorded years ago but were decided to be released by Mute rather than for fans only, as they showed off the great melodic songwriting prowess... and it gave the band yet another excuse to tour for the fans, and as a tie-over between official electronic studio albums. It's actually quite pretty in an understated way. PSB should try it as a side project for fans - some of their songs would work amazingly well also.

Now, the obsession with old synths... don't get me started. I *wish* that obsession was still there, as the last couple albums have been a mixture of soft synths and analogue. Keep in mind that the synth, analogue, digital, or software, will be there forever now, just as the guitar is. Using these older instruments don't date you, but the way you use them in music production does. Nothing sounds as good to my ears as a perfect pop song executed on analogue synths.

But we digress... this thread is for thoughts on the (now defunct) Fundamental samples before it was derailed by someone who brought up Erasure...