"Integral" vs. "TSAGS"!

Message

Nickname · #16 Post by **Nickname** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 3:08 pm

singysingysingy wrote:I agree with everyone who praises "Integral" and wants it as a single, but I always wonder why "TSAGS" doesn't get the same attention and support? IMO both songs are outstanding and should /must have been singles from "Fundamental". "TSAGS" also gets fantastic reactions at the show and is a song which screams for a single release with a controversial video! So let's not overlook "TSAGS" while we hype "Integral"...

I love both and I've always said these ones were the best songs from Fundamental by far.

pulse · #17 Post by **pulse** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 3:50 pm

Hmmmm, dated good vs. dated bad.

I never understood TSAGS. It sounds like bad Alan Parsons Project cross pollinated with an ELO-light, prog synthrock style. Not engaging in any way whatsoever, and the vocals are bunk on it. I distinctly remember a carload of laughter with my friends when it came on, as they were all in disbelief that something like this could make it to release.

As for "Integral", I love the energy of it and the chorus was quite infectious, for the first month of listening. However, it seems like it pales in comparison to the other songs they make in that style - RLD, GW, Where the streets have no name (I can't take my eyes off you), "Somewhere" etc.

If it were between the two, I'd have to go for "Integral".

(Not sure why "Luna Park" wasn't released, but that's beside the point).

leesmapman · #18 Post by **leesmapman** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 4:00 pm

Where the streets have no name (I can't take my eyes off you)?

Riikka · #19 Post by **Riikka** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 4:04 pm

These are, in my opinion, the two best songs on the album. But Integral sounds more like a hit and a single.

I still cannot understand why the record company can decide which songs to be singles?! It is artists doing their music, is it!!

drunk14 · #20 Post by **drunk14** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 4:21 pm

Unfortunately truth is that Integral and Sodom could be briilliant singles and not released these songs is one of the bigger (maybe eben the biggest) mistake in PSB history. I know it souds very seriously, but it's my point of view...

Pet Shop Girl · #21 Post by **Pet Shop Girl** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 5:48 pm

pulse wrote:Hmmmm, dated good vs. dated bad.

I never understood TSAGS. It sounds like bad Alan Parsons Project cross pollinated with an ELO-light, prog synthrock style. Not engaging in any way whatsoever, and the vocals are bunk on it. I distinctly remember a carload of laughter with my friends when it came on, as they were all in disbelief that something like this could make it to release.

As for "Integral", I love the energy of it and the chorus was quite infectious, for the first month of listening. However, it seems like it pales in comparison to the other songs they make in that style - RLD, GW, Where the streets have no name (I can't take my eyes off you), "Somewhere" etc.

If it were between the two, I'd have to go for "Integral".

(Not sure why "Luna Park" wasn't released, but that's beside the point).

I agree with you totally!

Pet Shop Girl · #22 Post by **Pet Shop Girl** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 5:51 pm

I love TSAGS, but I still think Integral is far better.

Flaffer · #23 Post by **Flaffer** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 7:44 pm

pulse wrote: Not engaging in any way whatsoever, and the vocals are bunk on it. I distinctly remember a carload of laughter with my friends when it came on, as they were all in disbelief that something like this could make it to release.

Have you taken your carload of friends on a highway recently? They must have laughing like The Joker when that came on

Flaffer · #24 Post by **Flaffer** » Tue 19 Jun 2007, 7:47 pm

Riikka wrote:I still cannot understand why the record company can decide which songs to be singles?! It is artists doing their music, is it!!

erm because they are the ones who undertake the marketing and distribution and in some cases pay the recording costs. PSB did have a clause in their contract that they could choose which tracks were to be released as singles. That may no longer be the case as they aren't as succesful as before hence they have less negotiating power

glennjridge · #25 Post by **glennjridge** » Wed 20 Jun 2007, 12:19 am

IMO "I'm with stupid" was the closet thing they have written in a long time that had a shot. worthy of being called a single out of the whole lot.

it had the timely political angle working for it, it had the strong chorus and a title that really made it stand out in a list.

realistically theres no sense complaining they dont write singles, they do sometimes, but its just not enough with airplay these days. the culture is too youth obsessed.

ems · #26 Post by **ems** » Wed 20 Jun 2007, 12:26 am

The only 2 songs I've really listened to on the album. Call me an Erasure junkie...but I do promise to give it a chance here soon as I'm done unpacking.

TSAGS should have been the first single. Fundamental the second.

Steve Fett · #27 Post by **Steve Fett** » Wed 20 Jun 2007, 5:22 am

Bothe TSAGS and Integral had single potential.

Its a preference thing. I'd go for Integral....more stomping. TSAGS is a bit more "novelty" like New York city boy....not that there is anything wrong with that !

"...sun, sex, sin, death and destruction" is one of my fave moments in a PSB track

kdpsb · #28 Post by **kdpsb** » Wed 20 Jun 2007, 5:42 am

I think TSAGS is a really good song but very "pompous" for non PSB fans people.
So, in that case I prefer INTEGRAL, is more powerful, easy listening and contemporaneous lyric

Undertaker · #29 Post by **Undertaker** » Wed 20 Jun 2007, 7:23 am

TSAGS is a song crying out for a video similar to Welcome To The Pleasuredome but Integral should have been a single. Then again, Shameless, Kings Cross, In the Night, Ressurectionist and probably The Theatre, should have all been singles. They weren't. Which is probably a good thing because it gave us more reasons to whinge.

Dave

"Integral" vs. "TSAGS"!

Re: "Integral" vs. "TSAGS"!