Arctic monkeys

[Lithium05]

NME and Kerrang are both utter shite tho.

[ilovemaiden]

Whilst I agree that that's true, I can appreciate the argument that they're not far enough away from indie to create whet many would consider a mix of styles. I know its a poor argument but I think what many are too ashamed to say is that what they want is a band who would appear on the cover of Kerrang rather than NME. As sad as it may sound I imagine that thet's the basis for a lot of these arguments, and I kind of feel the same.

Don't get me wrong, I like radiohead, but given the choice I would much rather have Green Day or someone this year then Radiohead next year when the other headliners aren't so similar.

(And I know people make the claim that AM are more like Green Day than they are radiohead, and I don't dispute that, but in terms of fan bases and to use the admittedly poor example again, they're more for readers of kerrang than NME)

[theramm]

The NME lost all musical credability ages ago, around the time the current editor (Conor Nicholas??) took over, they had Pete Doherty's cock wedged in their cheek since the Libertines first album. Then 'Smash Hits' stopped publication & the NME stepped in. What used to be called Indie music is now pop music & the NME is Smash Hits

[hearing_aid]

I don't think anyones disputing the fact that these are poor excuses for journalism. Both lack integrity and conviction and are happy to toss aside one "next big thing" like yesterdays jam (points to anyone who gets that reference ) in favour of a shinier newer option that the record companies have handed over a fat sack of cash to promote.

But in terms of those magazines representing a cross section of rock music there are few better ways of preventing the whole argument slipping into a "they're indie" "no they're not" slagging match.

[dewdropmagic]

Both lack integrity and conviction and are happy to toss aside one "next big thing" like yesterdays jam (points to anyone who gets that reference )

[beLIEveR]

Whilst I agree that that's true, I can appreciate the argument that they're not far enough away from indie to create whet many would consider a mix of styles. I know its a poor argument but I think what many are too ashamed to say is that what they want is a band who would appear on the cover of Kerrang rather than NME. As sad as it may sound I imagine that thet's the basis for a lot of these arguments, and I kind of feel the same.

[Lithium05]

Thought it doesn't solve the slagging match, it just changes the terms that is used. Rather than having the "they're indie" "no they're not" slagging match you have a "they're NME" "no they're not" slagging match. Its the same meaningless defnition. Sure Radiohead are mentioned in NME more than kerrang but are Radiohead fans going to be NME fans? I doubt most are.

As has been debated numerous times on these boards defining bands genere generally just isn't that simple.

I just don't see why anyone would want to use those two magazines, which seem to be universally classed as awfull on these boards, to help define the bands genre?!

[kaosmark2]

The point is what the magazines cover, not who reads them. I dont know if youve ever read a kerrang review of reading/leeds but rather than reviewing bands that dont usually grace their pages they just skip over them. Radiohead, Kings of Leon and Arctic Monkeys are all bands who get ignored by kerrang - no live reviews, no album reviews, no interviews, nothing. My point is that kerrang magazine has no headliners to review if those are what we're getting, and this is what people are basing their similarity/diversity arguments on, as their readers/people who are in kerrangs target audience feel neglected by this set of headliners. Whilst there is obviously crossover, whether they read the magazines or not people are largely split the same way.

If youre not comfortable with that comparison how about "bands who would headline Download vs bands who could headline V". Its the same argument however its dressed up.

[ArcticMonkeysUK]

Week before Reading & Leeds so still a possibility!

Arctic Monkeys are pleased to announce that they will be performing at Way Out West Festival 2009 in Gothenburg, Sweden on Friday 14th August.

Tickets are available here

[benisright]

Week before Reading & Leeds so still a possibility!

http://www.arcticmonkeysuk.com/forums/inde...ic=2949&hl=

[Lithium05]

Week before Reading & Leeds so still a possibility!

http://www.arcticmonkeysuk.com/forums/inde...ic=2949&hl=

[noalarms]

Seeing as you're a fan of theirs I imagine I may have to spell it out further... but you do know that where it says "Arctic Monkeys: TBC" in the line-up and rumours page, that means they're definately playing.

I can use visual aids if you want:

A

Shit

Band

Playing

Reading and...

Leeds

Hope that helps

Edited March 4, 2009 by noalarms

[Lithium05]

Shit in your opinion... They'll draw a crowd regardless of your opinion and I wonder which the festival care more about? Plus the whole NME Kerang argument is shit. If Kerang ignore all bands like Arcitics and Radiohead they are just completely close minded. I don't like NME but they review a lot more music than just the style of the Arctic monkeys and Radiohead. Saying bands in NME could mean you are pitting the headliner spot between any big urban, indie, rock, alternative or pop band... against the any metal band that is in kerang.

[ArcticMonkeysUK]

Not true. You make it sound like I'm leading some sort of "Machine Head for headliner" charge. Kerrang leaves the flash in the pan flavour of the month "indie" nonsense like the Arctic Monkeys (who will be remembered for nothing more than being one of the first bands to make it big via the internet rather than the generic songs they excrete) to the NME while the focus on the flavour of the month flash in the pan "emo" nonsense like MCR (who are certainly no worse than AM (or better mind) dispite what your mates might tall you) whilst also covering bands from all over the hard rock spectrum, don't know why that doesn't include radiohead, don't particularly care either.

[thomasowen]

NME, for all its faults, is 100 times better than kerrang. At least in their coverageof Reading and Leeds they reviewed all three headliners (and gave Metallica a great review)

[beLIEveR]

Granted, their two albums were very different, and their first album in particular will not be forgotten in a hurry, with several memorable tunes and singalong choruses. Whether I like the music or not, it was unquestionably one of the albums of the decade. And if I'm honest I liked parts of it.

The second album though will be looked back on as an album that sold millions because the arctic monkeys made it. Much like Be Here Now. What really gets my goat is that they didn't headline off the back of their first album, and now they're going to two years after the release of a weaker second.

[noalarms]

Not true. You make it sound like I'm leading some sort of "Machine Head for headliner" charge. Kerrang leaves the flash in the pan flavour of the month "indie" nonsense like the Arctic Monkeys (who will be remembered for nothing more than being one of the first bands to make it big via the internet rather than the generic songs they excrete) to the NME while the focus on the flavour of the month flash in the pan "emo" nonsense like MCR (who are certainly no worse than AM (or better mind) dispite what your mates might tall you) whilst also covering bands from all over the hard rock spectrum, don't know why that doesn't include radiohead, don't particularly care either.

[ArcticMonkeysUK]

Granted, their two albums were very different, and their first album in particular will not be forgotten in a hurry, with several memorable tunes and singalong choruses. Whether I like the music or not, it was unquestionably one of the albums of the decade. And if I'm honest I liked parts of it.

The second album though will be looked back on as an album that sold millions because the arctic monkeys made it. Much like Be Here Now. What really gets my goat is that they didn't headline off the back of their first album, and now they're going to two years after the release of a weaker second.

Edited March 5, 2009 by ArcticMonkeysUK

[Dunney77]

Who cares...if you dont like them just go somewhere else..like come on look at the possibilities

NME/Radio1 - The Hoosiers

Lock Up - Scouting for Girls

Dance Tent - Scooter

Arctic Monkeys all the way!!

[benisright]

Firstly dunney, none of those bands will ever play reading. And none of them want to. They know they are pop and dont pretend to be anything but.

Secondly, AM's second album was better than the first imo, more mature.

Thirdly, Kerrang focuses on just as many flash in the pan bands as NME.

[Lithium05]

Kerrang focuses on just as many flash in the pan bands as NME.

[ilovemaiden]

Firstly dunney, none of those bands will ever play reading. And none of them want to. They know they are pop and dont pretend to be anything but.

Secondly, AM's second album was better than the first imo, more mature.

Thirdly, Kerrang focuses on just as many flash in the pan bands as NME.

[benisright]

I'm fairly sure I said that!

[ArcticMonkeysUK]

Lol, once again you prove your username totally wrong, no way in hell was their 2nd album better.. I disagree that Kerrang focuses on 'just as many'.. I would say a considerable amount less..

[Azzy G]

Lol, once again you prove your username totally wrong, no way in hell was their 2nd album better.. I disagree that Kerrang focuses on 'just as many'.. I would say a considerable amount less..