Hurt - Vol. II
Record Label: Capitol Records
Release Date: September 25, 2007
Hurt's singer and lyricist J. Loren Wince is an interesting man indeed. His lyrics consist of nothing more than self-loathing reminiscences of his childhood or past experiences with lovers or drugs. Yet there's something in the core of him calling out for redemption in his lyrics, and even in his pain-filled voice, but he can't find it; he's forcing himself to relive all of his horrible experiences through the art of music, or is that a curse for him? I find myself leaning towards the latter.
But his pain, unfortunately, makes for eerie and hauntingly beautiful music that remains in the core of me even to this day. "Better" is the prime example of Wince's pain, cleverly depicting a drug addiction through what some might mistake as a simple break-up song. "Loded" is a song about the rejection of drugs, which includes Wince pulling off some crazy-genius half-rap. Opener "Summers Lost" channels Tool with its opening acoustic guitars, which builds and builds to one of the craziest break-downs I've ever had the pleasure of hearing, with thrashing guitars and insane drums intertwined with complex stop-start madness.
Best of all is "Talking to God" which is about a mother's overbearing love of God and abuse and neglect of her children. (Wince's childhood, perhaps?) It is chilling in sound and the lyrics are frighteningly real. Most horrifying, however, is the song's incorporation of a churchy-sounding choir towards the end. "Alone With the Sea" has a well-placed banjo thrown into the mix that only adds to Hurt's creative nature. "Thank You for Listening" gives lead guitarist Paul Spatola time to shine with his classic rock/bluesy guitar solo. Expect to see him in Top 10 lists in years to come.
Eric Greedy's production for the album is far superior to Vol. I, including a much clearer and crisper sound. The musicianship in this album is tighter than ever for the band, going beyond alt. metal into an experimental sound that will forever leave its mark on music in the best way possible.
In my opinion, Vol. II is the finest album of 2007 and since. No album has effected me quite like this one. Rest assured, this will be a band that will be talked about in years to come for their creative approach to a genre of music that desperately needed the helping hand back into what it once was: a complex way to express feeling. And no doubt about it, Hurt have re-defined music for me, opening me up to a more climactic feeling that no other band has ever brought me. You're a drug, Hurt, and I'm addicted.
And you would base this on...? I mean, I appreciate people who have different opinions than myself, but an actual reason to why you believe that would be nice. I mean, have you even listened to the album?
And you would base this on...? I mean, I appreciate people who have different opinions than myself, but an actual reason to why you believe that would be nice. I mean, have you even listened to the album?
98% as stated above is irrational, unless you are saying it is the best CD ever released? No room for improvement? What if their next release is better, where would you go % wise? I get you really love this album, but be serious and objective. Also i base it on every review of a new album i have seen which exaggerates how good it is. Improbable percentage.
First off, this was one of my favorite albums for two years.
Second, there's no way this could get near a 98% mark.
Reason?
-as with anything inclining towards radio rock in the slightest, I always feel a little distant from the music: as if they're writing more to make money, than for themselves, I believe you can always hear that in the music. and Hurt, being no more than humans, can't help but stray towards that section in songs like Loded, and Et Al.
-none of the parameters you rate music by on this site deserve more than a 9, other than obviously reviewers tilt. the vocals, albiet better than most, are still relatively non-unique in relation to other bands in its' same time period. The lyrics only good in some sections (Ten ton brick, treat me like shit?? what??), and the musicianship, although still very good, has some random, pointless parts (Summers Lost). I would give lasting value a 7 personally, but thats only because I haven't listened to it in about a year.
not a bad review, just extremely biased. I'm going to go put this on, now that I'm thinking about it.
First off, this was one of my favorite albums for two years.
Second, there's no way this could get near a 98% mark.
Reason?
-as with anything inclining towards radio rock in the slightest, I always feel a little distant from the music: as if they're writing more to make money, than for themselves, I believe you can always hear that in the music. and Hurt, being no more than humans, can't help but stray towards that section in songs like Loded, and Et Al.
-none of the parameters you rate music by on this site deserve more than a 9, other than obviously reviewers tilt. the vocals, albiet better than most, are still relatively non-unique in relation to other bands in its' same time period. The lyrics only good in some sections (Ten ton brick, treat me like shit?? what??), and the musicianship, although still very good, has some random, pointless parts (Summers Lost). I would give lasting value a 7 personally, but thats only because I haven't listened to it in about a year.
not a bad review, just extremely biased. I'm going to go put this on, now that I'm thinking about it.
You make very valid points about the album, and it's appreciated to have the opinion of someone who has actually listened to the album. After reading your post, I went back and listened to the album again. Actually, multiple times. And I read my review, multiple times. Perhaps it is biased, and perhaps I overrated it. I still think it deserves at least a 93 or a 94 percent, however. I won't bend on the point that I made about this being a groundbreaking album and it's still one of my favorite albums. Thanks for the comments, everyone.
I'm sorry, but I forgot that the reviewer also has an opinion himself. Someone saying it is irrational to give an album, that you probably don't like much, a 98% is pretentious in every way. So please, do me and every other non-elitist a favor and keep your mouth shut from now on.
98% as stated above is irrational, unless you are saying it is the best CD ever released? No room for improvement? What if their next release is better, where would you go % wise? I get you really love this album, but be serious and objective. Also i base it on every review of a new album i have seen which exaggerates how good it is. Improbable percentage.
Don't speak for the rest of your life, honestly it will make you seem a lot smarter.
I'm sorry, but I forgot that the reviewer also has an opinion himself. Someone saying it is irrational to give an album, that you probably don't like much, a 98% is pretentious in every way. So please, do me and every other non-elitist a favor and keep your mouth shut from now on.
If you engage your brain you may notice that the score has been lowered by the author, the other people who commented said variants of the same thing i said. Also learn what being an elitist is before you throw the word around. If you think what i said was wrong, how do you suppose he rates an album released by the same artist which is better?
Browse Reviews
Write a Review
Alphabetized Listing
Popular Reviews
Best New Music
View Artist Profile
View News Articles
Stream the Music
Buy the Album or MP3s
View Profile Picture
View Signature
Posts: 552
View Blog
Follow This Review
More Reviews By This Author