Drowned in Sound

Search



foals antidotes

Foals: Antidotes

77 votes
?
by Mike Diver

You have to rewind the best part of a year to find the root of the expansive bubble of anticipation that’s bloated about the five small-framed individuals that comprise Oxford’s Foals. All the way back to South By Southwest, when a series of sets left Brits Abroad spinning dizzy with delight between bottles of Lonestar and paper plates of barbequed pork. Forget the true origins of the band – the ‘Try This On Your Piano’ seven of 2006, the shows featuring founding member Andrew Mears (now focussing exclusively on Youthmovies), the slip-slide standalone successors of ‘Hummer’ and ‘Mathletics’ (if you miss them that much, buy the US import version of this) – for they have no place here, in 2008, on one of the year’s most ridiculously pre-release scrutinised debuts, Antidotes.

South By Southwest, the music conference of the year, confirmed Foals as a live tour de force in the minds of mainstream press types, a band capable of twitching toes into perpetual motion inside All Stars, of disassembling modern indie-rock and redesigning it using broken rulers and shredded blueprints. That ‘math-rock’ tag never really stuck though; instead, Foals’ own architects revealed their plans to produce a pop record, relatively speaking. Previous bands – notably The Edmund Fitzgerald, which spawned the face and backbone of Foals in the forms of Ioannis/Yannis Philippakis (vocals, guitar) and Jack Bevan (drums) – were enthralled with stateside indie-rock, the sort that’d mutated over the years into myriad odd-genres. Drawing heavily on the technical proficiency of post-rock and the intricacies that informed Tim Kinsella-schooled guitarists, The Ed Fitz peaked early and ran out of room to grow into. The logical step: smash it up and start again, Philippaqis telling DiS only last month that the goal was to “make something more straightforward and direct”. That’s precisely what Antidotes is the realisation of – an aim to refine ambition into direct compositions that toy with the idea of being experimental in an industry still dominated by sound-alike guitar rock, but that also throw off the stuffy shackles of technical prowess over pop immediacy to craft songs that bite and kick without bogging themselves down in self-manifested over-musicianship.

The songs to bite and kick first are the ones you, probably, know already. Lead single ‘Balloons’ is, snugly fitted into this album’s middle-section, as good a ‘summariser’ as any label could hope for when building fanfare for a debut album. The vocals punch above the weight expected from such a diminutive frontman, shrieks filled with unexpected acerbity, while the propulsive skin-pounding will be echoed across a number of album tracks. This isn’t Bevan as Ed Fitz fans knew him – the boy who’d need to slump down at the end of every song, so exhausted was he; he’s since employed an economical approach which showcases his abilities brilliantly without over amplifying the backbeat above everything else. Thus, those other already-familiar offerings of ‘The French Open’ and ‘Two Steps Twice’ feel richer in sound than the live EP of last year could ever have suggested, a warmth washed atop them that brings out the keyboard parts while cool guitar lines hiss as they’re picked out by dancing digits.

Although there’s a production-generated glossiness to friendly-faced tracks, Antidotes quite markedly lacks the soul that filters upwards whenever the five are caught live. It’s a studied collection, purposefully cold you feel in terms of human foibles and facets of burnt passion; rarely does Philippakis sound like he’s channelling any demons, lending an odd air of anti-catharsis to many a track. If he’s not convincing us, why should we care for his words? Many won’t – but then again the expression is entirely secondary to the employment. Foals use vocals as a melodic device, paralleling tweaked strings and skitter skins. So when they do crack, heart exposed, the affect’s stirring: ‘Big Big Love (Fig.2)’, which recalls Pretty Girls Make Graves’ moving ‘Pearls On A Plate’ with its overtones of melancholy, and ‘Electric Bloom’ stand apart as songs which capture Foals shorn of designer artifice, their techno-influenced pattern-based pieces scattered by something approaching real feeling. This is not an accusation that elsewhere the band hides behind distracting wizardry, as we’ve already dismissed the ‘math’ elements; simply that the few instances where something more seeps forth are the most rewarding, and provide Antidotes with essential longevity.

- - -

- - -

Which is something few other super-hyped debuts have enjoyed of late. Klaxons’ Myths Of The Near Future, an album which shares many similar core elements with Antidotes, suffered from too much filler flab, suffocating its brilliant singles in an album context; Adele’s 19 feels too hurried for its impact to last beyond the January flurry of positive feedback. Only Arctic Monkeys have really delivered a make-good debut recently, an album that went the distance, right the way up to its (better, even, perhaps) successor. There are hints here that Foals can follow in the Sheffield act’s footsteps: ‘Tron’, Antidotes’ closer, combines the formula perfected in the eleven preceding tracks with greater vocal contributions – back-ups from other band members coming to the fore – and more effective use of the horns provided by NYC collective Antibalas. There are instances where brass is shoehorned ineffectively, but come the album’s climax, and on mid-section conclusion ‘Heavy Water’, the collaboration works well. It’s certainly an aspect of Antidotes that’s worth revisiting on album two, albeit with a slightly greater degree of attention to where effectiveness leans too close to irritation.

Heavy Water’’s impact is heightened by the gap between its fizzing finale and the wandering lines of ‘Two Steps Twice’’s introduction, a technique utilised earlier ahead of the arrival of ‘Balloons’. Antidotes isn’t quite the free-flowing album Philippakis promised when DiS sat down with him last month, but it does feel like three chapters forming a well-worked whole. The way ‘Red Socks Pugie’ (give it an edit and it’s the band’s first top-20 single) segues into the also-excellent ‘Olympic Airwaves’ is most gratifying; then the first chapter, if you will, peaks with ‘Electric Bloom’ before a prolonged silence raises the tension for ‘Balloons’. Intentional or otherwise, this fracturing of Antidotes is to its benefit, and makes its digestion that bit easier for anyone under the impression that Foals are making inaccessible music. One obstacle is the lyrics, as previously noted: interpretations can be hugely varied, so it’s best to not go there until the band’s own track-by-track account of the album, coming exclusively to DiS in the near future. Suffice to say there’s fun to be had picking apart the few words that pepper each track; make your own meanings, please.

Fully fledged fans of below-the-radar acts rarely make albums that titillate tastes more accustomed to commercial radio airwaves and homogenised music television. Les Savy Fav are maybe making inroads, but Foals are leaps and bounds ahead of the Brooklyn outfit, Antidotes sure to make a major impression on the albums chart come its March release. This from five guys raised on a steady diet of punk rock, who still cite Charlottefield as one of the most important domestic acts of the moment, and Sweep The Leg Johnny as American greats. They’re not meant to be making pop music, right? Wrong, and perhaps it’s this opinion that’s led to the rumblings of a backlash even before this album’s in stores.

Foals’ take on pop isn’t 100 per cent unique, but what is? They’re not the revolutionaries they’ve been painted as by know-nothing blabbermouths with too many hands in industry pockets to ever open an album worth its recording budget. They are a popular band for a populous pining for The Next Step, the tiniest of advancements that takes us from Bloc Party and Klaxons to, well, Foals. Two steps, twice? Nah, one will suffice for the meantime, but album two could well dash three or four forward if the limitless dreams of these five blossoming musicians go unchecked. For better or worse, it doesn’t matter. We’ve a debut to cherish for years to come already.

Promise delivered, divided by expectations frenzied, multiplied by still-evident potential for future releases… equals a Pitchfork-style 8.6. If you’re still hanging Foals on that unsightly ‘math’ hook.

- - -

Antidotes (forthcoming) and the new single 'Cassius' can be pre-ordered HERE.

- - -

  • Foals 9 / 10

nope


^


6/10

a weekend in the city review... anyone?


Exactly what I was thinking

I've spent a lot of time with the Foals album, it's good, but this review may as well have been written by the band themselves. Way too much loving going on and, as someone else said, glossing over factors which would have earned any other band a dressing down.

It's not in the same stratosphere as Battles, sadly. Oh, and I'm sick of them making out Hummer and Mathletics wouldn't fit in here. They absolutely would - I could understand if they'd kept the Dave Sitek mix, but now they've basically remixed the whole thing to sound similar to those single any way. Trust me, I've made a playlist of the album and those two singles, and they fit in snuggly. Try Hummer before Cassius at track 2 and Mathletics between Electric Bloom and Balloons. It works…


...

"One obstacle is the lyrics, as previously noted: interpretations can be hugely varied, so it’s best to not go there until the band’s own track-by-track account of the album, coming exclusively to DiS in the near future."

Is this a review or an advert?! This whole review stinks of "look at us and our pet band"!


Ahem

"Go here for the exclusive interview, go here to pre-order the album, go here to declare them the best band ever"

Zzzzzzzzzzz


Reviews...

Are not DiS' strong point. Interviews; ace, but every single one of the reviewers on this site need perspective and a greater understanding of how the 1-10 system works. Daydream Nation reissue - 9/10. Foals album - 9/10. As good as DN then? Here's an idea 9 or 10/10 save for truly classic albums, and you can apply 8/10 with characteristic abandon to whatever else you like that week.

Also, whats with the length of that review? Just catch the band on Skins and amongst all the money shots you got a hard on and couldnt stop writing? Heres three succinct reviews of Antidotes:

1. Bloc Party meets Minus The Bear
2. A Weekend At The City without the choruses. What score would such an album deserve? DiS doesnt hand out anything less than 5 does it?
3.Ignore all the Battles comparisons in other reviews - Foals love syncopation but are completely rythmically uninteresting. And their lead singer looks like Syclar from Heroes.

One way to add some credibility to reviews here would be to curb Diver. Possibly the best writer on here, but he needs to put his dick back in his pants a bit more. If everything is 8/10, does he enjoy anything especially?


..

Put that dick back in yr pants, Diver.


I'll give this a due listen at some point

But I can't help but feel some of the aspects listed as qualities of this record would have been criticised as flaws in a review of any other album. 'Purposefully cold'; lacking emotion?. Lyrics incredibly open to interpretation; euphenism for shit lyrics? Etc etc.

Never really liked Foals but I am pretty interested in hearing this record. I hope its as good as people have said.


^yeeerr

not a fan but still looking forward to hearing this.


The coldness, explained.

It relates back to the techno influence, where songs are built on grid patterns; everything in a place, with no slips, no 'soul', arguably. The same thing's evident on Battles' Mirrored, and doesn't make it any the worse for it.

The lyrics, well: you can assess them different ways. There are lines in 'Electric Bloom' that make like Foals saw the January buzz for Adele and Duffy coming if interpretated one way; 'Cassius' features a few choice lines that one could relate to the band's need to get out of the country to make this album... but these are such personal interpretations that I wouldn't want to be 'on record' in a review with them. Rather, I want to hear what the band has to say about them.

Plus, as noted, they serve to drive the songs, structure wise, perhaps over having any 'true' meaning. I am sure this is not the case, but nevertheless their effectiveness is absolute regardless of words used.

mx


Yeah, I can understand that

I think my point still stands though. I don't even really mean it as a criticism, because its inevitable that previous experience of a band (even something as base as whether or not you like them) is going to influence what you make of new material they release.


nah


I'm

glad the 'pop' aspect has been noticed.

That'll piss off some of the chin-stroking twats who like them.

Can't wait to hear it.


It isn't though, is it

It may be more pop than The Ed Fitz, but that's not exactly saying much. It is in no way pop. Seriously, listen to some pop, this isn't it. Friendly Fires? OK. Foals? Not a chance in hell. Mainstream music buyers will get this and think, "WTF?!" Which is great. Hopefully it will be many an Enemy fan's first 'difficult' album.


But

it's poppy to me!


See, I quite like this album

But I really really wish that the vocals were better, because they stop me from *loving* it. Which is a shame really. But it'll probably be big, and I guess they deserve that.


my hate object of 2008

2007 hate object was klaxons of course.


Well then,

20 Indie Points for YOU!


And also, not that is of any real importance,

that artwork is proper shite.


The line

For a review so passionately written to the level of endearing fanaticism, I was surprised at the inclusion of this line:

"One obstacle is the lyrics, as previously noted: interpretations can be hugely varied, so it’s best to not go there until the band’s own track-by-track account of the album, coming exclusively to DiS in the near future."

which seems to me like a fundamentally flawed statement, as the logic would suggest I'm not qualified to judge the lyrics of almost every song I've heard. Surely, even if each lyric had a specific meaning to the writer, it's up to the listener to interpret them in the way that they choose.

I couldn't help myself, but the line worryingly reminded me of

"Oh and Spoon... Nice shoes."
"Vintage 2004."


This is an odd review

I mean, most of it is good, yeah (the review, not the album, although I do like the album a lot), but whats with the comparison to Adele's album? I mean, mentioning her along Foals and the Klaxons... feels very deliberate, in a way. I think what I am trying to say is: I am disturbed that DiS are giving that much credit to coffee table music.


i haven't heard this album

so of course, i'm not in a position to judge it or this review. However, this piece strikes me as slightly sinister. There seems to be a degree of fanboyism to it and, dare i say it, a touch of Bloc Party-esque favouritism (can't wait for that *EXCLUSIVE* interview!). Whatever the reasons, this review just doesn't sit right with me.. maybe it's the overwhelmingly underwhelmed reaction the album has been getting on the boards

But hey, what do i know?


Definite fanboyism,

BUT I really like the record, so it's alright.


I've just had a listen

Alot better than I expected, but incredibly samey. Can't see it being something I go back to after a few weeks


Miiiiiiiiike

They slowed down the French Open Miiiiike!!!!

The albums lush but not 9 lush Miiiiike!!!!

Miiiiiike!!!!!

(whining works)


does it ?!

It deserves a 7/10 in my opinion

so erm... whine?


doesn't deserve a 9 anyway

prob a 7 is about fair. Not as good as mirrored that's for sure.

Also is it really only out in over a month's time? That's going to stop people downloading it.


So, the backlash begins before the records even out...

I think that Foals are quite a unique and progressive band to be hyped up by the mainstream the way they have.
Sure, they have pop elements in their sound but they stick out like a sore thumb when played on daytime Radio 1, whereas other bands (Klaxons, Bloc Party) just gradually merge in with the rest of the detritus.
I actually really like them and think that they may be a rare band to survive this press wankfest. And I'm not sure they'll sell as many records as the NME would have you believe.


a 7 out of 10 is GOOD

I really like foals and this album is an excellent debut. I wasn't expecting a masterpiece, they still show promise and if they can show a little more variety in album 2 and beyond they I will continue to love them.

As it is I really do hope they get mainstream attention. They deserve it a lot more than most of the bands getting it.


Of all my favorite equestrian acts (Ponys, BoH) Foals are somewhere in the middle of the herd

Everything I've heard by Foals sounds journeyman-like. I'm basing my opinion on their myspace so I could be wrong.

I respect Mike's opinion...well, a lot - but here seems to be a case of a DiS pet band which is getting preferential treatment. 9/10? Who's gonna remember this record a year from now?


I agree,

this album is at least one step forward from bloc party-at least. It just sounds so much substantial. Hawkings nursery rhymes.


i for one

love this album. and everybody else should . just admit it..is..that..good


Nice review

well written.
Totally agree about REd Sox Pugie.


yawn

rather wait for youthmovies to be honest. least they have some dignity rather than foals. anyone catch the article in the guardian about how the couldnt deal with the pressure of hype yet go on the nme front cover and also "all these skinny indie bands are going to die" yet they are wearing skinny jeans.

got to love em eh....


Yeah

But that was written by Tim jonze, whos an idiot.
Foals were just hitting out at boring, stupid bands like the Kooks etc etc.
Typical NME misquote.


they bottled it

they could have had an amazing pop album with Hummer as its centrepiece but instead they reverted to their pretentious proggy math rock comfort zone.


this is SO wrong...

i'm not a massive fan, i don't believe the hype and i still think there was room for 'Mathletics' on this record. My opinion was almost identical to yours, and i guess a lot of people's, but listen to the record, and then listen again, and then listen again, it's amazing how it matures infront of your ears, and you eventually realise that this album isn't about the past singles at all, and that the better efforts are the likes of 'Big Big Love', 'Tron', 'Olympic Airways', 'Cassius' & 'Red Socks'. Barring 'The French Open', which is just pretentious pap, and the overdoing of the trumpet at the end of 'Cassius', this is the PERFECT pop record, whilst losing non of it's credibility whatsoever. Tags like 'Math Rock' really aren't worth the paper they're written on.


math rock?

all their songs sound like they are in 4/4. This is by no means an insult, but I just don't think it can really be described as 'math.'


play

They sound like a band playing at being their favourite bands. Am I missing something? I just think it sounds like a watered down version of a lot of music that has been coming from the US for the last 10 years. It's not terrible by any means, just a major-label incarnation of something that's been popular for years.

The drums are mixed really horribly - it's the same compression they put on mid-west christian rock bands.


^yes


agreed

it's hardly math rock...i think the math rock titles are an Ed Fitz residue...but theyre certainly not math i wouldn't say...

but the album IS really quite impressive...which i am surprised by...Olympic Airwaves, Ton and Heavy Water are the standout ones for me...and the horns sounds great in places.

i just wish they'ed start using their sudden peak of fame to promote better bands (Youthmovies etc)...now THATS an album worth waiting for


Quit it with the pop shit

This isn't pop at all. Seriously guys, listen to some pop. Pop needs sodding choruses for a start


This is SO right

100% agree. People saying this is pop are well off. Foals have pop tendencies but they've purposefully suppressed them to make a wannabe avant-garde album. I still like it, mind, but the the exclusion of Hummer and Mathletics was a statement of intent that the album follows through. It wants to be difficult, though is rarely as interesting as that would suggest


ha

you've been quoted on their myspace.

i think you're right though. probably more of a singles band than an albums band.


Hmm...

"The Ed Fitz peaked early and ran out of room to grow into."

I'm not so sure that's true. And even if they had stayed the same they would still be miles better than most other bands around.

They were easily one of the most interesting and exciting bands to watch live!

What's Lina up to these days? She was awesome.


maybe I'm the only one (apart from Mike)

but I think this is definitely a 9/10 album.


I can't stand 'em

To be honest, I have only heard the singles, but they make me want to eat my own ears.


Good

But not that good. Let's see how they are at the Astoria. I get the impression that it's more a debut that will be listened to for a few months and talked over as something new and cool, then relegated to the past as 'something cool from 2008'. A debut to cherish for years, I think not.


They

owe rather a lot to Don Caballero too.


Looks like a promising album

However I can't help but think if they didn't use to be The Edmund Fitz, they wouldn't get nearly as much love as they do


.

it's just really really really dull for the most part. which is sad, as i used to really enjoy seeing them live, but much of the record just doesn't reflect how exciting they used to be to see in the flesh.


on my copy track five's listed as 'The Race For Radio Supremacy'

yet here, and in track-listings it's called 'Electric Ballroom'?


'Electric Bloom'

On promo copies. The same thing happened with the last Deftones LP, too; that's the biggest record I can think of that's had song titles change from promo to finished product, of late anyway.


totally pop.

whoever says this is not pop band, well, is wrong. because: all songs are between three and four minutes long - the perfect pop format. the arrangements are far from 'experimental' but comply, again, with the typical pop format.
and if this is meant to be 'maths' rock, well, then it's maths for beginners because there's absolutely nothing there that's challenging, not the beat, nor the lyrics nor anything. on the contrary, once again they tick all the boxes for a typical white boys indie band: from their hairdos to their clothes to you name it. this is for sure not a record or a band that is in any way opening your eyes.


Foals make me shudder

not with delight i can tell you


Utter cock

The basics of pop are verse chorus verse, with perhaps a bridge. Half of these songs don't have choruses so, on a fundamental level, they are not pop. Sorry.

Saying it is pop shows up how little actual pop you listen to. Sure, compared to Pelican or Dillinger Escape Plan, you could say it was poppier. But compared to chart music or even a lot of mainstream indie, this is going to confuse a few people.

Trust me, I work in a mainstream-as-hell office and it already has. They're far more comfortable with their We Are Scientists LP. Now THAT'S pop.

I mean, come on, half of it sounds like a fusion of Talk Talk and watered down Battles.


shite

when is all this angular, barking-vocals-into-nowhere shit going to end?

on the plus side...no, I can't think of anything


it's just so...

samey and generally not as good and different as i thought it would be.


well i really liked this review.

pretty much summed up how i felt about antidotes. it's not quite the masterpiece i was hoping for, but sets up album number 2 nicely. and the pairing of red socks pugie and olympic airways is the best 2-consecutive-songs-on-an-album (must be a better phrase) in really ages.


sail afar

good luck boys...

i'll be having a pop all over yr lp!
and just deleted facebook in its honour.


Foals...

are like Battles. But not shit.<