archive : A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z sdtk comp
Cover Art Fields of the Nephilim
Dawnrazor
[Beggars Banquet]
Rating: 7.4

"Nephilim" comes from the Hebrew word for creatures that were half- angel and half- human. I believe the King James version calls 'em "giants." But Fields of the Nephilim never quite achieved that status. They were never the overshadowing mystery band looming dark over the goth music scene, waiting to make surprise appearances at exclusive London nightclubs. Instead, sounding like the abandoned offspring of Sisters of Mercy and the Damned, the band became overshadowed itself, by a scene that was gradually beginning to wane from its underground origins and into the more accessible sounds of the Cure and Siouxsie and the Banshees.

So as not to remain forgotten in the shadows, however, Field of the Nephilim have had their Beggars Banquet releases reissued and the band is gearing up for a reunion tour and new album for 1998. Dawnrazor, the band's first record with the label captures the band at a point of self discovery.

With just a hint of the mid- 1980s hidden deep in their music, Fields of the Nephilim steered away from the repeated samples and poppy keyboards of the era and focused more on flowing and icy guitar and bass. Stir this up with with lead singer Carl McCoy's deep, groaning vocals and a few rocking beats, and you've got one powerful concoction.

Contained here are a few of the classic Nephilim tracks-- from the oft- mimicked guitar riffs of "Preacher Man," to the foot- stomping "Power," it's easy to tell what keeps the band's fans dedicated. In fact, the only negative aspect of Dawnrazor is that it seems to speak itself as kind of country- flavored. Perhaps it's just the trenchcoats and big hats? One may never know.

-Skaht Hansen

TODAY'S REVIEWS

DAILY NEWS

RATING KEY
10.0: Indispensable, classic
9.5-9.9: Spectacular
9.0-9.4: Amazing
8.5-8.9: Exceptional; will likely rank among writer's top ten albums of the year
8.0-8.4: Very good
7.5-7.9: Above average; enjoyable
7.0-7.4: Not brilliant, but nice enough
6.0-6.9: Has its moments, but isn't strong
5.0-5.9: Mediocre; not good, but not awful
4.0-4.9: Just below average; bad outweighs good by just a little bit
3.0-3.9: Definitely below average, but a few redeeming qualities
2.0-2.9: Heard worse, but still pretty bad
1.0-1.9: Awful; not a single pleasant track
0.0-0.9: Breaks new ground for terrible
OTHER RECENT REVIEWS

All material is copyright
2001, Pitchforkmedia.com.