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 Jonathan Fire*Eater
Wolf Songs For Lambs
[DGC]
Rating: 6.9

Jonathan Fire*Eater's sound so obviously runs between D.C. and New York it's like I-95. The R+B revivalism of mellower Delta 72 meets the Details fashion spread emaciated noirism of Jon Spencer. Hey, Baltimore is on the way too! Funny, because Jonathan's hollow, smoky aesthetic would be perfect background music to play as a drug- addled teenager reads Poe in some beatnik poetry/ coffee bar on the foggy waterfronts. It's pretty shocking that these cats are sponsored by the international conglomerate Dreamworks.

Stewart Lupton's salivating rasp rants spray over carnival organ, tumblin' snare- heavy drums, B-M bass, and tin can guitar. It's roots rock going back to the Stones, baby. Shagadellic punk that you can really swing to. The thin production tries a bit too hard get that late '50s analog sound though. I imagine they'd be a better live groove. I only hope that the girls would be swim dancing in tight pants and spherical hair and the boys wouldn't just be sitting there sipping java and stroking goatees. It's borderline novelty, but I found myself lured into the yellow stained teeth haze for numerous listens. It grows on you like a mold.

-Brent Dicrescenzo

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.