Duffy

Dudess

Another young female singing "sensation". To be fair, along similar lines to Amy Winehouse, but what a voice! And the song's sound is fantastic - very, very 60s and rather reminiscent of Ray Charles's What'd I Say. She looks the part too with that Dusty Springfield/Lulu/Marianne Faithfull look going on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE2orthS3TQ

BaZmO*

Love that song. Her sound is very reminiscent of Phil Spector and that "Wall of Sound" vibe. Her albums not out until March so I'm sure she'll be played off the radio by then.

Actually, check out her performance on the Jools Holland Show, it shows off her talents better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoQwliMAZC8&feature=related

GrahamThomas

Some critics are touting her as being the new Dusty Springfield which may be a bit wide of the mark, but that was a geat performance on Jools Holland, looking forward to hearing more from her in the coming months!

red_ice

its all about northen soul with that girl i rekon, not (straight old fashoned) soul. Its good, but i think its just another girl wanting to be something i rekon shes not

Blisterman

I saw her live on tuesday, at the filming of the Album chart Show.

I'd never heard of her before, but I thought she was alright. But, you can tell she only got signed in the wake of Amy Winehouse's success.

biZrb

Mercy is a brillant song and the video is the best I've seen in a long time, but her first single Rockferry with the b-side Oh Boy aren't really what you'd call Northen Soul so Im dying to hear the album to see what the overall sound of it is like.

She spent 4 four years working on the album, so I don't know if shes been signed purely because of how popular Amy Winehouse has become. But even is she has its not a bad thing, its great to see more women in popular music.

440Hz

Saw her last year supporting Duke Special, not bad live at all, well in an intimate setting anyway. You could tell then she was going to go places!

mike65

Not another one! Old enough to remember a few previous Northern Soul types who came saw and were finished in a couple of years - Lisa Stansfield springs to mind.

Mike.

Dudess

Ah that's a different type of northern soul - Lisa Stansfield is a soul singer from the north of England, as opposed to being an exponent of the style of music that fits in with the genre Northern Soul (60s/70s - you know what I'm talking about).
If Lisa Stansfield is a purveyor of northern soul, then so is Mick Hucknall :eek::(

mike65

Ultragroove ftw

Mike.

parasite

I don't think her voice is the greatest, it's a bit harsh and nasal imo, catchy enough tunes I guess

Kimono-Girl

parasite wrote: »

I don't think her voice is the greatest, it's a bit harsh and nasal imo, catchy enough tunes I guess

oh she is brilliant!

she sounds better live then on the cd though, have you heard her live?

Kold

Voice reminds me of that Winehouse slag.

God, I hate that Winehouse slag's voice.

Mossy Monk

I sense I am in a minority of people that do not like this Duffy character.

Green Giant

Mossy Monk wrote: »

I sense I am in a minority of people that do not like this Duffy character.

I, too, am a proud member of this supposed minority

MikeHoncho

Mossy Monk wrote: »

I sense I am in a minority of people that do not like this Duffy character.

I wish this woman nothing but ill. Every time that Mercy song comes on the radio (which it does about 6734 times a day) I want to poor acid in my ear holes to ease the suffering.

Sherifu

MikeHoncho wrote: »

I wish this woman nothing but ill. Every time that Mercy song comes on the radio (which it does about 6734 times a day) I want to poor acid in my ear holes to ease the suffering.

Tell us what you really think :pak: I like her. Smokey!

Killaqueen!!!

I love the song Mercy and I love Duffy's voice but the other songs I've heard from her aren't anything special. I doubt her album is that good. Very good voice though..

Dudess

Mossy Monk wrote: »

I sense I am in a minority of people that do not like this Duffy character.

Green Giant wrote: »

I, too, am a proud member of this supposed minority

Why though?

I don't have time for flavour of the month-ism myself but I think it's justified in this case - well admittedly I only know this song by her, but I do think it's excellent.

Makaveli

MikeHoncho wrote: »

I wish this woman nothing but ill. Every time that Mercy song comes on the radio (which it does about 6734 times a day) I want to poor acid in my ear holes to ease the suffering.

Why inflict pain on yourself? Inflict it on those who continue to play it.

I seriously consider setting the Today FM building on fire every time they play that poxy song, which is anywhere between 6 to 10 times a day.

[ot]I also never realised how much I dislike Ray D'arcy.[/ot]

Green Giant

We should be begging her for mercy, not the other way around

grumpytrousers

Dudess wrote: »

Why though?

I don't have time for flavour of the month-ism myself but I think it's justified in this case - well admittedly I only know this song by her, but I do think it's excellent.

The album is quite good, with a number of tracks produced by Bernard Butler. Somebody mentioned the 'wall of sound' thing, and Butler is one of the best Spector-lite producers in the business.

If you don't believe me, click this....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=037XlZDBKtQ - and just get that pause at around 3:05

stovelid

What I've heard sounds pretty good, although I must admit that my critical faculties go to f*ck when confronted with this kind of singer and style.

I'm a sucker for it, basically.

Denalihighway

I must say for me personally 'that song' is one of the distressingly, irritating things I've ever heard. If I have the radio on for some background hum and it comes on I literally have to run and kick the machine before it slaps my ears around. Awful, nasal, wannabe Dusty Springfield stuff...its only my opinion, awful, awful, awful. I've heard other stuff on the album and its not so bad but the fact that the stuff is so unashamedly re-hashed and that not many people point this out I find unbelievable. Thats the thing I suppose, the younger generation dont have the benefit of knowing these older artists so they're an easy naive target for this stuff and the likes of Westlife covering old classics etc...I have to stop...now

Dudess

Over-exposure doesn't make something bad though.

gaffmaster

The industry has decided we should like her.

A good voice doesn't make good music. I'd rather hear good songs with average voices.

The whole thing stinks of the 80's guitar-rock problem. Bands like Van Halen wrote songs centred around technical guitar solos. Now songs are written as vehicles for the voice. It's not art in my opinion, and shouldnt be treated so. Adele is another offender (great voice, poor songs)

Bubble gum.

grumpytrousers

Dudess wrote: »

Over-exposure doesn't make something bad though.

it doesn't; but it can sure make something annoying. I think that's the reason for a lot of the negative Duffy comments here. Actually, I believe that the problem is the whole marketing thing around her, but it's a catch 22 thing, which has been perpetuated by the music biz for the last few years.

If i might get up on the hobby horse here, for a moment...i'm rather fond of pointing out that if the Beatles came along today, they either wouldn't get a record deal, or they'd have been dropped after Love me Do only made it to number 17.

the 'business' spends a ridiculous amount of money puffing up an act. The problem is that if you do this for a mediocre act (and this has been done since time immemorial) how do you 'puff up' an act that's genuinely talented. You're effectively saying 'remember how we said that Singer X was the best thing since sliced bread, well we were lying, 'cos Singer Y is actually the best bits of Ronnie spector and Dusty Springfield'

In other words, Duffy is more a victim of the hyperbole of marketing and the crazy way that pop records are sold now. It's released to radio 3 months before you can buy it and half the punters hate it then, not cos a song is crap, but because of overexposure.

I hate coldplay. I know they sell truckloads of albums, and going by a lot of other stuff that i've listened to, i shouldn't hate them with the venom which i do. It's overplay (hahah) that's done it though.

the problem, therefore, is that radio is too happy to be complicit in playing songs to death, and thus even talented acts end up getting shafted by their own marketing teams!

BaZmO*

grumpytrousers wrote: »

In other words, Duffy is more a victim of the hyperbole of marketing and the crazy way that pop records are sold now. It's released to radio 3 months before you can buy it and half the punters hate it then, not cos a song is crap, but because of overexposure.

The bit in bold is very relevant. My original post in this thread was when I hadn't heard the song 5 billion times. It gets wearisome after so many listens.

Kold

She sounds like a pterodactyl.

BaZmO*

Kold wrote: »

She sounds like a pterodactyl.

How do you know what a pterodactyl sounds like?

stovelid

Denalihighway wrote: »

I must say for me personally 'that song' is one of the distressingly, irritating things I've ever heard. If I have the radio on for some background hum and it comes on I literally have to run and kick the machine before it slaps my ears around. Awful, nasal, wannabe Dusty Springfield stuff...its only my opinion, awful, awful, awful. I've heard other stuff on the album and its not so bad but the fact that the stuff is so unashamedly re-hashed and that not many people point this out I find unbelievable. Thats the thing I suppose, the younger generation dont have the benefit of knowing these older artists so they're an easy naive target for this stuff and the likes of Westlife covering old classics etc...I have to stop...now

The dearth of 'new' ideas in pop is a fact now. I know my soul, and am aware that Duffy isn't exactly 'original'. Nor would I suspect that she claims to be.
I like some of her songs. I see them as complementing the genre, rather than strip-mining it. Her songs will probably never have the wider social 'relevance' of 60's soul, but they're still good tunes.

If were getting to the point where all current music needs to have no previous precedents, we're on shaky ground, because in a wider cultural sense, indie and pop have been cannibalizing their past for quite a while.

It's not fair to expect people in their teens and early 20s to be students of music. At that age, it's the lived experience of the genre that's important, not people in their 30's (like me) telling you that it was done before in '68, '78 or '88.

I loved the Stone Roses when I was in my late teens. The last thing I wanted to hear was guff about the '68 precedents (the sound, the Spike Island/ Ally Pally happenings, the chemicals) although I can see that clearly now in my dotage.