the album looks like an autistic kid made a collage and Nick shat on it, Pnut then vomited, Chad jerked a monkey off onto it, SA said fuck it I'm out, and then Tim was like "hey let's add a RAM".
and here we are today with the cover art for Universal Pulse.
I usually disagree with reviews and such. But I have to agree. This album cover is just plain bad design. I thought that when I first saw it. I can say this because I have a degree in Graphic Design and do the shit all day long. Whoever does their design from album cover to all marketing pieces sucks bawls. My favorite album cover has to be Evolver. It was just cool. I guess the Cruise poster wasn't that bad as well but still there was so much that could have been done. They need to fire their creative director and hire a monkey. At least that would be a step up.
If I woke up with a hangover, and the first thing I saw was that album cover, the next thing I would see would be a blur leading to the water in my toilet.
$ayzak wrote:If I woke up with a hangover, and the first thing I saw was that album cover, the next thing I would see would be a blur leading to the water in my toilet.
$ayzak wrote:If I woke up with a hangover, and the first thing I saw was that album cover, the next thing I would see would be a blur leading to the water in my toilet.
i lurk - there just isnt anything cool going on. cruise line up looks dope. set lists from the fall tour look like some of the best ever.
it is really Nick's voice that is holding them back - he sounds worse and worse while the band sounds better and better. that red rocks show they released sounds great - instrumentally.
that pitchfork list is dumb. the cover isn't that bad. they should have removed the animals from the entire package
they get the majority of their artwork from fans - essentially they have a list of people they have contacted or who contacted them and they accept submissions continually. So they choose from whatever comes in - and believe me, they don't choose wisely. I sent them a shitload of dope designs and they picked some of the worst ones to print. And the band makes the decision. Adam and Peter gather a bunch of designs and show them to the band and they pick out what they want to print. I'm sure they consider cost and complexity of printing - amount of colors and size and all that. When you do large runs - the amount of ink(screen print paint or whatever) adds up, so they will choose a design that is one or two colors and small to save on production costs and ultimately increase profits.
I might send them some stuff for the cruise and vegas but I'm not sure.
not as saucy as I remember. Actually it was articulate, informative, and rational. I'm not use to such posts here. Is any of your work on any of their prior albums?
I do disagree on the cover being that bad, it's awful. But do agree that without the animals it would be much better. I was very harsh above for crude comedic reasons. But really in my mind the equivalent was much like an angelfire site from the late 90's.
Also, while we're discussing the awfulness of the album cover, what's with the name? How does that name tie together the concept of the album?
