Panic at the Disco - Pretty. Odd. Explicit?
 

I'm going to drop by Wal-Mart this afternoon to pick up the new PATD CD, I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't explicit so I'm not picking up the clean version at Wal-Mart.

I've listened to a stream of the CD online and really liked it, please flame on :).

As far as I can see, it is not stickered.

I've listened to it, and I don't remember any swear words.

= J

Good deal, thanks guys. I wasn't paying terrible attention when I was streaming it, just kinda background music, but still enjoyable. I know there were some expletives on the first album, just wanted to check.

Also, fueled by Ramen (or what ever label they're on) are an indie, and don't sticker albums anyways (you could argue that the firs patd album kind of deserved it.

I thought the first one would have, but don't remember if it did or not. I always forget about the indie rule, I think I started the same thread about the last Motion City Soundtrack CD when it came out.

anyone like this c.d. I D/L it last week and thought that it was just o.k. Nine in the afternoon is the fastest/most rokin song on the cd. Everything else was slow and beatleish. It's totally opposite than there first cd.

If it is totally opposite then their first CD then I'll wait to find it used.

I listened to it today, and wasn't overly stricken with it. Was really surprised at whole overall mellow it was.

I wonder what their fan base is going to think of it? I can't imagine a lot of the kids who bought the first album being very into this one. There's almost nothing of the sound of the first album to be found here.

That's not saying it's bad - just very different.

im not a fan, just an observer, but it seems to me that touring with the Dresden Dolls had a huge influence on how this band is now.

Listened to it twice now and I'm not really feeling it. This really seems like 4 kids begging the music world to take them seriously. Bottom line, this album just isn't as fun as the first album. It really makes me wonder what the album they scrapped sounded like.

I'm a HUGE fan of their first album. Compared to that, this is pure garbage. You might like this album if you hated the first one but if you liked it, this one is NOTHING like it. I've heard bands change their sound before, but this is a totally different band with a totally different sound. I hate it.

Is it just me or the album version of 9 in the afternoon is different than the one from the video/radio?

I swear i hear more guitar in the album version....

I take back what I said. After a few more listens, the CD is growing on me. While the band is COMPLETELY different, the cd isn't so bad. Still nowhere near as good as the first cd but it's not bad.

That's funny - a friend of mine made me a copy of the new album, and while I don't love it or anything, I found it listenable, and a massive improvement over their previous material, which I found utterly unlistenable.

I took back what I said in the post above yours. The CD is def listenable and I even think it's pretty good. With that said, I LOVED the first CD and was hoping for something similar to that.

Cmon, please someone tell me i ain't crazy! :P

Some of the comments here have really cracked me up. I'll admit that I haven't listened to their first album because on paper it sounds like something I'd be wasting my time with. After reading about how their new album was recorded and some of their influences, I decided to give it a try. Not bad. How the fuck are the Beatles or Blur as an influence a bad thing? God, kids today. Listen, I like balls to the wall punk snot fury, but there is nothing wrong with a band mixing it up and growing.

Kudos to these tots.

Huh. That's the first I'd heard that they was a different direction prior to this one in the works. All I can recall that I ever heard about their new songs was Pete Wentz saying he'd heard some new stuff, and that it sounded "retarded," as in really really good.

Also for those saying this is a whole different band, well...they did say on We're So Starving that they're "still the same band." ;)

Nope, not crazy. I downloaded Nine in the Afternoon off of Amazon a month or two ago, and the album version does sound like there's an extra guitar riff or two in there, mainly during the chorus.

YES! Thank god i'm not crazy! :P

They had almost an entire album completed. They scrapped it last July because the songs felt forced, and that they were actively trying to be a different band since they'd been playing the same ~12 songs every night for 2 years straight.

The irony of course is that this album still feels like they're trying to be a different band.

How many bands have changed over their careers? Check out each of Talk Talk's recordings in the 80's and you'll see some drastic changes with each album going in a positive direction. Like I said before, I've never heard anything from this band's first album so they don't sound like a band trying to change to me.

I'm not knocking them for trying something different. But it's so different that it feels like a completely different band altogether. I just thought it was funny that they scrapped their original attempt because it was too different, and then proceeded to release this album.

I'm curious to see how much of their original fan base they're going to lose because of this album. I'm sure it will be a large amount. I would assume most of their fan base are kids in their teens to mid twenties who don't want to listen to this new sound. I'm sure they will gain an entirely different fanbase BUT I don't think this CD is good enough for that new fanbase to grow very large.