- Critic score
- Publication
- By date
-
In and of itself, Winchester Cathedral is a fine introduction to Clinic and an entertaining 35 minutes of evocative rock. But it's hard to believe that at this late date, having been together for seven years, the band can't find new modes of musical expression.
-
BlenderAll very beguilling as long as you really, really like the sound of a melodica. [Sep 2004, p.134]
-
If it was pared down to its best tracks, Winchester Cathedral would make a solid EP. As it stands, it's far from bad, but it's a little boring, which is worse than bad from a band that has sounded so unique in the past.
-
Should you own the band’s magnificent first three singles (collected on the “Three EPs” mini-album), it’s hard to imagine you’ll ever really need another record by this conceptually brilliant, artistic dead-end of a band.
-
SpinMusic as spooky--and ultimately as sterile--as the hospital scrubs and surgical masks they wear onstage. [Sep 2004, p.120]
-
I'd be lying if I said this was bad music -- but perhaps worse, the bulk of this album fails to make any unique impression whatsoever.
-
There are no new ideas, no points of interest.
-
Q Magazine[Clinic] has misplaced the groove and settled for a rut. [Sep 2004, p.117]
-
Whereas Walking With Thee was a wonderful relief in the indie/retro-rock world, pushing the band's internal parameters and the idea of what pop music should sound like, Winchester Cathedral feels more like a roadblock, or at least a pit stop, rather than a step forward in Clinic's previously innovative evolution.
-
MojoThey sound a bit tired. [Sep 2004, p.98]
-
Rolling StoneMuch of the time it sounds like Clinic are just playing around with their noisemakers and not having much fun. [2 Sep 2004, p.141]
-
It’s frustrating to listen to a band run in place, especially when the expectations are so much higher.
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 3 out of 3
-
Mixed: 0 out of 3
-
Negative: 0 out of 3
-
MatthewSNov 17, 2005
-
JesseSOct 18, 2004