Without Feathers - The Stills
Metascore
65 out of 100

Generally favorable reviews - based on 20 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 20
  2. Negative: 1 out of 20
  1. The result is the work of an effectively new band--and a much better one. [12 May 2006, p.83]
  2. Yet another Next Flaming Lips emerges from beneath the librarian's skirts. In the 'Neon Bible' section, of course.
  3. 80
    Intriguing. [Jul 2007, p.116]
  4. The infusion of new blood, thankfully, seems to have put the Stills' post-punk posturing and emotional distance to bed for good. [Jul 2006, p.194]
  5. 80
    While [Hamelin's] lyrics are less likely to be mistaken for emo (good), they're also less evocative (bad). [#20, p.102]
  6. Without Feathers pays off with its maturity and broader scope, and ultimately is a more satisfying album as a whole. [#13, p.89]
  7. 70
    This record is too flat. [Jun 2006, p.119]
  8. Without Feathers may lack its predecessor's apocalyptic vision, but it's a new direction for a group that was heading down an awfully familiar -- and extremely congested -- road.
  9. It's not quite the tour de force they seem to be capable of.
  10. What impresses about Without Feathers is the depth and liveliness that the group brings to it.
  11. Feathers seems less a continuation of Logic than a valuable complement, cheerful and heartfelt as the latter was somber and stylized.
  12. While stocked with skillful guitars, tuneful vocals and the occasional hook, Without Feathers feels oddly unassuming, a plain-vanilla modern-rock record. [Jun/Jul 2006, p.122]
  13. By abandoning the gloom and doom and embracing quirky power-pop, the Stills seem to have morphed into a less minimalist Spoon, and your replay mileage may vary based on how strongly you liked what they were doing before.
  14. The songs on Without Feathers are fine, really, and for the most part pretty well-crafted, but there just doesn't seem to be a good reason to listen to them.
  15. It wouldn’t be so bad if The Stills didn’t kill the majority of the newly minted loose-limbed percussion and flighty major key romps ("The Mountain")--with drivel choruses and intermediate tricks (flooding the speakers with a porridge of every conceivable instrument).
  16. Sometimes we forget why reinventions are so impressive; it’s because they’re so difficult to pull off. Without Feathers, while not terrible, is the mediocre representative of what happens when bands attempt it without the necessary artistic passion.
  17. Former admirers, be warned that 'Without Feathers' will send you into a headless, flailing flap; while any newcomers to The Stills will be left with a plump, bald turkey on their hands.
  18. The middling tempos of plodding tracks like "Halo the Harpoons" and "It Takes Time" underscore the new lineup's shortcomings.
  19. A severe line-up change has left the Stills devoid of much of its original edge.
  20. Where melody, mood, and technique dominated Logic, Without Feathers sinks into a tuneless no man’s land.
User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 22 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 16
  2. Negative: 4 out of 16
  1. BillB
    10
    This is my favorite album of the stills so far! Its better than Logic and destroys Oceans will Rise. Every song is catchy and there isn't one song I dislike. Full Review »
  2. James
    9
    First thoughts: this doesn't sound anything like LWBYH, where the hell is Fletcher? Who cares what's been done before. Good luck breaking new ground to anyone who tries! I read review after review of reviewers comparing this album to other bands. Of course that is going to happen over and over again since there are decades of artists in this country and others constantly making music... Every day... This album will either captivate you or completely turn you off of the Stills. Just make sure you listen to it before you buy. Full Review »
  3. ArthurV
    9
    I was disappointed when I first heard Witout Feathers because it wasn't as emotional and deep and explosive as Logic Will Break Your Heart but after repeated listens WF turns out to be a great, solid album from beginning to end. This is simply a case of albums over bands. How boring would it be if they released an album that sounded like LWBYH every two years for the next eight years? Bands need to evolve and experiment. And that's exactly what they do on this cut. They traded in their downtown loft for a cabin in the woods. This is a well-produced album rock rock album with notable guest stars (Auf Der Mar, Emily Haines) which given how great LWBYH, it had no guest stars. Keep in mind, people, that LWBYH had some bad parts. Not every album can be OK Computer. This record is getting the wrong kind of response. They couldn't keep gettiing compared to Interpol (you can't say their sophomore album was better, by the way), either. Full Review »