New Ozma Songs on Myspace

[DarkNebula]

As bad as it sounds, I think the songs are okay and all but I really hope they all don't end up sounding like this. Because then they'll all be... kinda the same. The thing I loved about Borderline was how different every song really was. Turtleneck coverup is one of my favorite songs, as well as wake up on there. I want to hear everyone in Ozma scream out singing to powerpopy guitars and that synth I can't get enough of. T_T

edit: Not to mention the different instrumentations for pretty much every song.

[Fantastic Max]

I kind of wish ozma had gone in a quirkier, poppier, rock direction rather than with the overly serious big rock sound.Ã,  I think that these kind of songs (like bad dogs, and even battlescars) sound a little forced and insincere.Ã,  I think they do pop (and even mellow indieish stuff like your name) better.

I kind of agree with that. Cept that I do love both Bad Dogs and Battlescars, so not that..but the rest..yeah.

[Fantastic Max]

It just seems like there a few splits between preferences among us all.

There are those, who feel that bands should completely re-invent themselves whenever they can, and completely welcome anything new and crazy, others who are the exact opposite who feel, Ozma should stick to poppy melodic stuff, others who are in the middle, who want to keep the old sound but let it evolve a bit.

And it's pretty obvious with everyone's comments who's for what. I dunno, I guess I find myself in kind of the middle..the whole wanting the old sound, but with perhaps, some evolution.

[WhoYouCallinWeez]

very nicely put. im all for the Melodic Powerpop sound, but yes a lil evolution wouldn't hurt that sound.

[brad]

idk guys.  i love the new songs.  they're growing.  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

[Colt45]

idk guys.Ã,  i love the new songs.Ã,  they're growing.Ã,  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.Ã,  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.Ã,  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

then don't call it ozma

[Fantastic Max]

idk guys.Ã,  i love the new songs.Ã,  they're growing.Ã,  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.Ã,  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.Ã,  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

Haha, I never said I didn't like em...I actually love Straight Flush, and Darkness Into Light.

[tis not mike other]

I really really like Strait Flush, but I definitely think if the album needs some simple, poppy yet brilliant songs, like thier old ones. I like the more mature songs but I dont want an entire album of it. I like both what can I say. Hopefully ryen and danniel will "blend" their sound with alot of co-writing, like said in the other topic, I think Ryen and Dan work best together, although their both brilliant. I love ozma.

[Jeff42]

idk guys.  i love the new songs.  they're growing.  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

then don't call it ozma

All sorts of bands have gone through radical changes in their sound over time while keeping the same name.  The Beatles are a prime example.  Why does a stylistic change mean Ozma should no longer be called Ozma?  It's the same band except for the drummer, and again, all sorts of bands have changed drummers.

[Colt45]

idk guys.Ã,  i love the new songs.Ã,  they're growing.Ã,  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.Ã,  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.Ã,  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

then don't call it ozma

All sorts of bands have gone through radical changes in their sound over time while keeping the same name.Ã,  The Beatles are a prime example.Ã,  Why does a stylistic change mean Ozma should no longer be called Ozma?Ã,  It's the same band except for the drummer, and again, all sorts of bands have changed drummers.

do you realize you just compared The Beatles to Ozma?

[noonchild]

idk guys.  i love the new songs.  they're growing.  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

then don't call it ozma

All sorts of bands have gone through radical changes in their sound over time while keeping the same name.  The Beatles are a prime example.  Why does a stylistic change mean Ozma should no longer be called Ozma?  It's the same band except for the drummer, and again, all sorts of bands have changed drummers.

do you realize you just compared The Beatles to Ozma?

Dude, you're a shmuck.  He was simply using them of an example of how bands change thier sound and not their name.

[simpleton]

idk guys.  i love the new songs.  they're growing.  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

then don't call it ozma

All sorts of bands have gone through radical changes in their sound over time while keeping the same name.  The Beatles are a prime example.  Why does a stylistic change mean Ozma should no longer be called Ozma?  It's the same band except for the drummer, and again, all sorts of bands have changed drummers.

do you realize you just compared The Beatles to Ozma?

Dude, you're a shmuck.  He was simply using them of an example of how bands change thier sound and not their name.

use Weezer instead.

[I like ozma]

i think that you can use the beatles as an example for ozma, because no matter what song the beatles wrote or played you could always say "thats a beatles song" and they didnt have to stick with one sound.

im not saying that i want ozma to stick with the same sound, but instead just be able to write what they want and still make it sound like themselves

[gloom-glaam]

idk guys.Ã,  i love the new songs.Ã,  they're growing.Ã,  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.Ã,  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.Ã,  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

then don't call it ozma

Stupidest post of the day!

[The Other Mike]

idk guys.  i love the new songs.  they're growing.  you have to keep in mind they're not 18 anymore.  thes are really mature, ass-kicking, rock songs.  if you don't like straight flush, you're just wrong.

they don't really sound more mature to me... they sound older I guess.  Maturity to me means developing a more challenging sound, whereas this seems to be moving in the straightforward rock direction.

[brad]

the added synth and more fuller sound they are going with is more challenging, and thus more mature then songs in the past where they'd just chug away on power chords and have synth in the solos.  plus i think the solos in these songs are absolutely huge, especially in straight flush, with the harmonizing of the guitar line and synth line.  another plus is i love the vocal screaming on both daniels and ryens part (in barriers).  and finally, for daniels songs at least, they have a very ass-kicking type rhythm, that almost seems angry to me.  i love this.  this is new and more mature to me.

[The Other Mike]

I guess I meant challenging from the listener's perspective.  I think the 'angry' sound is the biggest turnoff.  Angry songs tend to smack of adolescence a bit unless the anger is focused on a clearly defined, interesting target.

[jvstin]

dan and ryen get quite emotional live... so i don't really see the 'screaming' as anything threatening to the whole ozma vibe.

none of the new stuff comes off as angry or almost angry to me.

edit: i prefer the straight-foward rock direction to a mellower sound. kicking ass/rocking was always one of ozma's important strengths. the melodies are not as accessible, but they're still good melodies.

[///]

let's keep in mind that Ozma can write some great, mature songs without the teenage hook...some great songs from borderline; Your Name, Restart, Curve in the Old 1 9 and Lightyears Will Burn...which I think is one of the best songs on the record.

I can see these new songs in the same vain as those three, I just don't think they're fully developed yet. they still feel like demos to me, which is good because that's what they are...I think by the time these new songs are fully fleshed out they will be on par with any other songs of ozma's catalogue.

[Colt45]

believe me i'm as big of an ozma fan as anyone on these boards, guarenteed... but a lot of you are confusing "more mature" with boring.

Example(s) of more mature:

Tom Petty - Wildflowers
David Bowie - Low
Green Day - American Idiot
Red Hot Chili Peppers - Californication
REM - Automatic For The People
Eric Clapton - Slowhand

those are artists who "reinvented" their sound, "grew up," but kept pretty much the same sound as old, just evolved it into something "more mature," "fresh," and "new."

What Ozma have done isn't evolve their old sound, instead they've just gotten boring, pretentious, and dull. They've basically taken Gone With The Ghosts sound and mixed it with the really bad and boring latter Yes Dear sound. It seems like Brummel and Slegr have discarded any possiblility of adding a hook or a decent melody to their new stuff, hence the music is more boring.

You can defend every thing these guys do because they're your "friends." I know they're really cool people and I respect every member of this band and they're a blast to see live. But saying that what they're doing is any form of musical evolution is wrong. Musical evolution is when you gradually change your sound but still sound like the same band. Green Day have recently done it successfully whether you like American Idiot or not (personally i do not though I appreciate it.)

I'm sure i'll get bashed for making this post but seriously think about it.

Are these songs really any good? If you were a record label (Which Ozma is currently shopping for) would you see these songs as a wise investment? Personally I wouldn't. Ozma were close to becomming great after Spending Time. The talent was there, the chemistry for the most part was there, it was just a little unfocused. This new stuff not only seems unfocused, but it's not even memorable. I would buy the album because I support the band, not because I enjoy the music.

In life it's good to experiment, but you're usually better off sticking with what your good at. If you disagree ask Michael Jordan how his baseball career went.

Members of Ozma if you read this you can say what you will about me, but honestly these songs suck. If John Popper heard these new songs he wouldn't give it a second listen. I know for a fact he liked Spending Time on the Borderline. If that's not enough to make you rethink your current path, than I guess you're already set in your ways.

[jvstin]

wow, i haven't thought of it that way...

i hate the new songs. they suck.

[Lando_Calrissian]

believe me i'm as big of an ozma fan as anyone on these boards, guarenteed... but a lot of you are confusing "more mature" with boring.

Example(s) of more mature:

Tom Petty - Wildflowers
David Bowie - Low
Green Day - American Idiot
Red Hot Chili Peppers - Californication
REM - Automatic For The People
Eric Clapton - Slowhand

those are artists who "reinvented" their sound, "grew up," but kept pretty much the same sound as old, just evolved it into something "more mature," "fresh," and "new."

What Ozma have done isn't evolve their old sound, instead they've just gotten boring, pretentious, and dull. They've basically taken Gone With The Ghosts sound and mixed it with the really bad and boring latter Yes Dear sound. It seems like Brummel and Slegr have discarded any possiblility of adding a hook or a decent melody to their new stuff, hence the music is more boring.

You can defend every thing these guys do because they're your "friends." I know they're really cool people and I respect every member of this band and they're a blast to see live. But saying that what they're doing is any form of musical evolution is wrong. Musical evolution is when you gradually change your sound but still sound like the same band. Green Day have recently done it successfully whether you like American Idiot or not (personally i do not though I appreciate it.)

I'm sure i'll get bashed for making this post but seriously think about it.

Are these songs really any good? If you were a record label (Which Ozma is currently shopping for) would you see these songs as a wise investment? Personally I wouldn't. Ozma were close to becomming great after Spending Time. The talent was there, the chemistry for the most part was there, it was just a little unfocused. This new stuff not only seems unfocused, but it's not even memorable. I would buy the album because I support the band, not because I enjoy the music.

In life it's good to experiment, but you're usually better off sticking with what your good at. If you disagree ask Michael Jordan how his baseball career went.

Members of Ozma if you read this you can say what you will about me, but honestly these songs suck. If John Popper heard these new songs he wouldn't give it a second listen. I know for a fact he liked Spending Time on the Borderline. If that's not enough to make you rethink your current path, than I guess you're already set in your ways.

Some excellent points. I think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say the new songs 'suck', but I agree with your general sentiment.

[brad]

I guess I meant challenging from the listener's perspective.Ã,  I think the 'angry' sound is the biggest turnoff.Ã,  Angry songs tend to smack of adolescence a bit unless the anger is focused on a clearly defined, interesting target.

i think anger was the wrong word choice on my part.  i think these songs have more attitude.  ozma on the whole seems to have more attitude then before, judging from brummels live performances.  i'm also referring to some of the riffs with this attitude.  they really drive with attitude (like some of the bass in kid icarus -- the guitars after the line "bet you won't regret giving me a run).....this is what i'm referring to.

[Fantastic Max]

believe me i'm as big of an ozma fan as anyone on these boards, guarenteed... but a lot of you are confusing "more mature" with boring.

Example(s) of more mature:

Tom Petty - Wildflowers
David Bowie - Low
Green Day - American Idiot
Red Hot Chili Peppers - Californication
REM - Automatic For The People
Eric Clapton - Slowhand

those are artists who "reinvented" their sound, "grew up," but kept pretty much the same sound as old, just evolved it into something "more mature," "fresh," and "new."

What Ozma have done isn't evolve their old sound, instead they've just gotten boring, pretentious, and dull. They've basically taken Gone With The Ghosts sound and mixed it with the really bad and boring latter Yes Dear sound. It seems like Brummel and Slegr have discarded any possiblility of adding a hook or a decent melody to their new stuff, hence the music is more boring.

You can defend every thing these guys do because they're your "friends." I know they're really cool people and I respect every member of this band and they're a blast to see live. But saying that what they're doing is any form of musical evolution is wrong. Musical evolution is when you gradually change your sound but still sound like the same band. Green Day have recently done it successfully whether you like American Idiot or not (personally i do not though I appreciate it.)

I'm sure i'll get bashed for making this post but seriously think about it.

Are these songs really any good? If you were a record label (Which Ozma is currently shopping for) would you see these songs as a wise investment? Personally I wouldn't. Ozma were close to becomming great after Spending Time. The talent was there, the chemistry for the most part was there, it was just a little unfocused. This new stuff not only seems unfocused, but it's not even memorable. I would buy the album because I support the band, not because I enjoy the music.

In life it's good to experiment, but you're usually better off sticking with what your good at. If you disagree ask Michael Jordan how his baseball career went.

Members of Ozma if you read this you can say what you will about me, but honestly these songs suck. If John Popper heard these new songs he wouldn't give it a second listen. I know for a fact he liked Spending Time on the Borderline. If that's not enough to make you rethink your current path, than I guess you're already set in your ways.

Agreed, except for the songs sucking.

[gloom-glaam]

I really do like barriers.

[butterfly]

believe me i'm as big of an ozma fan as anyone on these boards, guarenteed... but a lot of you are confusing "more mature" with boring.

Example(s) of more mature:

Tom Petty - Wildflowers
David Bowie - Low
Green Day - American Idiot
Red Hot Chili Peppers - Californication
REM - Automatic For The People
Eric Clapton - Slowhand

those are artists who "reinvented" their sound, "grew up," but kept pretty much the same sound as old, just evolved it into something "more mature," "fresh," and "new."

What Ozma have done isn't evolve their old sound, instead they've just gotten boring, pretentious, and dull. They've basically taken Gone With The Ghosts sound and mixed it with the really bad and boring latter Yes Dear sound. It seems like Brummel and Slegr have discarded any possiblility of adding a hook or a decent melody to their new stuff, hence the music is more boring.

You can defend every thing these guys do because they're your "friends." I know they're really cool people and I respect every member of this band and they're a blast to see live. But saying that what they're doing is any form of musical evolution is wrong. Musical evolution is when you gradually change your sound but still sound like the same band. Green Day have recently done it successfully whether you like American Idiot or not (personally i do not though I appreciate it.)

I'm sure i'll get bashed for making this post but seriously think about it.

Are these songs really any good? If you were a record label (Which Ozma is currently shopping for) would you see these songs as a wise investment? Personally I wouldn't. Ozma were close to becomming great after Spending Time. The talent was there, the chemistry for the most part was there, it was just a little unfocused. This new stuff not only seems unfocused, but it's not even memorable. I would buy the album because I support the band, not because I enjoy the music.

In life it's good to experiment, but you're usually better off sticking with what your good at. If you disagree ask Michael Jordan how his baseball career went.

Members of Ozma if you read this you can say what you will about me, but honestly these songs suck. If John Popper heard these new songs he wouldn't give it a second listen. I know for a fact he liked Spending Time on the Borderline. If that's not enough to make you rethink your current path, than I guess you're already set in your ways.

oh how i totally agree with this comment. yes, i will still buy the album cuz i support them but not becuz its a great album. yes, STOTB is a mature album compared to their previous based on their style of writtings and all. But if you were to call the newer stuffs mature, i don't think so. MAybe the synthesizer sounds new, but i've already heard those on bands like THE RENTALS, THE ANNIVERSARY. Maybe ozma just don't have their magic anymore, just like how weezer lost their edge.

Sometimes i wonder, who will be the next 'OZMA'?

[Cheese]

I'm gonna wait to pass judgment until a whole album is complete and in my hands for me to listen to top to bottom.

[FireAarro]

What Ozma have done isn't evolve their old sound, instead they've just gotten boring, pretentious, and dull. They've basically taken Gone With The Ghosts sound and mixed it with the really bad and boring latter Yes Dear sound. It seems like Brummel and Slegr have discarded any possiblility of adding a hook or a decent melody to their new stuff, hence the music is more boring.

I wouldn't say that... Kid Icarus has plenty of hooks and memorable melodies. Now that song kicks ass.

I'm not really that big on Barriers and the other song, but Kid Icarus is ace, from what I've heard on the bootlegs. I love Straight Flush too, but yeah, it's not that memorable.

[I like ozma]

darkness into light is good, and i find myself singing straight flush. so we should probably all wait until they have an album to start the critiquing

[Not Jason]

I like almost everything I've heard so far better than most of the stuff from spending time.  I might stand pretty much alone here, but I think they're going in the right direction.  I'm not sure if they've really achieved what they are ultimately working towards just yet, but I see these as steps in the right direction, personally.