It would be interesting if WAL was released as an acoustic for the album, and then we heard it in it's present form as an extra track. I wounder how many people would be saying, "oh fuck! Noel should've done that."

Seems like that always seems to happen. The version we haven't heard is always better than actual version we have. I'd like to play devil's advocate on some of those tracks, and wonder what would have happened if they had been released the other way around or in a different order. Like with WAL, if it had been released as an acoustic first, and then we heard the "dance" version. That would be an interesting reaction.

Anyways, I liked the acoustic radio version, but in no way do I think it "pisses" over the original version. It's good, but not that good.

I always seem to prefer the originals of the songs we get, i.e all of the DOYS album version including WFTR. just my opinion and yes deasy55 it would've been better as a guitar track. For me anyway as I prefer guitar music. It's just flat and plus his vocals on chorus on the acoustic version have way more of a punch.

Well I'll just have to disagree. If it was guitar instead of piano it would have been horrible imo. As it is right now its my favourite of the 4 we heard.


Imagine Falling Down as a guitar driven track? That's what they made it sound like live and it was fairly horrible.

The style is familiar. It's a Noel track with all the traits of a Noel track, just using things other than a guitar for once.

Spot on spaneli. Ooooh! A new nickname perhaps. Spot-On Spaneli. I like it.

I always love getting acoustic versions of songs, but in this case the original is still a lot better. Both are great, but I still love just about everything about the original, especially the vocals.

In no way is Falling Down a guitar driven track.

It's a drum driven track. Supersonic is guitar driven, Falling Down is surely not. imo

I can hear a guitar the whole way threw a few Fatboy slim songs, but that doesn't make them guitar driven.

It's the way a guitar is used that makes a song driven by it. And the way Falling Down uses it, kind of excludes it from being guitar driven. The guitar in Falling Down is complementary to the drums rather than driving with them.

Falling Down is completely drum driven. The guitar is almost used just to layer the track, rather than drive it.

It's not even a secondary instrument on the song. It's basically just there for layering.

Not to drive this in the ground, but really imo Falling Down is not a guitar driven song. The way the guitar is being used just doesn't support it being a guitar driven track.

I think the guitar is there for more than just layering. Are you a producer or something? Did you hear it live? Yeah the drums and synths are primary but the guitar sounds like it is too.

Anyway my initial point was 'AKA... What A LiFe!' could've been a lot better.

Which was the point Deasy55 made



Live Falling Down was made into a guitar driven track, but on the record it's not. I'm talking about the album version and it doesn't take a producer to tell if something is just used for layering or if it's not even a secondary instrument. If that's the case, then we should never talk about music again until we're all producers.

You're basically arguing with yourself when it comes to the question of whether FD is guitar driven or not. Deasy55 had already previously answered that live it was made that way, while on the album it wasn't.

Don't agree, layering sounds like something being touched up polished to make the record sound fuller.

Put it this way if you took the guitars off Falling Down it wouldn't be half as good, it would be missing something very important. I quite like the chord structure in Falling Down actually. I play it myself on acoustic guitar a lot. Maybe that's why I hear it and maybe feel it's more important on the track.