Punknews.org
Holding On - Question What You Live For (Cover Artwork)

Holding On

Holding On: Question What You Live ForQuestion What You Live For (2002)
Bridge Nine Records

Reviewer Rating: 2


Contributed by: FortyMinutesWestFortyMinutesWest
(others by this writer | submit your own)

Bridge 9 is a great label, and there have been many times that I've discovered an impressive new band that called this label home. But this is not one of those times. "Question What You Live For" eh? Maybe these guys should take their own advice, I hear there's good money in selling insurance. B.
iTunes StoreAmazon


Bridge 9 is a great label, and there have been many times that I've discovered an impressive new band that called this label home. But this is not one of those times. "Question What You Live For" eh? Maybe these guys should take their own advice, I hear there's good money in selling insurance. But seriously, this is a very mediocre CD.

The lyrics are dull and predictable and all the songs just seem to run together. By the time you realize the first song is over, you're on track 4. I've listened to this atleast eight times, and I still can't get into. I really wanted to like this CD, but I couldn't. Holding On playing your typical straight forward, fast hardcore, and since most of this album maintains the same pace, it can become really tedious after about five tracks. I don't have a problem with a band sticking to the same style if it works, but this really doesn't work on any level. If played well, this style of hardcore can be fun and energetic, Holding On doesn't do this well enough to hold my interest.

I know alot of people are going to say something like "Holding On are some of the nicest guys ever" or "Holding On is the hardest working band ever", but I really don't care. It's good that the band is willing to work hard and that they're cool to talk to, but that certainly does not make them good. Maybe "you haven't heard this band 'til you've heard them live", I still don't care, I'm reviewing this CD, not their live show. This is the type of album you lose track of for a couple months, until you find it in the case of the CD you were really looking for.

 

 
People who liked this also liked:
Subb - Daylight SavingDesert City Soundtrack - Contents of DistractionGarrison - The ModelEmbrace - EmbraceRainer Maria - Long Knives DrawnRock Kills Kid - Rock Kills KidMy Bloody Valentine - LovelessSince By Man - We Sing The Body ElectricThe Juliana Theory - LoveSnapcase - Designs for Automotion

Please login or register to post comments.What are the benefits of having a Punknews.org account?
  • Share your opinion by posting comments on the stories that interest you
  • Rate music and bands and help shape the weekly top ten
  • Let Punknews.org use your ratings to help you find bands and albums you might like
  • Customize features on the site to get the news the way you want.
Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not respon sible for them in any way. Seriously.
Anonymous (February 4, 2004)

Yet another bad uninformed review by the useless contributors of punknews.

Learn about the music, learn about the scene before you pass something off. I can understand you not liking an album, but the reviewers here are constantly down playing great bands and toting useless drivel.

Thumbs DOWN, punknews, thumbs DOWN.

FortyMinutesWest (May 7, 2003)

The only review of mine that's really been criticized is this one. But hey, since you like my reviews so much, I promise to keep writing. In fact, I dedicate my next one to you. Hugs and kisses..

Anonymous (May 7, 2003)

No, I'd like it better if you'd stop writing fucking reviews. They all suck and you get so damn defensive when everybody says your review sucks... just fucking face it..

FortyMinutesWest (May 7, 2003)

I said you'd say what I did, just make it seem positive. Instead of calling them sticking to the same style tedious, you'd say they were consistent. Like I said, you don't like my review, fine. Write your own if you think the world needs to know how great this average at best band is. Maybe you'd like it better if I agreed with you.

Anonymous (May 7, 2003)

what the fuck are you even saying? You didn't put a positive light on it at all... you said a great old-school straight ahead hardcore band sucked... But seriously, your reviews as well as straight up writing sucks... fucking stop

FortyMinutesWest (May 5, 2003)

Then review it yourself, you're going to say the same things I did, just put them in a positive light.

Anonymous (May 5, 2003)

FourtyMinutesWest, please stop bitching, the review sucked, fucking face it... good band, bad review, bad reviewer...

FortyMinutesWest (May 5, 2003)

Eh, I hate to comment again, but.. You base your whole criticism of my review on a couple of lines where I tried to "pre-empt insults". I wasn't trying to pre-empt insults, I was merely pointing out that the most important thing to consider about a band on a CD review is the actual CD, not live performances,work ethic, or kindness. You did basically the same thing in your Liars review, when you said the band didn't care what people think, and similarly when you mentioned about the band being pretentious(but not negatively). The main differences being: you used more sentences to do it than I did, and you were much less straight forward.

FortyMinutesWest (May 4, 2003)

Furthermore, I explain what the songs sound like, the type of lyricism the band uses, etc. in my reviews.

FortyMinutesWest (May 4, 2003)

Sorry, next time I'll try to ape Pitchfork a little more.

relay1112 (May 4, 2003)

Okay point being your review sucked. I have nothing against you at all, whatever. But your review sucked. Next time review the CD, tell what the music sounds like, what the songs sound like, any tracks that may be good, etc. Don't make a preemptive strike on any insults that may be said, I don't want to read your personal gospel of why other people are wrong before they talk.

Maybe it's cuz you write way too many reviews. Every time I look at a review of a band I don't know, it's hardcore and you're writing it. And every time, it sucks. Maybe if you concentrated on fewer reviews you'd be able to get what you're trying to say down.

About your reviews not being "self-important." Just cuz a review is well-written doesn't mean it's self important. It means it's well written. It means it tells something about the MUSIC and the ALBUM and has nothing to do with defending the reviewer from personal insults he may or may not get.

Don't respond bitterly, this isn't an insult. It's a criticism. Take it how you'd like. My hands are tired. I'm done now.

FortyMinutesWest (May 4, 2003)

So whoever doesn't like Holding On doesn't like any good music whatsoever? Ok, so do you play guitar in this band or sing? And don't generalize all reviews on punknews like they're done by the same person, this is one of the few websites that doesn't just allow staff reviews, if you want "good reviews of good bands" write them yourself and stop bitching. As for describing the band, I said they're straight forward hardcore, there's not much else to say about them.

Anonymous (May 4, 2003)

i fucking love old school hardcore, but holding on is really unoriginal in this department. a few songs are so ten yard fight its insulting. and a comment about the nature of reviews. interjecting your personal opinion isnt a bad thing, but i think its more important to describe the cd as best as possible, because why should anyone listen to your opinion if they dont even know you? just sayin...

Anonymous (May 4, 2003)

Another bad review of a great band from punknews. This site continually gives negative reviews to quality groups and supports and praises the true garbage in modern punk.

Good one punknews. Too bad no one on this site knows anything about hardcore or good music in general. Keep up the lame work.

FortyMinutesWest (May 4, 2003)

I also gave Ramallah, Faded Grey, and The Missing 23rd good reviews, and they all play hardcore. It has nothing to do with whether or not I like hardcore, this CD bored me.

Anonymous (May 4, 2003)

As a reviewer you gave Unearth and Dark Day Dawning awesome reviews. Maybe you're not meant to be reviewing hardcore.

lieutenant (May 4, 2003)

I've listened to a song off of the Bridge9 website; this is unfortunate. Might be a little too much for some, but personally I love this band's name and album title. It's too bad this band is too drops of quality less to match up.

Anonymous (May 3, 2003)

ive seen these guys live twice and of course heard the cd. the lyrics are pretty much unintelligble live, but it doesnt seem to be a problem with the crowd. i do agree its not the most innovative stuff out there. but you made your point well by saying fans of just straight ahead hardcore will dig it. thats pretty much exactly right. fun shows, hard music, good time.

Anonymous (May 3, 2003)

holding on.....to my nutsack!!!!

FortyMinutesWest (May 3, 2003)

I see what you mean, but reviews by nature are opinion based. I usually make sure that I describe the band's sound while interjecting my own opinion. I get annoyed with people who are afraid to say what they really think. I'd rather have someone's honest opinion than read a review by someone walking on eggshells, as long as they don't make any really "out there" statements. Oh and by the way, I don't think these guys sound like American Nightmare(who I like alot), but oh well.

Anonymous (May 3, 2003)

Yeah but the problem with saying you like it or you don't is that you can't agree with peoples opinions. Hell, there are tons of people out there who think the Clash aren't a good band... Everyone has their likes and dislikes but I feel it is the reviewers job to give them some info on the release and let them decide for themselves. Say that Holding On has a straight-ahead, old-school hardcore style and fans of American Nightmare might like the release... Shit like that..

FortyMinutesWest (May 3, 2003)

Hah, I saw that coming.

Kevin11 (May 2, 2003)

These guys are the hardest working band, and such nice guys! You really havent heard them till you've seen them live.

FortyMinutesWest (May 2, 2003)

like it to*

FortyMinutesWest (May 2, 2003)

Ok, point well taken, and I respect your opinion. But, when I write reviews I like it sound like I'm discussing the album with a friend, not some sterile piece of writing from someone who takes themselves way too seriously. If I think it sucks, I'll tell you it sucks, if it's good, I'll say it's good. I hope you understand what I mean.

Anonymous (May 2, 2003)

Here is my suggestion. Not everyone out there is going to all agree that a disc is incredible and not everyone will agree that it fucking sucks but in all honostly, personal opinion should be kept to a minimum in reviews. Your job as the reviewer is to REVIEW the cd, explain the bands sound, style, technique etc and from that let the listener decide. Althoug you did this some you had FAR too much personal opinion. I personally think that this is a great hardcore album. I picked it up when it came out and it has been in constant rotation in my cd player. It's fast and hard hitting with some great changes and breakdowns. The vocals are great (I'm not nesicarily saying lyrics) and flow greatly with the music....

FortyMinutesWest (May 2, 2003)

Ok, so he(or she) doesn't like my review, so I asked them what they would've done differently. I'm sorry that we can't all be as witty as you.

REALPUNX4LIFE (May 2, 2003)

You're really bad at diffusing counter-arguments that no one would have ever thought up.

FortyMinutesWest (May 2, 2003)

How would you have written it? Please enlighten me.

Anonymous (May 2, 2003)

jees man, learn how to write a review...

Exclusive Streams

Sponsored


Newest Reviews

Punknews.org Team

Other Places to Go