The Ting Tings: Sounds from Nowheresville

Perhaps the Ting Tings should have taken a deep breath on this one... because the work is sluggish, self-conscious, and seemingly deliberately bad.

The Ting Tings

Sounds from Nowheresville

Label: Sony
US Release Date: 2012-03-13
UK Release Date: 2012-02-27

The Ting Tings are a noisy, exuberant and highly accomplished boy/girl band, at least so on their first CD release in 2008, We Started Nothing. That disc did, in fact, start something -- to the tune of about two million sold. The title track is six-plus minutes -- perhaps too long by a third -- of mildly snarling and yet sweet vocals and ragged and repetitious one-note guitars. And the point is this: it’s a great song, though not even the disc’s best, and one that defines, until now, the essence of the Ting Tings -- confident, hook-heavy, catchy, melodic, joyous, petty, pouty, none-too-serious, and repetitious in the best sense of pure pop and dance music. We Started Nothing works because it is kookily unpredictable, honest, melodic and high-energy, void of self-regard. And the few weaker songs do not over-shadow the better ones.

We Started Nothing is a great pop record.

Four years later, an eternity in popular music, and the Ting Tings (Katie White and Jules De Martino) have issued their sophomore effort, Sounds from Nowheresville). Or is it their true second release? Seems that record company executives thought the initial follow up was so good they’d already begun a significant promotion and even had their “hits” picked out, which, amazingly, didn’t sit so well with The Ting Tings. Who but the two parties knows the real story, but the end result is that the band scrapped at least most of that work and recorded another one. And Sounds from Nowheresville is what we have before us.

Perhaps the Tings should have taken a deep breath on this one and stayed with their original material because Sounds from Nowheresville is sluggish, self-conscious, and seemingly deliberately bad (note especially the reggae-ish "Soul Killing", which is, along with "In Your Life", an over-earnest mistake of a song). It’s as though the band made an album the record company wouldn’t like, defiantly; abandoned melody and hook, out of spite. To boot, on "Soul Killing" a squeaky chair (or something) annoys greatly, and why is it there at all?

The whole effort, a mere 33 minutes worth but seemingly longer, is disappointing, save one or two songs. Multiple spins just can’t save this one.

To punctuate the band’s disappointment with the record company, Katie White sings, on "Give It Back", “This could have been perfection/but we had a better sense / …and so we started all again.” True integrity -- is there any other kind? -- is worth respect. But Sounds from Nowheresville seems more defiance for the sake of defiance rather than a principled artistic statement. Simply put, if it were the latter the music would be much stronger and more listenable than it is. And that’s a shame, because the Ting Tings are a better band, far better, than Sounds from Nowheresville suggests.

While Katie White is a highly expressive and an emphatic singer, her voice here is all shout and fury and (perhaps deliberately) off-putting. For the most part, she abandons melody altogether. On "Guggenheim" she begins with a spoken lyric which has to do with another girl breaking up her relationship with a boy who “was cooler than the boys in all my crazy dreams". That, in turn, creates “all these crazy issues", leaving White to scream, incomprehensibly, “This time I’m gonna get it right / I’m gonna paint my face like the Guggenheim,” although I’ve read the line quoted differently. And "Guggenheim" is one of the better songs on Sounds from Nowheresville.

The best Nowheresville has to offer is "Hit Me Down Sonny", a band march of a song that offers up goofily incoherent lyrics but possess the energy and verve (White lays into this one perfectly, with a casual insouciance) of the best work from We Started Nothing: the title track, "Fruit Machine" and "Great DJ".

Hang on to what the first disc has to offer and consider this a misstep. Now if the Ting Tings can do the same, their third disc (and let’s hope there is one) should be just fine.


The year in song reflected the state of the world around us. Here are the 70 songs that spoke to us this year.

70. The Horrors - "Machine"

On their fifth album V, the Horrors expand on the bright, psychedelic territory they explored with Luminous, anchoring the ten new tracks with retro synths and guitar fuzz freakouts. "Machine" is the delicious outlier and the most vitriolic cut on the record, with Faris Badwan belting out accusations to the song's subject, who may even be us. The concept of alienation is nothing new, but here the Brits incorporate a beautiful metaphor of an insect trapped in amber as an illustration of the human caught within modernity. Whether our trappings are technological, psychological, or something else entirely makes the statement all the more chilling. - Tristan Kneschke

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.