The Strokes are back with a new album out tomorrow (March 22). Below, our editors and staff music writers share their first impressions of Angles, along with some audio samples from the new record.

1. Most people either love or hate The Strokes. What did you think of them prior to hearing the new album?

Keith Meatto: Their sound is nothing new: a poppy homage to the Velvet Underground and their descendants. Still, their debut Is This It? is among my favorites of the last decade, a record that radiates energy and the gleeful despair of youth. The subsequent albums are more forgettable.  I did enjoy the earnest pop songs on Albert Hammond’s solo album Yours to Keep and Julian Casablancas’ collaboration with Danger Mouse on Dark Night of the Soul. Chris Thile and Punch Brothers do some inspired bluegrass covers of “Heart in a Cage” and “Reptilia.” Above all, The Strokes put on a spectacular live show.

L.V. Lopez -  I definitely fell on the negative side, though “hate” is not right.  I was initially underwhelmed by Is This It?, although on returning to it after six or seven years I was actually impressed.  The rest of their material –and all of Casablancas’ solo work– has left me cold.

Peter Lillis: I dig The Strokes. Their quick rise at the turn of the millennium was fueled by the public’s desire for something familiar yet new. That said, The Strokes are far from new these days. Rock royalty has always been an interesting phenomenon, but their story is even more surreal. Prior to Angles, The Strokes seemed washed up after three records. That’s not to say that I wasn’t excited for this new record, but its important to view them in a realistic light.

P.J. Bezanson: I like the Strokes but probably appreciate Is This It? more now than I did when I first heard it and there are plenty of tracks on First Impressions of Earth that seem under-appreciated (“Vision of Division” rocks).  At Outside Lands last August, they sounded every bit as good as they did 6, 7, or 8 years ago and seemed to enjoy playing together.  Perhaps with a little maturity and a little but of humility after sputtering solo attempts, I thought The Strokes could pull things together for a fourth album and was looking forward to Angles.

2. What are the highlights of the new album?

Lopez: “Machu Picchu” and “Two Kinds of Happiness” are definite highlights.  The Strokes most obvious influences have been the proto-punk New York and Detroiters of the early 70′s (The Stooges, The MC5, The VU). As those groups’ music influenced a whole slew of bands that would eventually become “The New Wave,” the move to New Wave sounds seems appropriate for The Strokes.  I think the record could have been a true success if they had stuck with this approach throughout.

Lillis:  As always, most songs are arranged splendidly. Each instrument takes on a unique yet necessary personality that builds to a graceful, rocking end. “Under Cover of Darkness” is the obvious standout track that takes much from their pop-rock past. Outside of that, there are inspired moments, like the big choruses on “Machu Pichu” and “Taken for a Fool” or the dreamy verses of “Call Me Back.”

Bezanson: “Under Cover of Darkness” is the stand out, signature Strokes song on the album (with perhaps “Metabolism” as well, although “Metabolism” isn’t as musically varied or creative).  The other highlight is that the album is full of the band trying new things.  In addition to “Machu Pichu” and “You’re So Right” attempts at other styles, “Gratisfaction” evokes more southern indie music rhythm and melody (Spoon’s “Cherry Bomb”).  The highlights are less in specific tracks than in the suggestion that the Strokes might not be treating Angles as a going through the motions attempt to recreate an old album to make some money, but instead to try new things and get better at the craft.

Meatto: “Machu Picchu” is a highlight. Funky is not the first word that comes to mind to describe the Strokes. Yet here they are being funky, in a New Wave meets disco kind of way, with a guitar part that seems to quote Michael Jackson’s “Startin’ Something.” The other highlight is “Taken for a Fool,” probably because it’s the catchiest song. Dig the syncopated bass line and the way the synthy guitar mirrors the vocal. This song has the album’s first singalong chorus: “You get taken all the time for a fool/I don’t know why/You’re so gullible/But I don’t mind” and one of its few memorable lyrics: “Monday Tuesday is my weekend.” Words to live by.

The Strokes, Machu Picchu

The Strokes, Under Cover of Darkness

3. What are the lowlights?

Lopez: “You’re So Right” is an abomination; it highlights the difference between “lo-fi” and “poorly produced.”  Also, Muse already beat them to aping Radiohead; that ship has sailed.  “Metabolism” isn’t much better; it makes me think that one of them picked up a Megadeth record as a joke and then bet one of his buddies he could write a Megadeth song.  Honestly, I don’t get either of these tracks.  Did the band just not have enough material for a full LP?  Did one member of the band demand that his original compositions be included (as Phil pointed out, we haven’t seen the liner notes)?

Meatto: Agreed. “You’re So Right” is a paint by numbers version of Radiohead and the low point of the album.

Bezanson: The downside to Angles is that it is hard to identify which tracks are, or could become (with more listening time) anthemic or well-appreciated songs.

Lillis: With the exception of “You’re so Right,” the album is rarely bad, but  really never memorable. Maybe that’s because of its disjointed nature, but I chalk it up to weak songwriting. The songs aren’t terrible, they’re just not very good.

The Strokes, You’re So Right

4. Takeaway from the new album?

Lopez: It’s a passable but unremarkable record with some significant highs and some significant lows, notable primarily for immediacy of its inconsistency.  Absolutely no track sounds like it belongs behind the one before it, and I realized this before I realized I like any of the songs.  I think I’m left feeling that The Strokes are a pretty good band that had one great record in them.  If they had chosen to fade away with a decent LP every three years, and Angles had been one of them, I wouldn’t have been disappointed.  But with the hype surrounding this “reunion record,” I feel let down.

Meatto: Decent, but not exceptional. Eight of the ten songs are solid, but none of them really grab you by the throat. Overall, there’s a disjointed quality that makes Angles feel more like a collection of one-offs than a cohesive album.

Bezanson: It’s a disappointment. By the mid-2000s, both the Strokes and the White Stripes (who recently formally came to an end) were at the forefront of do it yourself garage band stardom.  Credit Jack White for constantly moving the White Stripes and his other projects forward and creating music that was distinctly his, but evolving.  Angles seems to want to be that; however the execution just isn’t as good.

Lillis: Pretty easy listen. Some really strong rocking moments and excellent guitar rock as expected, but it won’t make its way into my regular listening record roster. The faux-new wave-prog rock sound is stale and neutered. But it’s really not surprising. No longer a breath of fresh air, the former indie rock mainstay has fallen behind the times. But I’m still pumped to see The Strokes live this summer, so what does that say?