the music: poorly produced (no bottom end, and the rhythm section is lacking), the guitars are uninspired and drone. if you like music to march to then this'll be a good album for you, if you prefer to put a little swing into life then look elsewhere.
lyrics: very '6th form', lacking melody and originality - they do fit the music, but is that enough of a reason to use them in a song?
they write their own songs, play their own instruments, make vague references to the past, and are better than coldplay (just to clarify here - i don't like coldplay, nor listen to them. mentioning coldplay is merely a means by which to measure how good or bad this band are - they are better than them, but that means very little when coldplay are so bad. going the other way and listing that they are worse than animal collective, big john patton, gong, kevin ayers, blind willie mctell, gene clark, tickawinda, the staple singers, lambchop, bonnie prince billy, brian eno, the majestic arrows, oakley hall, ronee blakley etc... would show my musical knowledge off, yet not make my point clear - it did leave me open to a comment about expanding my musical knowledge, but then i'm not the one that likes this tosh, so yarbo-sucks to you). but, does that mean they are any good? i say, 'no' - but, then i must be an elitist snob, i guess.