|
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eavyhorses.jpg
Album Title: Heavy horses Artist: Jethro Tull Nationality: British Year: 1978 Subgenre: Folk/Prog Player(s): Ian Anderson (Vocals, flute etc), Martin Barre (Guitar) Barriemore Barlow (Drums), John Evan (Organ, Piano), David Palmer (Keyboards) John Glascock (Bass) Familiarity: As it's my best period from the band very good, even though I hadn't heard this album in years. Favourite track(s): "Weathercock" and “Moths” Why? Just a couple of wonderful tracks Least favourite track(s): None Why? N/A Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Was actually quite looking forward to listening to the album again, even though I wished it had been Songs from the Wood. Factoids you'd like to share? A period where the band probably had their most stable line-up, from a band that were always chopping and changing band members. End impression: An upbeat folk rock recording that is one of their more robust folky recordings. Comments: This period is my favourite when it comes to Jethro Tull (as there are periods from this band that I really don't much like) I always felt their folk inspired rock was what they did best and should've embraced it even more, instead of the mind-numbing prog of Thick as a Brick and the nonsense that is known as A Passion Play. Overall Heavy Horses though is a good album but not the classic that the previous Songs from the Wood is, but it's still an album that I enjoy quite a bit. On Heavy Horses the band celebrate their folk with their rural agricultural themes and if Songs from the Wood along with Aqualung are my two favourite Jethro Tull albums, then Heavy Horses is in the small batch that I like just below this. Heavy Horses had a great production and an album that really stands up to repeated listens and always sounds fresh, as it has done for me today. Rating: 4.0 |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eavyhorses.jpg
Album Title: Heavy horses Artist: Jethro Tull Nationality: British Year: 1978 Subgenre: Folk/Prog Player(s): Ian Anderson (Vocals, flute etc), Martin Barre (Guitar) Barriemore Barlow (Drums), John Evan (Organ, Piano), David Palmer (Keyboards) John Glascock (Bass) Familiarity: With Jethro? Tons. With this album? Nothing. Favourite track(s): And the mouse police never sleep Why? Because it has a great driving feel and it's about cats! I have 2 cats and they are the best. Although I played them this song and they seemed unimpressed. Great lyrics though. Least favourite track(s): Acres wild Why? A little too much of that Jethro Celtic jig thing going on. Plus it seems to be about all the places this guy banged his woman which I don't need to know about. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Not really. I have a bit of a love/hate thing with Tull. His voice can weary me but there are flashes of brilliance. This was back in the good years so I expected it to be good and it was. Just not great. Factoids you'd like to share? Amazed Ian picked up flute just prior to starting Tull because he knew he would never be able to play guitar like Clapton. That always amazes me. Like Phil Lesh with the dead or Paul Simonon with the Clash. People that pick up instruments so late in the game but still do an amazing job. End impression: Really liked it but not my favorite Tull by any stretch. Comments: Some beautiful acoustic guitar all over this album. Both the playing and just the pure tone. I think this album is good but not something I would revisit often. Many of the songs sound very similar although I listened several times and the songs really started to distinguish themselves. 4 years later they would put out one of my favorites by them, Broadsword and the beast. I saw them open for the who in 1982 with the stage looking like a big viking ship and all that and I thought it was great. If you have not heard the broadsword album I would highly recommend it. If nothing else Ian writes some really amazing lyrics and this album is no exception: Standing like tanks on the brow of the hill Up into the cold wind facing In stiff battle harness, chained to the world Against the low sun racing Bring me a wheel of oaken wood A rein of polished leather A Heavy Horse and a tumbling sky Brewing heavy weather. Also, it takes guts to write a song called "weathercock". Rating: I will go 3.8 although with continued listening that could go up. |
I think Heavy Horses is an album that can get better on multiple listens, as it's that kind of album.
|
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eavyhorses.jpg
Album Title: Heavy horses Artist: Jethro Tull Nationality: British Year: 1978 Subgenre: Folk Prog Player(s): Ian Anderson (Vocals, flute etc), Martin Barre (Guitar) Barriemore Barlow (Drums), John Evan (Organ, Piano), David Palmer (Keyboards) John Glascock (Bass) Familiarity: I know and enjoy Jethro Tull's popular tunes Favourite track(s): Heavy Horses Why? It's epic. It starts with several progressive changes that set a mood and have their own climax before the transition to the vocals, which are excellent. Then the reprise at the end with the instrumental intro. Least favourite track(s): Most the the tracks were kind of typical Jethro Tull feel, with the exception of the opening track, Moths, and title track, which were great. Why? There was nothing really bad, but nothing really stood out; they were just a bit more folk on the folk/prog spectrum they exist on. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? As always, it's on this list, so it should be prog, and the title track really seemed to satisfy that feeling. Also, because I know and accept Jethro Tull, the vocals had already passed the test. Familiarity doesn't hurt scores. Factoids you'd like to share? We use 100% of our brain, not just 10%, that's a myth spread by people claiming to use 14% of their brain. End impression: I like the album overall, Jethro Tull is very much part of the identity of progressive music, you kind of feel like you're going on an adventure with them. So far, it's the best album of the three I've seen here. Rating: 4.0 |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eavyhorses.jpg
Album Title: Heavy Horses Artist: Jethro Tull Nationality: British Year: 1978 Subgenre: Prog-Folk Player(s): Ian Anderson (Vocals, Flute, Dancing), Martin Barre (Guitar) Barriemore Barlow (Drums), John Evan (Organ, Piano), David Palmer (Keyboards) John Glascock (Bass) Familiarity: Is it possible to be a proghead and not know Tull? Favourite track(s): Journeyman, No Lullaby Why? I picked these two because the former is groovy in an almost AOR fashion whilst the latter has some excellent orchestrations and plenty of fun posturing from Ian. Least favourite track(s): None. Why? 'Heavy Horses' is such a consistent record from start to finish that even when something doesn't stand out, it adds depth to the album experience. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Of course not. Doesn't really apply to me on this band. Factoids you'd like to share? A lot of metalheads were pretty mad at Jethro Tull in 1988. Wonder why? :laughing: End impression: Surprisingly strong album from a band that were already considered "dinosaurs" by critics. Comments: The funny thing about Jethro Tull is that a big chunk of their 70's output had at least one meh cut per record or song segments that didn't quite work on their more epic excursions. Heavy Horses, however, is one of the few exceptions to that rule by being a pretty groovy ride from '...And the Mouse Police Never Sleeps' all the way to the end. This gives it a slight edge over Songs From The Wood for me, tying it with TAAB and Aqualung as their best album of the 70's...though of course that's only my opinion. That being said, I don't think Ian was ever quite this good again going forward into the 80's and beyond. Rating: 4.5 |
Nice reviews guys. Seems everyone was impressed with that album other than me. Sort of.
Anyway, wave a fond farewell to our original list, as we plunge boldly into a listing of one thousand prog albums stretching all the way back to the sixties. This is the first selection from it, it came up on number 636 and that gives us http://www.progarchives.com/progress...0131952008.jpg The Flower King --- Roine Stolt I know very little about the Flower Kings, although this is a solo album but apparently seen as also the first album from the Flower Kings, so should be interesting. |
http://www.insideoutmusic.com/media/...ineStolt01.jpg
Album Title: The Flower King Artist: Roine Stolt Nationality: Swedish Year: 1994 Subgenre: Not sure... it's got elements of classic and neo-prog: Neoclassical Prog? ;) Player(s): Roine Stolt (Lead Vocals, Guitars, Bass, Keyboards, Percussion), Hasse Froberg (Vocals only on tracks 1 & 8), Hasse Brunisson/Jaime Salazar (Drums), Dexter Frank Jr (Keyboards, “electronics”), Don Azarro (Bass, Moog Taurus), Ulf Wallander (Sax) Familiarity: None really. I once heard a Flower Kings track but don't recall liking it. Favourite track(s): “The Flower King”, “Humanizzimo” Why? The title and opener just blew me away with its melody, its upbeat message and it was not what I was expecting at all. The epic I think is constructed very well and every time I listened to it it got better. Least favourite track(s): None Why? I like everything on this album. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? As I said above I had only heard The Flower Kings and don't remember liking them so was expecting more of the same. Also, from the album cover and the title I thought of expected a kind of hippy space/prog vibe, which was not what we got at all. Factoids you'd like to share? Although a solo album this was apparently regarded as the first album of the band The Flower Kings, from which obviously the name was taken. End impression: Much better than I had expected and it's made me decide to give the whole band another shot. Comments: When this came up I thought “Oh no! I remember the bloody Flower Kings!” But like us all I have to listen to it so I hit play, expecting a sort of hippy, peace-and-love message with a more or less psychedelic feel. From the beginning I was taken aback at the clear, crisp melody and the way the opener made me feel. I really liked this. To be fair, this album never once flags or dips in quality: it's totally solid all the way through. Stolt certainly takes control here --- check all the instruments he plays above and he also sings lead vocals. I'm kind of reminded in odd ways of the debut Supertramp album, released 1970, particularly on the second track and the way it ends. But that's not to say Stolt (or, one would assume, later the Flower Kings) were trying to rip off that band, just that there are the odd similarities between the two, for me. The keyboard work on this album is quite amazing, seen most clearly on “The magic circus of Zeb”, when Stolt sort of melds early Genesis and Yes into something that is much more than the sum of its parts, and yet totally his own sound. The instrumentals, of which there are three, are superb and never bore or seem to drag, despite one of them being seven minutes long. The highlight though is definitely “Humanizzimo”, which runs for 21 minutes and change, a fantastic epic that has everything: time signature changes, tempo changes, sections and movements, and several genres running through it, with at the end of it all a real message of peace and love which somehow does not come across as twee or insincere. I also like the way the closer bookends with the opener and gives a sort of reprise while fooling you into thinking it's a new track with its odd title. Pretty cool all round really. Rating: I have to go with a high one here, given that I didn't expect to be bothered and am very impressed at the end of it all, so given also its pedigree and what spawned from this album I'm going for 4.5 |
http://www.insideoutmusic.com/media/...ineStolt01.jpg
Album Title: The Flower King Artist: Roine Stolt Nationality: Swedish Year: 1994 Subgenre: Bats me. prog rock lite? Player(s): Roine Stolt (Lead Vocals, Guitars, Bass, Keyboards, Percussion), Hasse Froberg (Vocals only on tracks 1 & 8), Hasse Brunisson/Jaime Salazar (Drums), Dexter Frank Jr (Keyboards, “electronics”), Don Azarro (Bass, Moog Taurus), Ulf Wallander (Sax) Familiarity: Zilch. Never heard of them. Favourite track(s): “Magic circus of Zeb” Why? Well, I liked the camel or whatever that was at the end. And there was some pretty ripping guitar although it sounded like a rip off of Steve Vai only not as melodic. Kind of a wah wah hell. Least favourite track(s): Close your eyes. Why? The Nylon string guitar, the whispery vocals, the bad David Gilmour imitations. I don't know. Just painful to get through. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Well, considering I have been so pleasantly surprised with other albums here I did have high hopes. And hearing he was a great guitar player got me a bit excited. Factoids you'd like to share? Nothing comes to mind End impression: This is the kind of prog I was afraid would be dominating the list. Everything that made me think I did not like the genre. If I had heard the Watch followed by this I may have given up. Thank god for Gentle Giant, Van Der Graaf, Spocks beard... Comments: Ok, clearly I did not care for it. I was not a big fan of the vocals. The guitar sounded so way over processed. I think what I disliked mostly was the complete AOR soft rock sound of it. The bad flute in Humanizzimo that went on way too long. Sounded like Kenny G jumped in on sax at one point. "The sound of violence" didn't sound anything like the sound of violence. Then there was the "we believe in light and love, every precious thing" stuff which I wouldn't mind if it was not surrounded by such wussy music. Guitar was a little too much like Steve Vai tone wise but without the "Flair" and phrasing. I don't want to be overly mean. Roin is clearly a very good guitar player and musician. I liked some of the attempted artistic touches. Like the weird opening day baseball announcing at the beginning of Pilgrims Inn. There was a nice build up in that song. But overall I never want to hear this again and I will be gun shy for future flower kings although will keep an open mind. Rating: 2.5 |
For any who care, barring any actual input from anyone on this, this is how I see members here. If you're not happy with this let me know what level you would like to be at/think you should be at.
Trollheart --- Core Member (and Founder)! Yay! :rolleyes: Anteater ---- Core Member Unknown Soldier --- Core Member Rostasi --- Associate Member Neapolitan --- Associate Member Urban --- Associate Member Moss --- Standard Member Xurtio --- Standard Member Ninetales --- Associate Member This is based on how people have approached the task of reviewing. As I said before, membership can go up or down, so if you want to remain at the level you're at (unless that's AM) then you need to make sure you keep up the reviews. If you want to move up, or down, a level let me know. Assuming anyone cares about this. But it's more for the ranking/rating thing on the albums, so that I know whose score to include when working out each final rating. Oh, if I've forgotten anyone shout: someone did say "I'm in!" but hasn't been heard from since, so if you want to be part of the club you know what to do... |
http://www.insideoutmusic.com/media/...ineStolt01.jpg
Album Title: The Flower King Artist: Roine Stolt Nationality: Swedish Year: 1994 Subgenre: Symphonic Prog Player(s): Roine Stolt (Lead Vocals, Guitars, Bass, Keyboards, Percussion), Hasse Froberg (Vocals only on tracks 1 & 8), Hasse Brunisson/Jaime Salazar (Drums), Dexter Frank Jr (Keyboards, “electronics”), Don Azarro (Bass, Moog Taurus), Ulf Wallander (Sax) Familiarity: None. Favourite track(s): “Pilgrim's Inn” Why? I liked most of the instrumental tracks because they have that iconic prog feel with the slow lead guitar with bends and vibratos. Least favourite track(s): The Flower King Why? While I liked the set ups and some of the emphasis in the vocals, I didn't like the the timbre of the vocals. And the "We believe" chorus. My god, I was suddenly transported to a church get together. Factoids you'd like to share? End impression: Good instrumentally overall, in terms of phrasing, emphases, and subtle characteristics. However, he keys get annoying and the vocals definitely get annoying. Comments: I did like a lot of the guitar lead, even in The Flower King. The tone could have been a little warmer, and some of the get-up-and-go breaks seemed a little out of place, and the lead guitar in those parts wasn't as good. I mean, in terms of talent it was fine, but in terms of interesting expressions, it was forgettable. I'd also note that I couldn't find a studio version of Humanizzo, so I listened to a liver version from '97 when the band was technically "The Flower Kings". I liked the vocals a lot better for that song. Not sure if it was because the singer was older (or different singer?) or if he just always used a different style on that song. Rating: 3 |
http://www.insideoutmusic.com/media/...ineStolt01.jpg
Album Title: The Flower King Artist: Roine Stolt Nationality: Swedish Year: 1994 Subgenre: Neo Prog., though its arguable that its not either. Player(s): Roine Stolt (Lead Vocals, Guitars, Bass, Keyboards, Percussion), Hasse Froberg (Vocals only on tracks 1 & 8), Hasse Brunisson/Jaime Salazar (Drums), Dexter Frank Jr (Keyboards), Don Azarro (Bass, Moog Taurus), Ulf Wallander (Sax) Familiarity: I own a few of TFK albums, including this one. Favourite track(s): Either 'Humanizzimo' or 'The Pilgrim's Inn' Why? Former is a great, multi-faceted epic suite (which I like a lot) and the latter is a great instrument. Least favourite track(s): 'The Flower King' Why? The chorus is a bit annoying. Thankfully, Stolt's writing got better on the next few albums. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? I've been aware of TFK and their associated projects for so long that I doubt this question applies to me these days. Factoids you'd like to share? Roine has been around a lonnng time: he's the guitar prodigy behind Kaipa, one of Sweden's classic 70's prog outfits. End impression: This album, unlike everything else that would come later with The Flower Kings, sounds like it was meant to be something of a one-shot from Roine. For one thing, Jonas Reingold and his distinctive bass playing isn't here, and he's a key element to why TFK worked well on later albums. His absence is felt..but again, if we consider this a debut, you can forgive it. Everyone has to start somewhere right? Roine's guitar playing is probably the biggest highlight for me, since he is actually very distinctive: he's got a knack for the minor key and great sustains like David Gilmour or maybe Andy Latimer, but unlike those two he likes to bring his blues background into the forefront - his tone is earthier, but that's what distinguishes him in a genre where technical competency reigns supreme but everyone runs the risk at sounding exactly like eachother. Still, Roine is one of those singers you love or hate depending on the song. Partly why the band has always been hit or miss with me too. :laughing: Rating: A generous 3.5. |
Quote:
Just kidding, this seems quite appropriate. |
http://www.insideoutmusic.com/media/...ineStolt01.jpg
Album Title: The Flower King Artist: Roine Stolt Nationality: Swedish Year: 1994 Subgenre: neo-prog Player(s): Roine Stolt (Lead Vocals, Guitars, Bass, Keyboards, Percussion), Hasse Froberg (Vocals only on tracks 1 & 8), Hasse Brunisson/Jaime Salazar (Drums), Dexter Frank Jr (Keyboards, “electronics”), Don Azarro (Bass, Moog Taurus), Ulf Wallander (Sax) Familiarity: Quite a bit, but the problem is that I haven't heard anything by the band in around 5 years so had forgotten most of their material. Even though this is a solo album Favourite track(s): “Humanizzimo” Why? It's the showpiece track of the album and really impressed on the two listens I gave it. Least favourite track(s): None Why? N/A Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? I knew this was a Roine Stolt solo album, but also knew that it served as a blueprint for the Flower Kings. Factoids you'd like to share? Roine Stolt has a son named Peter Gabriel. End impression: Maybe I wasn't in the mood for this album but the only song I really enjoyed was the almost final "Humanizzimo" which made up for the average feel of the rest. Comments: I always knew that Roine Stolt's singing was always a key factor to getting into his music, but had forgotten how clean and somewhat processed the music can sound like, but then again when I like the songs I'd hardly notice this. I usually don't mind a processed sound as such, but usually don't always dig it on a prog rock record, but then again this is the 90s and it's modern prog which has different approaches from traditional prog. As said “Humanizzimo” is a great 21 minute track that consists of various sections and genres and shows just how talented Roine Stolt as an artist is Rating: 3.5 thanks to the "Humanizzimo" track. |
Hmm. Seems I'm the only one (so far; Ant has yet to present his review) who liked this album. And I didn't expect to at all. Interesting...
Anyhoo, here's the next one. Spinning brought me to 858 and that equates to http://www.progarchives.com/progress...1917112005.jpg Aerial --- Kate Bush It's a double; sorry about that but hey: double Kate? Can't be bad...;) I know this may not seem a natural choice for a prog rock album, but it's on the list and I can be reasonably sure that it will not be the last, shall we say, prog-related album we'll end up reviewing. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/i...dVmyAsC8HkZtig In case you missed it, a Standard Member is valued just as much as a Core Member. Your ratings are added into the overall score for every album. If you want to be a Core Member you can certainly do that, but there's a little more work involved. Now if I had called you an Associate Member, you would have a legitimate grievance, as those people generally don't contribute that much or that often. Saying you're a Standard Member is like saying "You're all right man"... Which you are. Quote:
|
Quote:
Looking forward to the Kate Bush! |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...bushaerial.jpg
Album Title: Aerial Artist: Kate Bush Nationality: British Year: 2005 Subgenre: Prog related? Player(s): Way too many to list but the main ones: Kate Bush (Vocals, Piano, Keyboards), Dan McIntosh (Guitars), Gary Brooker (Hammond), Peter Erskine/Steve Elliot/Pete Sanger (Drums), Eberhard Weber/John Giblin/Del Palmer (Bass), Rolf Harris (Didgeridoo and male vocal on “The painters link”), Chris Hall (Accordion) Familiarity: Everyone knows Kate. Though I admit I don't know enough of her material as I should. Favourite track(s): Here you have me. This album is just unbelievable and picking out a favourite track is like trying to choose between your children. Luckily I don't have children, so I can choose, but it is hard. “King of the mountain”, “Pi”, “A coral room”, “Nocturn”, “How to be invisible”, “The painter's link”, “Sunset” ... they're all great tracks. If I was pushed, maybe “A coral room”. Why? Everything here, almost, is great but I love the gentle ambience and relaxing atmosphere of “A coral room ”, and there's nobody like Kate to sing it. Could do without “Little brown jug” though! Least favourite track(s): Again, none really but if I have to choose I'd say the title and closer, “Aerial”. Why? Because so much of it is just Kate laughing, and while that's a lovely sound I want more on a song than that. Though then again it is just over a minute of that and I love the rest of the song. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? I expected it to be good, but not quite this good. Factoids you'd like to share? End impression: I need to listen to much more Kate Bush! Comments: To be honest, when this came up I sort of thought “Oh dear” (again!) because I certainly don't consider Kate to be prog. From the off though I was impressed and really that never lessened as the album went on. It's so good that I never even realised it was a double until I went to check the Wiki page. I could have listened to twice as much music and still been unsatisfied. I find it amazing --- if expected --- that the album is almost entirely driven on Kate's piano. Of course there are other musicians, but the piano holds court over everything and is the main instrument in all songs. Kate's voice of course is soothing and sexy at once, and if there's an icon for women in music she has to be up there with them. I do in fact hear the prog elements as the album goes on, but still think it's pushing it a little to call this prog. But it's a brilliant album, incredibly well constructed and played, and if this were to be anyone's introduction to Kate's music you could probably not pick a better one, though I admit I don't know much of her other work, a situation I must rectify soonest. If I have any small niggles (don't be so personal!) it's that she repeats the line “Washing machine” so often on “Mrs. Bertollozi” that it gets boring, and the birds on “Aerial tal” are annoying and the laughter on the closer. Other than that it's bloody perfect. Rating This is an amazing album and I am totally blown away by it. It's close to perfection and has certainly made me eager to explore more of Kate's music. I have no hesitation in awarding it the highest possible rating of 5.0 |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...bushaerial.jpg
Album Title: Aerial Artist: Kate Bush Nationality: British Year: 2005 Subgenre: Prog related Player(s): Way too many to list but the main ones: Kate Bush (Vocals, Piano, Keyboards), Dan McIntosh (Guitars), Gary Brooker (Hammond), Peter Erskine/Steve Elliot/Pete Sanger (Drums), Eberhard Weber/John Giblin/Del Palmer (Bass), Rolf Harris (Didgeridoo and male vocal on “The painters link”), Chris Hall (Accordion) Familiarity: Back in the 80s and 90s she was one of my favourite artists. Favourite track(s): Difficult as the album seems to run as two continual very long tracks but the first album does seem to identify itself as individual songs, whereas the second seems to be more of one long suite. Why? N/A Least favourite track(s): As I'm treating it as two long tracks it's not a overly valid. Why? N/A Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Had heard it many years ago but to be fair have problems getting into Kate Bush as a mature artist. Factoids you'd like to share? Hardly used to tour as she found it too stressful. End impression: If this is prog then much of her other material could be as well. Comments: Aerial is a pretty lush sounding album driven by Kate Bush and her piano. As per usual she's used a host of various musicians and her customary sound effects and it is a good album. Overall Aerial is a lush and accomplished album that DOES need numerous listens to dig out it's richness. The issue for me though is that this is mature Kate Bush meaning that her earlier energy and idiosyncracies are void imo on this and her more recent work, but that's not to say that the album doesn't have an exciting vibe to it. I still find her first five albums pretty amazing stuff and they're so unique in feel and style and few artists have such a run to match these five albums. I went off her musically with The Sensual World as the album largely seemed to cater for the masses by presenting Kate Bush as an artist that the average music listener could appreciate and at that time she was constantly being promoted as the women's ambassador for British music, meaning that she lost some of her aura and the following The Red Shoes was a real disappointment as an album. Kate Bush has always been about aura and mystique and on Aerial she does capture it again to a degree, even though it doesn't have the more manical style of old. Rating Based on this listen I'd give the below rating, but that could probably go up half a point if I had the time to listen to it again, I guess I've recently been spoilt when it comes to five star double albums as I'd just been re-listening to Can's Tago Mago which really is a 5.0 4.0 |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...bushaerial.jpg
Album Title: Aerial Artist: Kate Bush Nationality: British Year: 2005 Subgenre: Prog-ish Player(s): Kate Bush (Vocals, Piano, Keyboards), Dan McIntosh (Guitars), Gary Brooker (Hammond), Peter Erskine/Steve Elliot/Pete Sanger (Drums), Eberhard Weber/John Giblin/Del Palmer (Bass), Rolf Harris (Didgeridoo and male vocal on “The painters link”), Chris Hall (Accordion) Familiarity: Very familiar with Kate but not familiar with this album at all other than King of the Mountain. Favourite track(s): How to be invisible with King of the Mountain or Aerial a close second. Why? How to be invisible has a great pulsing groove to it. When I look at the songs I like best on here, they are the ones that are less piano/vocal based and more bass, guitar, drums, band sounding. Least favourite track(s): Bertie Why? Not really sure. I know it's a beautiful song written about her son but it just didn't work for me. A little too Baroque Ren fair sounding or something. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Very few. Always liked Kate Bush but never really delved deeply into any of her work. Factoids you'd like to share? Kind of cool how David Gilmour was such a big help early in her career. I do admire how she puts family above everything. End impression: I have a hard time calling this prog although it does have prog elements I guess. Comments: Kate Bush is certainly one of the more lauded musicians of our time, especially in England, and for good reason. I have a hard time figuring out what to rate this album. It's quite a bit like Joanna Newsom in that I can see such clear artistry and talent yet it's just not something I am prone to listen to. I have never been a big fan of the piano/vocal/soprano combo in general and it's just so mellow (for lack of a better word). I don't mind mellow music so not sure why I feel that way. There are some beautiful melodies and lyrics throughout this album and I really need more time with it to really be fair. I had a hard time really giving this enough spins this week and there is a lot of material on here. But it is unlikely I will bother to listen to it enough to really let it sink in. I can admire it as an artistic statement and it does make me want to hear more Kate Bush but I would almost have to be forced again. Hard for me to explain. So much music and so little time. Glad I spent time listening to it and it was not time wasted but I will be moving on. Rating: 4.0 - Clearly a great album |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...bushaerial.jpg
Album Title: Aerial Artist: Kate Bush Nationality: British Year: 2005 Subgenre: "Progressive pop" Player(s): Kate Bush (Vocals, Piano, Keyboards), Dan McIntosh (Guitars), Gary Brooker (Hammond), Peter Erskine/Steve Elliot/Pete Sanger (Drums), Eberhard Weber/John Giblin/Del Palmer (Bass), Rolf Harris (Didgeridoo and male vocal on “The Painters Link”), Chris Hall (Accordion) Familiarity: I've got a bunch of her albums. She doesn't get spun as much as others, but she's a close acquaintance for sure lol... Favourite Track(s): 'Aerial' or maybe 'Pi' Why? I love Kate when she really blasts off into the stratosphere with her voice and arrangements (which she does to great effect on the closer) and her occasional purely acoustic forays (like 'Pi'). There's really no weak track here, but these two songs in particular are on another level. Least favorite Track(s): *shrug* Why? A good album shouldn't have too many weak cuts...and there's nothing here that really qualifies as weak. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Hard to have preconceptions about Kate Bush when she's basically a living example of how someone can continually evolve their music over friggin' decades and remain fresh. Factoids you'd like to share? She was the first woman in the U.K. to top the charts with a self-written song ('Wuthering Heights'). It's a well known fact, but still very interesting nevertheless. End Impression: A great, great album. Maybe among her best? Comments: I can't say much about Kate that others haven't already remarked upon, but she's definitely the definitive "progressive" female as far as music over the last couple decades is concerned. She was kicking ass and putting out complicated, curiously compelling records long before people like Tori Amos or Bjork or Lady Gaga even learned to read music, and she's more tuneful than all of 'em put together to boot. 'Aerial' is neither her best album nor most conventional, but sits in territory that might qualify it as one of the better gateway albums for 21st century folk to leap headfirst into her unusual world. It's certainly less sinister than The Dreaming, Never For Ever or The Kick Inside, so that in itself scores points on the accessibility scale as far as I'm concerned. :laughing: Rating: 4.0 - Excellent! |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...bushaerial.jpg
Album Title: Aerial Artist: Kate Bush Nationality: British Year: 2005 Subgenre: Prog related Player(s): Kate Bush (Vocals, Piano, Keyboards), Dan McIntosh (Guitars), Gary Brooker (Hammond), Peter Erskine/Steve Elliot/Pete Sanger (Drums), Eberhard Weber/John Giblin/Del Palmer (Bass), Rolf Harris (Didgeridoo and male vocal on “The painters link”), Chris Hall (Accordion) Familiarity: None, never heard of Kate Bush Favourite track(s): Aerial Why? Nothing really stood out, it was all very similar, but I remember the instrumental break in "Aerial" the most (probably because it started to touch on some guitar styles I like in the rhythm and lead near the end of the song Least favourite track(s): most of them Why? For the same reason that there was no favorite Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Nope! Factoids you'd like to share? N/A End impression: I didn't especially like it. Comments: It seemed like I was hearing the same exact phrasing in her vocals over and over and the consistently with which she used rest notes was predictable. She rarely left the high register she was on. It really felt like was listening to the same long song and there was nothing that stood out about it. The vocals tended to drone on a bit sometimes. The keys were similar. They kind of always did the same little phrasings, wandering around the tonal centers with no poignant structure or emphasis. If it wasn't the keys, it was the low attack synths. The whole album seemed to always be meandering around without a point or descriptive musical phrasing. The only time I remember it picking up is the title track at the end. She kind of reveals the potential for a bluesy/country voice... and then she goes a little avante guarde with the the birds and the laughing... but there's still a lot of the meandering, wandering droning vocals that I've grown tired of throughout the album. The video are weird and interesting and distract from the banality of the music. Rating 2.5 |
You've never heard of Kate Bush, what country are you from?
|
USA originally, but Alaska, which is kind of disparate from continental USA. Currently living in Canada.
|
Quote:
Your description of her music, while being your opinion and you're entitled to it, is based on one album and you haven't heard any of her other music so I don't really think you can criticise such a well-known and loved artiste. Kate's voice is unique and she's known for it. She's a real icon and even if you don't know her you need to acknowledge that. It's unfair to rate her as if, because you don't know her, nobody does. That would be like me saying I don't like and have never heard of Peter Gabriel, or Eminem, or Lady Gaga, but think they're crap. You have to allow that she is beloved of so many music fans across the board and is the role model for generations. I feel you're being very unfair to her here. Also, I find your rating terribly low and surely unjustified. How can all the songs sound the same? One piece of music? That's been remarked on but there are huge differences in, for instance, "Sunset" and "Aerial", or "A coral room" and "King of the mountain". Just don't get it, I have to say. Very disappointed in your reaction. |
I'm not sure why you're so offended. I'm only rating the album, not the whole musical career of the artist. It's like you want to discourage negative reviews. Further, it appears that you want to bias my opinion of this album with a broader view of the artist, but that's not really how a review should work. The purest review is one in which the reviewer has no outside connection with the artist, so the music can stand on its own.
|
Quote:
I'm not saying you should do a positive review for every album --- I have no idea where you got that from --- negative reviews are just as valid as long as they take into account the standing of the artist. You can't for instance review a Slayer album and say this sucks without acknowledging their place in metal history. Credit where credit it due, is all I'm saying. I still can't believe you never heard of her? |
Quote:
As for Alaska, I reckon that makes darkest South America seem civilized. |
Okay, well before we annoy Xurtio so much that he gets hot enough to melt the ice around his igloo (just joshing mate!) here's the next selection. Hopefully we all know who this guy is! ;)
The spin gives us this number 513 and that equates to http://www.progarchives.com/progress...0172122009.jpg Crises --- Mike Oldfield Oldfield's most successful album outside of "Tubular bells", this one gave him two hit singles and is perhaps his most commercial offering. Will be interesting to see how this is received... |
yes boring old Mike Oldfield.
|
Quote:
In other words, shut up and just listen to the album! ;) |
Quote:
:shycouch: |
I have heard raves about Oldfield for years so looking forward to digging in. And for the record I do understand not liking Kate Bush right away. Not really my cup of tea in general. But I do find her brilliant when I bother to listen. For someone that has never heard of her (strange as that is (-: ) I found your review fair Xurtio.
Anyway, on to the new one. |
Quote:
|
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lbum_cover.jpg
Album Title: Crises Artist: Mike Oldfield Nationality: British Year: 1983 Subgenre: Instrumental Prog? Player(s): Mike Oldfield (You don't surely expect me to list all the instruments he plays, do you? It's a lot!), Simon Phillips (Drums, effects, blah blah), Ant /Rick Fenn(Guitars), Phil Spalding (Bass), Pierre Moerlen (Vibraphone), Maggie Reilly/Jon Anderson/Roger Chapman (Vocals on various tracks) Familiarity: I know Oldfield well, but have only two of his albums. Guess which two? Favourite track(s): “Moonlight shadow” Why? I knew it already and there's nothing much else on this that grabs me. “In high places” comes close but even the presence of Jon Anderson can't raise it, um, higher than it is. Also I can't help thinking of it as more of a Yes song than a Mike Oldfield one. Least favourite track(s): “Shadow on the wall” or “Foreign affair” Why? I hate Roger Chapman's vibrato voice on the former and the latter is dull, boring and uninspired, with the chorus repeated for something like half of the song. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? I actually thought there'd be more long instrumentals, given Oldfield's pedigree. On the basis of the title track I'm glad I was wrong, but the album was still a big letdown. Factoids you'd like to share? End impression: I guess I'm not going to become a fan of the man anytime soon! Comments: What is it with bloody multi-instrumentalists? Is it not enough that you can play guitar, keyboards and/or drums? Do you really have to go learning every bloody instrument known to Man, and then be so bloody good on all of them? Makes a guy feel quite ... inadequate. Seriously though, Mike Oldfield is surely known to us all, if not from the album “Tubular Bells” then from the cut from that which opens the movie “The Exorcist”. There can be few who have never heard of the man, or at least heard his music. And yet I'm not that much of a fan. Oh I have “Tubular Bells” and its (um) followup “Tubular Bells II”, but really I've listened to them about once and then put them away. They're not albums that stand up to repeated listenings. Here Oldfield has released what must be his most commercial album, with two hit singles, and indeed it looks aimed at commercial success, the way it's constructed. Only one long instrumental (and that kind of sucks) and only one other instrumental at all. He pulls in the talent of Maggie Reilly on two of the tracks, one of which is the big hit “Moonlight shadow”, while the legendary Jon Anderson lights up the album with his guest appearance on “In high places”. In contrast, Roger Chapman on the closer just annoys me. This, for me, was an album I struggled to get through the first track, knew the second, and then sort of cruised along until the last one, shrugged and said okay next. It didn't impress me, but then as I say I'm no huge fan of Oldfield, and I find anyway instrumental albums have to have that special something to make them different. I didn't find this one did. Rating You have to allow that the man is an icon and a genius, but this did not grab me so all I can award it is 3.0 |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lbum_cover.jpg
Album Title: Crises Artist: Mike Oldfield Nationality: British Year: 1983 Subgenre: Multi instrumentalist prog Player(s): Mike Oldfield (everything), Simon Phillips (Drums and stuff), Ant /Rick Fenn(Guitars), Phil Spalding (Bass), Pierre Moerlen (Vibraphone), Maggie Reilly/Jon Anderson/Roger Chapman (Vocals on various tracks) Familiarity: Just the album that was issued to everybody in America in the early 1970's. Never bothered to listen to anything else. Favourite track(s): “Shadow on the wall” Why? I thought it sounded a bit like some lost Roky Erickson track. I actually maybe it was Roky at first. I didn't realize it was considered a "hit song" for Oldfield as I never heard it before. Least favourite track(s): “Foreign affair” Why? Like Trollheart said, dull, boring and uninspired. Easily the worst song on the album. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? I also thought it would be some long instrumental album with little vocals or real melody. I was wrong and was pleasantly surprised. Factoids you'd like to share? Apparently this album is going to be available in a 5 CD box set? Why the hell...? And "in high places" showed up as a sample on Kanye Wests "Dark Fantasy" according to Wiki. End impression:Probably won't dig much deeper into his catalog unless forced by this album club. Comments: Never really understood why tubular bells was so huge but then again I was 5 in 1973. Apparently it was unlike anything else at the time and changed the face of music and all that, but does anybody really bust that one out on a regular basis? Maybe as background music while you are doing something else. Although me and my brother used to turn out the lights in our room and play that excorcist theme to scare the bejeezus out of ourselves because of course we had the vinyl Tubular bells available. May still have it, not even sure. Anyways, my first spin through this album I didn't like it at all although "shadow on the wall" caught my ear. But upon repeated listenings I started to like it a bit more. Some nice grooves, some good guest vocals, actual short songs and not just long instrumentals. Certainly some impressive musicianship. BY the 3rd or 4th listen I wasn't wishing it would end so have to admit I kind of liked it. Rating: I'll go with a 3.5 |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lbum_cover.jpg
Album Title: Crises Artist: Mike Oldfield Nationality: British Year: 1983 Subgenre: Superrrr proggggg Player(s): Mike Oldfield (everything!!), Simon Phillips (Drums and stuff), Ant / Rick Fenn (Guitars), Phil Spalding (Bass), Pierre Moerlen (Vibraphone), Maggie Reilly/Jon Anderson/Roger Chapman (Vocals on various tracks) Familiarity: I got a few of his stuffz...heh. Favourite track(s): 'Crises', 'High Places' Why? Oldfield's epic pieces are always interesting even when they meander, and I like Jon Anderson on 'High Places' quite a bit. Least favourite track(s): “Shadow On The Wall” Why? Pedestrian and a tad repetitive...plus Roger sounds like a goat on crack-cocaine whenever he opens his mouth. :laughing: Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? None. Factoids you'd like to share? Oldfield's siblings are even more talented than he is. I'll be reviewing his sister's debut 'Water Bearer' sometime in the near future methinks... End impression: His best 80's record for better or for worse. Comments: There's no doubt that Mike is one of the most influential and domineering forces of instrumental music from the early 70's onwards: he is to progressive rock what Klaus Schulze is to the Berlin School of electronic music or Philip Glass is to modern classical. And unlike those contemporaries, he's even got some pop savvy too (such as the Hall & Oates appropriated 'Family Man', a track that originated from 1982's Five Miles Out). All this being said, this was the last album until 1990's Amarok where I feel Oldfield tried to challenge himself as an artist. The opening title cut is positively massive in all the best respects and you've got some good radio-esque material in 'Foreign Affair' and the Jon Anderson-fronted 'High Places'. Still, this isn't overall as strong a recording as his pure instrumental exercises of the previous decade nor does it leave as strong an impact on me as his 90's output. Stuck between a rock and a meh place, Crises is a solid album that, nevertheless, needed stronger direction or a more cohesive set of pop tunes on the B-side to rank among his best. Rating: I think 3.0 will suffice. |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lbum_cover.jpg
Album Title: Crises Artist: Mike Oldfield Nationality: British Year: 1983 Subgenre: Instrumental Prog? Player(s): Mike Oldfield (You don't surely expect me to list all the instruments he plays, do you? It's a lot!), Simon Phillips (Drums, effects, blah blah), Ant /Rick Fenn(Guitars), Phil Spalding (Bass), Pierre Moerlen (Vibraphone), Maggie Reilly/Jon Anderson/Roger Chapman (Vocals on various tracks) Familiarity: Sadly yes, especially bloody Tubular Bells Favourite track(s): “Crises” Why? Covers its 20 minutes really and is probably a great example from what I've heard from Mike Oldfield of his typical instrumental arrays. The track has enough variety and a few twists that can really grab you. Least favourite track(s): “Shadow on the wall” Why? Oh dear! So many other bands around this time were doing this kind of thing so much better, even though I do like Mike Chapman from the Family. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? As Trollheart said I was expecting more instrumentals than this, luckily we were spared. Factoids you'd like to share? Everybody with a music collection and whether they know music or not, always seems to have Tubular Bells in their collection. End impression: Was a struggle at times, despite the fact that I did find the title track enjoyable in places. Comments: The great problem with this album is its lack of direction and cohesiveness and this largely comes about because of its artist guest feature spots from Maggie Reilly, Jon Anderson and Roger Chapman. Of the the three only Maggie Reilly does herself any justice. "Moonlight Shadow" is such a well known song and still usually played on the radio and "Foreign Affair" sounds like a very good b-side to a single from this period. Musically I don't find the pop tendencies of the album blend that well with the aural variety of the rest of the album. Mike Oldfield despite never caring for his music that much, still has to be recognized as one of the most influential artists of the 1970s, but like so many artists of this type seemed to be out of ideas that really work here. Rating 2.5 Trips up in too many places really |
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lbum_cover.jpg
Album Title: Crises Artist: Mike Oldfield Nationality: British Year: 1983 Subgenre: 80's Prog Player(s): Mike Oldfield (instruments), Simon Phillips (Drums, effects), Ant /Rick Fenn (Guitars), Phil Spalding (Bass), Pierre Moerlen (Vibraphone), Maggie Reilly/Jon Anderson/Roger Chapman (Vocals on various tracks) Familiarity: None Favourite track(s): Shadow on the Wall Why? I like the bluesy guitar... vocals are barely tolerable, but kind of intriguing anyway. Least favourite track(s): High Places Why? The vocals, especially the pacing of the vocals, were horrendous. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Well, thinking it was an instrumental got my hopes up because vocals are generally the most disappointing instrument. Factoids you'd like to share? N/A End impression: The sons on the album weren't really connected and certainly didn't feel very prog. Foreign Affair come off as a typical 80's tune, Taurus 3 reminded me of music from a golfing video game or airport jazz, Shadow on the Wall was more bluesy rock metal kind of approaching that Uriah Heep style of metal which I could finally appreciate on its own, but as an album, all these styles together are somewhat schizophrenic and don't really tell a story or paint a clear picture and none of the individual tracks stands out enough to save the album. I actually would have enjoyed a pure instrumental album slightly more. There seemed to be some talent on the strings, just not a good story or musical progression to guide them. Since I've never heard of Oldfield, I don't know where he stands traditionally, but my ratings and reviews are based on the art, not the artist. Rating 2.0 |
Well, seeing as Troll is going to be taking some sort of extended hiatus from MB, I wouldn't mind leading this group and/or organizing it for awhile if you guys don't mind.
That being said, I'm not a huge fan of whatever list TH was getting his picks from, so how about we give Anteater's Top 200 Progressive Albums Of All Time a run through? I can pick a new random album every week after folks have given their verdict, plus we can also use this as an opportunity to bring new ideas to the table. :beer: Anyway, my list is more eclectic than your typical progressive rock list, since I also judge by album concept, influence..and of course if the album is progressive musically in some way, so be prepared for some variety, lol! Some of it is a far cry from the 70's prog-rock scene, but be open minded. ;) |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:46 AM. |
© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.