The Prog Rock Album Club

Neapolitan · 03-07-2014, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

Normal's overrated...

Is the normal thing to do is pick another album to review?

djchameleon · 03-08-2014, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

Is the normal thing to do is pick another album to review?

Another album was picked. It is at the bottom of the page before your comment.

Unknown Soldier · 03-10-2014, 01:05 PM

Remember album deadline is up real soon.

Trollheart · 03-10-2014, 05:38 PM

Album title: Sounds that can't be made
Artiste: Marillion
Nationality: British
Year: 2012
Subgenre: Neo-Prog
Player(s): Steve Hogarth (Vocals), Mark kelly (Keyboards), Steve Rothery (Guitars), Pete Trewavas (Bass), Ian Mosley (Drums)
Familiarity: I am a huge Marillion fan: second-favourite band of all time; have been into them since their debut.
Favourite track(s): “The sky above the rain”
Why? Though I love “Gaza” it is hard going, and I feel Marillion say more in this final ten minutes than they did in the opening seventeen in many ways. It's a fine closer, and I think this album needed to end well, as it does. Mind you, “Lucky man” comes close too.
Least favourite track(s): None, but if I had to pick one that was weaker than the rest I'd probably go for “Invisible ink”.
Why? Just feel it's a little --- a very little --- substandard, given the overall quality of the tracks here.
Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Up until “Somewhere else” I was fanatically certain that any Marillion album would be nothing short of terrific, but that album hurt me and it's been something of a slow climb back since. “Marbles” and the excellent “Happiness is the road” helped heal the hurt, but I still maintain that horrible little niggling fear that they may slip again, so the certainty with the release of each album is slightly less these days. Still, I expected a great album and this is what we got.
Factoids you'd like to share? Marillion don't usually do much in the way of political lyrics since Fish departed in 1988, only “Berlin” and “Easter” off “Seasons end” come to mind really, but here they've not only written their first and most hard-hitting politically motivated song in years, but their longest too, clocking in at an amazing 17:31!
End impression: Marillion are back baby!
Comments: I'd been waiting for the release of this album for about a year, watching the Marillion website and reading up on it. When it finally came I approached it with more than a little trepidation; apart from the fears expressed above, an album that OPENS with a seventeen-minute track had better be damn good, or you're going to lose your listeners before they have time to check out the rest. And there's also a 14-minuter and a 10-minuter here too, so not for the faint-hearted! Luckily it all came together well and I consider it one of the finest recent Marillion albums I've heard.

Again, I've written a full review of this in my journal so I'll be brief here, just to say that the Arabian style melodies in “Gaza” are expected but work well, and it goes through a lot of different changes over the course of its massive run. Some great hard guitar from Rothery and powerful drumming from Mosley, and as ever Hogarth's pained, emotional vocal rises above and demands your attention. Marillion as ever mix in a nice selection of rock, prog rock, pop and even lounge with the odd bit of jazz into this album, so whether it's truly a prog rock album or not I'd maybe have to defend, but if that isn't being progressive in the truest sense of the word I don't know what is.

My only criticism, if I have one, is that there are too many long tracks on the album, and on those longer ones I find I get easily lost, that is, they don't flow as easily as the shorter ones and I'd be hard-pressed to remember what they go like. It's the old “Ocean cloud” (from “Marbles disc 2”) problem rearing its head again, a trap Marillion have tended to fall into over the last ten years and the last four albums. Songs like “Power”, the title track and “Lucky man” hit the spot more for me because they're (relatively) short and I can relate to them more. This is odd, yes, coming from Trollheart the Epic Lover, but it's just how these longer songs come across to me. The last really long Marillion song I enjoyed was probably “Neverland”, the closing track on “Marbles” and “Interior lulu” and “House”, the final tracks on “Marillion dot com”...

I really feel that if Marillion stuck to more sub-ten-minute tracks they would be a lot more popular than they are at the moment. Much of this album is squarely aimed at longtime fans like me, and even I have a little problem with the “epics”. And yet I love “The sky above the rain”, and that's over ten minutes long. Thing is, I used to be able to sing (if you wanted to be tortured!) every word and hum every musical phrase from every Marillion album, going back to "Script" and up to about "Marillion dot com", but after that I started to --- not forget as such but maybe not be quite as impressed by some of the tracks, and the later albums I could sing some of the tracks, often close to all but not every single one. In itself I think this says something of a guy who is a total Marillion nut, and what therefore would it say of a casual listener or fan? Too clever for their own good? I do begin to wonder....

Rating: 4.0 (I'd like to score it higher, and I do love it, but I don't feel it deserves the title of classic and certainly not masterpiece sadly. But a great, great album nevertheless)

Anteater · 03-10-2014, 05:56 PM

Album Title: Sounds That Can't Be Made
Artiste: Marillion
Nationality: British
Year: 2012
Subgenre: "Neo" Progressive Rock
Player(s): Steve Hogarth (Vocals/Keyboards), Mark Kelly (Keys/Backing Vox), Ian Mosley (Drums), Steve Rothery (Guitar) and Pete Trewavas (Bass)
Familiarity: Very
Favourite track(s): Sounds That Can't Be Made, Montreal, Gaza
Why? All very powerful songs in their own way, with the title track in particular being a melodic tour-de-force on par with anything on Seasons End or Afraid Of Sunlight.
Least favourite track(s): Lucky Man
Why? Hogarth doesn't do the bluesy, bar-band thing that well.
Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? I haven't really liked a Marillion album from start to finish since Afraid Of Sunlight back in '95 (though Marbles had its' moments), so there's always a part of me that hoped they'd eventually give me something I could sit through from beginning to end with a smile on my face.
Factoids you'd like to share? Hogarth almost became the keyboardist for famed band The The right before he was approached by Marillion.
End impression: The best they've done in ten years or more.
Comments: I've never seen a band besides maybe Radiohead or The Smiths who have as fervent and dedicated a following as Marillion. The majority opinion from them is that this latest outing is their best since Marbles, and on that I would agree wholeheartedly. Hogarth has perhaps grown wearier as a singer with the passing of years, but all that seems to fall away when you hear parts of 'Gaza' or that soaring chorus on the title track and you remember why these guys continue to be so lauded despite so much competition in the progsphere nowadays compared to the 80's and 90's. There is much life left in Rothery and the boys yet.

Rating: 4.0

Neapolitan · 03-10-2014, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

Remember album deadline is up real soon.

I'm opting out on this. I didn't like the first track... I didn't care for it and couldn't get passed that to be bother write a review of the album. Before giving the album a listen I did watch a mini-doc on it learn some interest stuff but meh. I don't know... my taste is different from everyone here so I just might opt out of the club altogether. Though I'm slightly curious what the next album will be...

Trollheart · 03-11-2014, 06:35 AM

Nah, I don't really accept opting out. If you want to bow out of the club altogether that's fine but you can't pick and choose what albums you'll review really. The first one we did here was an Ian Anderson and I bloody hate him but I still did a review. If everyone could decide not to review stuff they didn't like then we'd have nothing but glowing reviews, which would be pointless.

I completely don't understand your reasoning but respect your choice, but I'd have to say if you're going to have that attitude then the club is better off without you. We want people here who will commit to reviewing and put in the slog no matter whether they like or hate the album. Just saying I don't like it so I won't review it is not in my opinion grounds for avoiding reviewing it.

That said, this is all supposed to be done in a sense of fun and good humour, so I don't condemn you for your attitude but I certainly do not share it, and if this is the way you look at reviews then I would have to say should you review anything here in the future I would take it very much with a pinch of salt. I can review albums in my journals, or in threads, that I hate and still do a good review of them. Why can't you apply that same principle here?

Anyway, if you don't want to do it nobody can force you but your reasoning disappoints me.

Edit: I should be clearer here. Nobody HAS to review an album, other than the Core Group of Anteater, Unknown Soldier and me. But if you choose not to review one just don't do it. The kind of posturing you're doing here, Neapolitan, whether intentional or not (I'm assuming the latter) is just pointless. You don't want to review an album, fine. Just don't tell us all about how you hate it and why you're not going to review it. It just seems a little mean-spirited, especially since this is one of my favourite bands. Again I'm sure that wasn't your intention but really, if you don't want to review then don't review: you don't need to post about it. There are others who can take up the slack and the CG will always put in their reviews, so no album will be ignored completely.

Trollheart · 03-11-2014, 06:40 AM

Okay I realise some of us are still trying to catch up with the current selection but hey, it's Tuesday so here's the next spin. And it's 47

which gives us

Arbeicht macht frei --- Area

Never heard of these guys... Wiki/Progarchives here I come!

Trollheart · 03-11-2014, 09:50 AM

Occurs to me I may have been overly harsh on Neapolitan, and if so I apologise, though I still find his stance disappointing. However it does serve to illustrate the fact that not everyone here is or can be as committed to the club as others, and with that in mind I'd like to propose something.

I feel that in order to belong to any club, even a stupid internet one, there are certain responsibilities that members have to accept. You can't just be a member and do nothing. Sure it's all in fun and enjoyment but at the same time you can't say you belong to a club without being prepared to give something back.

So here's what I suggest: a three-tier level of membership. First tier we already have: Core Membership. This is, at the moment, restricted to Unknown Solider, Anteater and myself, as the founders and movers of the club. It's up to us to make sure there is always an album to review, and that our own reviews are published in time. It's also our responsibility to basically run the club, and if one should be sick or unable to participate for a short while the other two should be able to step in. That's Core Membership, and it would be open to anyone who can agree to make that sort of commitment to the club.

Second level I would propose is Standard Membership. This would still mean that you would have to review every album but in recognition of the fact that maybe you have not as much time to devote to the club as us, or are not as interested in or committed to it, Standard members would be allowed an extension for their reviews, anything from ten to fourteen days, after which their reviews MUST be up.

Once all Core and Standard Members have posted their reviews I would total the scores up and award the overall average for each album. Scoring for that album would then be closed.

The last tier would be Associate Membership. This would be for the one-off, come-in-come-out members who wanted to review an album once in a while, comment, talk, discuss and hang around but who would not be relied upon for their reviews. None of their scores would be included at any stage in the average for an album. Naturally, anyone wishing to move from one tier to a higher (or lower) could be achieved if their workload/interest/commitment changed.

I don't want to come across as dictatorial or draconian on this, but I really feel to make the club work we need people to take it seriously, and I'd rather have four dedicated members than twenty so-so ones.

So, what do you think? In order for this to be ratified I feel it should only have to be approved by the three Core Members, then we can ask who wants to be at what level.

Comments welcome: let's try to make this the best album club on Music Banter, but to do that we all need to be prepared to put in a shift and justify our membership. Fair?

Anteater · 03-11-2014, 10:49 AM

Bwahahaha, and thus our MLM Prog Pyramid Scheme was born!!

...but no, I think its a sound structure TH and I think it encourages a wider range of participation too.

03-10-2014, 05:38 PM	#674 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,970	Album title: Sounds that can't be made Artiste: Marillion Nationality: British Year: 2012 Subgenre: Neo-Prog Player(s): Steve Hogarth (Vocals), Mark kelly (Keyboards), Steve Rothery (Guitars), Pete Trewavas (Bass), Ian Mosley (Drums) Familiarity: I am a huge Marillion fan: second-favourite band of all time; have been into them since their debut. Favourite track(s): “The sky above the rain” Why? Though I love “Gaza” it is hard going, and I feel Marillion say more in this final ten minutes than they did in the opening seventeen in many ways. It's a fine closer, and I think this album needed to end well, as it does. Mind you, “Lucky man” comes close too. Least favourite track(s): None, but if I had to pick one that was weaker than the rest I'd probably go for “Invisible ink”. Why? Just feel it's a little --- a very little --- substandard, given the overall quality of the tracks here. Any preconceptions prior to listening, whether good or bad? Up until “Somewhere else” I was fanatically certain that any Marillion album would be nothing short of terrific, but that album hurt me and it's been something of a slow climb back since. “Marbles” and the excellent “Happiness is the road” helped heal the hurt, but I still maintain that horrible little niggling fear that they may slip again, so the certainty with the release of each album is slightly less these days. Still, I expected a great album and this is what we got. Factoids you'd like to share? Marillion don't usually do much in the way of political lyrics since Fish departed in 1988, only “Berlin” and “Easter” off “Seasons end” come to mind really, but here they've not only written their first and most hard-hitting politically motivated song in years, but their longest too, clocking in at an amazing 17:31! End impression: Marillion are back baby! Comments: I'd been waiting for the release of this album for about a year, watching the Marillion website and reading up on it. When it finally came I approached it with more than a little trepidation; apart from the fears expressed above, an album that OPENS with a seventeen-minute track had better be damn good, or you're going to lose your listeners before they have time to check out the rest. And there's also a 14-minuter and a 10-minuter here too, so not for the faint-hearted! Luckily it all came together well and I consider it one of the finest recent Marillion albums I've heard. Again, I've written a full review of this in my journal so I'll be brief here, just to say that the Arabian style melodies in “Gaza” are expected but work well, and it goes through a lot of different changes over the course of its massive run. Some great hard guitar from Rothery and powerful drumming from Mosley, and as ever Hogarth's pained, emotional vocal rises above and demands your attention. Marillion as ever mix in a nice selection of rock, prog rock, pop and even lounge with the odd bit of jazz into this album, so whether it's truly a prog rock album or not I'd maybe have to defend, but if that isn't being progressive in the truest sense of the word I don't know what is. My only criticism, if I have one, is that there are too many long tracks on the album, and on those longer ones I find I get easily lost, that is, they don't flow as easily as the shorter ones and I'd be hard-pressed to remember what they go like. It's the old “Ocean cloud” (from “Marbles disc 2”) problem rearing its head again, a trap Marillion have tended to fall into over the last ten years and the last four albums. Songs like “Power”, the title track and “Lucky man” hit the spot more for me because they're (relatively) short and I can relate to them more. This is odd, yes, coming from Trollheart the Epic Lover, but it's just how these longer songs come across to me. The last really long Marillion song I enjoyed was probably “Neverland”, the closing track on “Marbles” and “Interior lulu” and “House”, the final tracks on “Marillion dot com”... I really feel that if Marillion stuck to more sub-ten-minute tracks they would be a lot more popular than they are at the moment. Much of this album is squarely aimed at longtime fans like me, and even I have a little problem with the “epics”. And yet I love “The sky above the rain”, and that's over ten minutes long. Thing is, I used to be able to sing (if you wanted to be tortured!) every word and hum every musical phrase from every Marillion album, going back to "Script" and up to about "Marillion dot com", but after that I started to --- not forget as such but maybe not be quite as impressed by some of the tracks, and the later albums I could sing some of the tracks, often close to all but not every single one. In itself I think this says something of a guy who is a total Marillion nut, and what therefore would it say of a casual listener or fan? Too clever for their own good? I do begin to wonder.... Rating: 4.0 (I'd like to score it higher, and I do love it, but I don't feel it deserves the title of classic and certainly not masterpiece sadly. But a great, great album nevertheless) __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

03-11-2014, 06:35 AM	#677 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,970	Nah, I don't really accept opting out. If you want to bow out of the club altogether that's fine but you can't pick and choose what albums you'll review really. The first one we did here was an Ian Anderson and I bloody hate him but I still did a review. If everyone could decide not to review stuff they didn't like then we'd have nothing but glowing reviews, which would be pointless. I completely don't understand your reasoning but respect your choice, but I'd have to say if you're going to have that attitude then the club is better off without you. We want people here who will commit to reviewing and put in the slog no matter whether they like or hate the album. Just saying I don't like it so I won't review it is not in my opinion grounds for avoiding reviewing it. That said, this is all supposed to be done in a sense of fun and good humour, so I don't condemn you for your attitude but I certainly do not share it, and if this is the way you look at reviews then I would have to say should you review anything here in the future I would take it very much with a pinch of salt. I can review albums in my journals, or in threads, that I hate and still do a good review of them. Why can't you apply that same principle here? Anyway, if you don't want to do it nobody can force you but your reasoning disappoints me. Edit: I should be clearer here. Nobody HAS to review an album, other than the Core Group of Anteater, Unknown Soldier and me. But if you choose not to review one just don't do it. The kind of posturing you're doing here, Neapolitan, whether intentional or not (I'm assuming the latter) is just pointless. You don't want to review an album, fine. Just don't tell us all about how you hate it and why you're not going to review it. It just seems a little mean-spirited, especially since this is one of my favourite bands. Again I'm sure that wasn't your intention but really, if you don't want to review then don't review: you don't need to post about it. There are others who can take up the slack and the CG will always put in their reviews, so no album will be ignored completely. __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018 Last edited by Trollheart; 03-11-2014 at 06:48 AM.

03-11-2014, 06:40 AM	#678 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,970	Okay I realise some of us are still trying to catch up with the current selection but hey, it's Tuesday so here's the next spin. And it's 47 which gives us Arbeicht macht frei --- Area Never heard of these guys... Wiki/Progarchives here I come! __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

03-11-2014, 09:50 AM	#679 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,970	Occurs to me I may have been overly harsh on Neapolitan, and if so I apologise, though I still find his stance disappointing. However it does serve to illustrate the fact that not everyone here is or can be as committed to the club as others, and with that in mind I'd like to propose something. I feel that in order to belong to any club, even a stupid internet one, there are certain responsibilities that members have to accept. You can't just be a member and do nothing. Sure it's all in fun and enjoyment but at the same time you can't say you belong to a club without being prepared to give something back. So here's what I suggest: a three-tier level of membership. First tier we already have: Core Membership. This is, at the moment, restricted to Unknown Solider, Anteater and myself, as the founders and movers of the club. It's up to us to make sure there is always an album to review, and that our own reviews are published in time. It's also our responsibility to basically run the club, and if one should be sick or unable to participate for a short while the other two should be able to step in. That's Core Membership, and it would be open to anyone who can agree to make that sort of commitment to the club. Second level I would propose is Standard Membership. This would still mean that you would have to review every album but in recognition of the fact that maybe you have not as much time to devote to the club as us, or are not as interested in or committed to it, Standard members would be allowed an extension for their reviews, anything from ten to fourteen days, after which their reviews MUST be up. Once all Core and Standard Members have posted their reviews I would total the scores up and award the overall average for each album. Scoring for that album would then be closed. The last tier would be Associate Membership. This would be for the one-off, come-in-come-out members who wanted to review an album once in a while, comment, talk, discuss and hang around but who would not be relied upon for their reviews. None of their scores would be included at any stage in the average for an album. Naturally, anyone wishing to move from one tier to a higher (or lower) could be achieved if their workload/interest/commitment changed. I don't want to come across as dictatorial or draconian on this, but I really feel to make the club work we need people to take it seriously, and I'd rather have four dedicated members than twenty so-so ones. So, what do you think? In order for this to be ratified I feel it should only have to be approved by the three Core Members, then we can ask who wants to be at what level. Comments welcome: let's try to make this the best album club on Music Banter, but to do that we all need to be prepared to put in a shift and justify our membership. Fair? __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018