Ok I'm saving up Kansas for another day, so we'll go with Pain of Salvation here.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Tw0cmGKTHv...edyLane__2.jpg

For us poor people who have to save our pennies...

Just to see if anybody is listening to Remedy Lane. Pain of Salvation are not an easy band to get into.

Remedy Lane is an album I'm intimately familiar with, so I'll be reviewing it for sure in the near future. :)

I'm interested in taking part in this, so I'll be listening to Remedy Lane shortly :)

Yes, I'm listening. I know what you mean, but I haven't got a problem with the album.

Pain of Salvation

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Actually, it sorta reminded me of Genesis. I think it was the vocals that did it for me, but I kept thinking that this is what a modern Peter Gabriel-era Genesis record could sound like.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

I listened to the youtube link (thanks, Troll!). So I didn't really notice any "songs" rather just one long piece of music. Not just because I couldn't see the song changes, but because it flowed together as one track.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

See above.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

I was reminded of Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins several times. I preferred the vocals solo compared to the harmonies. The harmonies just kept reminding me of cheesy power metal.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

I really enjoy progressive rock, but it's heavily skewed towards the genre's older artists. In terms of the very limited amount of new prog, this was pretty average for me.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

I feel like it drags in the middle. I remember expecting to see it at the 40 minute mark and I was only 22 minutes in. I wasn't totally satisfied with the ending, but this is only my first listen.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

Being progressive, I found the lyrics pretty avoidable. I focused more on how the voices sounded with the music. In that regard, I think they matched up quite well.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

I thought there were interesting things happening. I liked the majestic scale of the music they were trying to make. It had a classic symptoms of ELP songs, where sometimes the band took their foot off the gas to highlight a specific instruments. I've said before that's not my cup of tea as I prefer the King Crimson method of the whole band coming together. Nevertheless, I found the level of musicianship very impressive.

9. What did you think of the production?

I thought the sounds were blended together in a way that bled them together. I'm not familiar with the rest of their work, so I'm not sure if this is the intention or not.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I've only heard of them in passing as one of the better modern progressive rock bands. That's it.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Progressive metal.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

TBD

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

TBD (When I listen to it again, Ill pay attention to the track listing)

14. And the one you liked least?

TBD

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

The only way I could do that is to compare it to the rest of their work, and I don't have the background to do that.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

I wasn't loving this, but I would like to return to it again. There were several moments that I really enjoyed and that peaked my interest in terms of sound and structure.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

I didn't know there was one. According to my sources, it's about "the search of man to discover the nature of himself." I'll take that into consideration on my next listen.

18. Did the album end well?

I liked where the album was going once it passed the hour mark. However, the only 5-7 minutes dragged for me.

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

Maybe differentiate between the songs just a little bit, I would have assumed with was a 'Thick as a Brick' situation if I hadn't checked the tracklist afterwards.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

In terms of what it is trying to do, I think it says true to it's style and direction.

Well done, Electrophonic Tonic, I've heard the album a few times and written notes in my little book (while commuting), so I need to get on with this.

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Attributed to Pain of Salvation are labels like progressive rock and progressive metal (an irritating and unhelpful label at the best of times), so I was interested to see into which camp they fell, but fearing the worst (so-called progressive metal). I found they were reassuringly progressive, with clear Genesis and Faith No More influences in the first two tracks.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

Opening track Of Two Beginnings, begins with bubbling instrumentation and vocals in the style of Fish imitating Genesis-era Peter Gabriel. It is a short track, but at the halfway point, transforms itself into a Faith No More-sounding passage. Two Beginnings' position in the tracklist, preceding 3 x four-part 'chapters' makes it seem like an overture. To the Faith No More and Marillion hybrid of the 'overture' are added spoken-word vocals, rather like Mike Portnoy with Dream Theater, for second track Ending Theme (which confusingly is the first part of Chapter I).

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

Track four, A Trace of Blood, has an excellent driving, melodic intro, which settles into an imaginative riff, where Gildenlöw uses his voice to create a percussive sound. A Trace of Blood is complex with heavy guitar and kick-drums, having elements of Dream Theatre and Flower Kings added to the aforementioned bands. The sprightly instrumentation of this track certainly made me sit up and listen. Fifth track, This Heart of Mine (I PLedge), closes Chapter I by taking us back to Fish-era Marillion territory and the superb solos are like Yes's Steve Howe on Relayer (Atlantic 1974).

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

Daniel Gildenlöw is a capable singer, but adds his own dimension in an angst-ridden delivery, which is not encouraging.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

No, Gildenlow is a competent singer, although the lyrics do not always work. He also has a devil may care attitude in employng other singers' techniques.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

It improved and I did warm to the album.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

The lyrics can be jarring with phrases like, 'Through roads of agony,' and 'Lost the will to live.' This Heart of Mine (I PLedge) has uncomfortable, melodramatic lyrical motifs, such as, 'I pledge to love you till I die,'

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

Chapter II finishes with Dryad of the Woods, an incongruous, but scintillating instrumental based around acoustic guitar and synthesizer. This is supremely melodic and the time change towards the end is marvellous. Chapter III opens with another dynamic, albeit short, synthesizer-led track, Remedy Lane. Johan Langell's drums have a big sound, like Nick Mason using drumsticks on bongos. Although the tracks span different 'chapters', this is the strongest and most coherent part of the album.

9. What did you think of the production?

Clear and sharp, but quite complex. The arrangements, however, lack a bit of 'oomph'.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I had heard of them but not heard anything by them.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Progressive metal, although I do not know what constitutes 'progressive metal' and hate sub-genres. Today, I heard of one called 'power folk'!

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

Initially, I found the imagery uninviting and the music turgid, but, with repeated plays, liked it more and better understood the material. I eventually warmed to the album.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

The two instrumentals.

14. And the one you liked least?

Second Love is an unashamedly commercial close-harmony track, which at best could be a Patrick Swayze song, especially during, 'You came like the wind'. At worst it could be something by Nickelback, yet, strangely, the progressive elements are still here, including Genesis vocals, Mike Oldfield instrumentation and a Brian May guitar solo. Second Love represents a stroke of heroism and, in another age, may have given them a hit single.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Pain of Salvation albums followed those by Marillion, Faith No more, Dream Theater and Queensryche, so I assume Gildenlow is copying those bands, but I'll be tidying my sock drawer before cross-checking exact dates of albums and live shows.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

Yes, I would listen to another album, but whether I could stay the course is another matter.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

No. I gather it is autobiographical, with pertinent locations and dates provided in the booklet. There is also a concept, but the overwhelmingly depressing nature of the material prevented me from delving that far.

18. Did the album end well?

The whole thing is hit and miss, including the ending. If Of Two Beginnings is an overture, Beyond the Pale is a finale. The band throw in everything but the kitchen sink, including all the influences, particularly Mike Patton's distinctive roar.

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

The album is full of ideas and adept musicianship, but they are used seemingly at random. How I would add the 'missing spark' I am not sure. If I represented the record company, I would have fantasy artwork, with no dreary and off-putting photography. If I was the producer, I would send Gildenlow away and tell him to come back when he had written some more upbeat material.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

As above, the album is full of ideas and adept musicianship, but it needs a coherent shape and structure.

Overall Album Rating: 7.5 out of 10.


I have drafted a review for my journal.

I never heard of this band. I got impatient about 5 minutes in because you mentioned Kansas. Ended up listening to Monolith instead...sorry. :)

But I do agree...I heard the Peter Gabriel influence right off the bat....and weirdly Brian Ferry.

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Starts off with the familar now Peter Gabriel era-Genesis vocal style before the opening song breaks into more mixed and often muddled sounding Pain of Salvation territory. Anybody listening will surely note how unique this band are. And as Big Ears states there is a Faith No More influence which I never noticed before, kind of obvious really.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

I actually think the opening tracks, act as a guide and enable us to understand the stronger tracks that come later. They're kind of like a blind man leading us into his world of darkness!

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

I think the album maintains its quality throughout the 70 minutes of album length and the best tracks pop up all over the place.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

Daniel Gildenlow often goes unnoticed as a singer, but he has a diverse range and style. He has a style that ranges from Peter Gabriel, Fish to Geoff Tate. He might not be as accomplished as any of those singers, but none of those could probably cover the ground as he does.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

Most of what Pain of Salvation always appeals to me, that's not to say that it's all good, but the interest factor that I have for this band is always high.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

Like with most of the band's discography, repeated listens are essential. The exception to this trait may well be the first two albums, which I never found overly interesting.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

The lyrics as always are fairly downbeat.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

As with most Swedish progressive bands that I run across, the instrumental parts are consistently strong throughout and at times they're a delight to listen to.

9. What did you think of the production?

As has already been stated a bit more energy could've been put into the production, without losing the feel of the album.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

Already know most of the discography.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Progressive metal without a doubt, in fact they are one of the few bands that actually deserve this much flaunted so called trendy "sub-genre label"

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

Pain of Salvation are never a warm band but they engross the listener, once you break through all the murk on their albums.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

"Fandango" kind of captures the true essence of the band. The melodic pick-up vocal section of "A Trace of Blood" is quite magical and is probably what grabbed me to this album initially.

14. And the one you liked least?

"Waking Every God" a jaded sounding later album track.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Pain of Salvation often toured with Dream Theater. People would turn up at the concerts mostly for Dream Theater and after listening to Pain of Salvation were usually left scratching their heads;)

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

Often get a craze to listen to their discography and so listen quite often.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

All their albums have a theme and this one is to do with freedom, not that the listener could work this out.

18. Did the album end well?

I think it ended reasonably well, there was nothing spectacular and the best hadn't been saved till last, but the finals tracks were ok.

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

The most open-ended question here, how do you improve a Pain of Salvation album without actually detracting from what makes it unique? which of course is its great depth and often disjointed feel.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

The album is one of those coherent messes and that's the beauty of it.

Overall Album Rating: 8.5 out of 10.

Hahaha that wasn't even the Kansas album that was selected but Monolith is still a very good album, their final great album from their golden period.

It's interesting that you did not write an uneqivocally favourable review, US, but I can tell you like them. Which Pain of Salvation album would you recommend after this one? Would it be The Perfect Element Pt1? A point I forgot to mention is that the drummer adds something special to the album and I understand he later left the group. Was his replacement as good?

I think the band are something of an enigma, they're a band I love but I can never really put my finger on why! The Perfect Element Pt1 is the place to start and much more accesible than Remedy Lane. I haven't listened to the most recent albums (they're somewhere on one of my endless lists to hear) but I know that he's French and is meant to be very good. I'm also a fan of the albums BE and Scarsick which didn't get very good reviews.

The below song is a great example that when it comes to prog, Pain of Salvation know no boundaries and even touch on disco, not many bands would be brave enough to attempt such a thing.

Thanks for the information, US, I'll look out for The Perfect Element.

Okay okay! I'm late again! YOU try running three journals at once! :laughing:

That's it: I'm listening to this today no matter what. Expect my review later this afternoon.

Press PLAY now. Do it! :)

Can anyone tell me what happened here? According to my lyric sheet, both "Dryad of the woods" and the title track have lyrics but I got nothing but two instrumentals up until "Waking every god"?????

Anyway...

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

For me this only evoked one band: Marillion, particularly early Fish-era, around "Script" or "Fugazi". Got a lot more in the vein of progressive metal than rock fairly quickly though, and that initial impression was lost.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

The first two were a lot heavier than I expected, and the sudden onslaught of guitar took me more than a little by surprise. I wasn't quite sure what to think, given the rather gentle opening and what it set me up to expect.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?


I sort of only became any way invested in the album when "A trace of blood" arrived; thought that was very well written and played, and evoked some disturbing images, but very true to life. Losing a child must be one of the most traumatic things anyone can go through, and if there's a better example of joy becoming sorrow in an instant I can't think of it. Great job there. I found a lot of Floyd's "Hey you" in the melody of "Undertow", (come on: it even has the multiple echo of the last word at the end!) and I must compliment Gildenlow's vocal performance on this: just superb, a highlight of the album. Got a little confused/frustrated with the title track and "Dryad of the wood", which both came across as instrumentals but it seems should not be....

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

Returning to my Marillion comparison, perhaps oddly though I mentioned early Marillion was the impression I got originally, I found the vocalist, again initially, more like Steve Hogarth than Fish, but fairly quickly I got the Gabriel comparison, especially in the more "angry" exchanges. Hogarth doesn't really do angry well, I feel. I wasn't crazy about the muttered, mumbled soliloquies though. I also think that it would have been hard to have made out many of the lyrics if I hadn't had a page in front of me with them printed on it. With that, I could follow the album better, but really, the singer should elucidate properly enough for me to be able to make out all the words he's singing, and I found I couldn't.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

I'd definitely categorise this more as progressive metal than rock; I think it has a much harder edge, tougher guitars and more forceful percussion that you generally don't get to hear in many prog rock bands. Very accomplished musicians though, of that there's no doubt.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

Much better; I really found myself warming to it. Though as I say my enjoyment/understanding of it was definitely enhanced by having the lyrics to refer to.


7. What did you think of the lyrical content?


I'd agree with ET that some of the lyrics are a little esoteric, with a lot of references that got prog rock bands tagged, perhaps fairly, as "snobbish" and "elitist" in the seventies. The depiction of a young woman's attempts at suicide in "Rope ends" is tremedous though, and the double-meaning of the song title is a stroke of genius. I love the line "Winnie is strong and would not let her fall", using the image of a well-loved children's character to link into a horrible act of self-harm. Chilling.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

Some of it was very good, though the guitars dominate a little too much I think. The piano in "Fandango" is interestingly sparse and bleak, almost single notes, which is something different. I think this track actually reminds me in places of Diablo Swing Orchestra, never a bad thing! However at times, particularly during the end part of "Thorn clown", the guitar got so frenzied and loud that it totally drowned out the vocals, which in my mind was a ridiculous thing to do. If it's a solo, fine, but the guy was singing and you couldn't make out a damn word he was saying! That said, great guitar solo and excellent piano in "Rope ends".

9. What did you think of the production?

As always, I can never comment on production, but I didn't think it was produced badly.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

Only through "One hour by the concrete lake", which I hated, though I listened to it a few times.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?


Progressive metal.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?


N/a as only listened the once.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?


"A trace of blood" tied closely with "Undertow". No wait: "Rope ends", definitely. And sure thrown in "Second love" too...

14. And the one you liked least?

"Thorn clown" followed by "Chain sling" then "Beyond the pale". Really didnt like that.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Again, this question should be ignored if the album is NOT a debut, only. This isn't, so I'm passing over it.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

I'd be prepared to give them more of a chance than I was after "One hour", after which I had basically written them off as a band I would not like.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

Yes, the idea of a man starting his life as a child looking for love and then finding it, losing his child and continuing on through the pain (to try and find) salvation came through very well.

18. Did the album end well?

Kind of found it returned to a Marillion style on the last track, for the opening, then later it got all almost death metal, kind of swung between genres and for me got a little confused. Think maybe they were trying too hard to end the album well, and may have missed the mark. I think finishing with "Second love" would have been more appropriate and a better closer. "Beyond the pale" sounds just like that, something a little too over the top, forced and almost tacked on, as if PoS felt they had to have an epic to end on. Although it revisits themes from the first track I feel it's slightly incongruous with the rest of the album and doesn't fit in well with the rest of their work on this.

(That would be a no, then.) ;)

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?


Tone down the guitars a little and let the keyboard through a bit more. Also, some more distinctive vocals would have helped in places. Also WTF was going on with those two instrumentals-that-shouldn't-have-been?

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?


Very definitely held together well and got the concept across successfully.
Overall album rating: 7 out of 10

So are we done here? And if so, whose choice is it next?

This is the order since August:

TH - Twlefth Night
BE - Spock's Beard
US - Captain Beyond
AE - Big Big Train

TH - Alphataurus
BE - Hawkwind
US - Pain of Salvation
AE - ?

Electrophonic Tonic provided a review for Pain of Salvation, so maybe they should be included?

OK so it's Ant's choice next.
I agree about ET but as a new member I think it's only fair he joins the queue at the end, making the next choice in order

Ant
Me
You
Unknown Soldier
Him

Sound fair?

Yes, it's fine by me.

http://thedirt666.weebly.com/uploads...67957_orig.jpg

I didn't know Him was a member of our club, looks like we're going up in the world.

I already know what album I'd like to see reviewed next, but I'll go ahead and do my Remedy Lane review also. :)

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Exquisite: I love how 'Of Two Beginnings' segues into 'Ending Theme'. Excellent vocals and production!

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

As someone who was decently familiar with Pain Of Salvation via other records (Entropia), I'd actually say Remedy Lane opens fairly strong compared to albums they'd do after this one.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

All great songs from my point of view, with nary a duff in the bunch: its a progressive metal record that actually challenges people a bit, which is probably what polarizes people so much towards either adoring or heavily disliking PoS's output respectively.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

I noticed nobody ever really addresses him by name in the past reviews, but Daniel Gildenlow is a rather unique vocalist...arguably one of the best in the genre to be honest. He has a lot of control and intensity and can shift between style and tempo at a moment's notice, not unlike Mike Patton. Pain Of Salvation is pretty much his baby creatively also, so his talent shines quite bright IMO on this album.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

Pain Of Salvation was one of the first progressive metal bands I fell in love with over half a decade ago, with Remedy Lane in particular being a seminal record for me. Great sound, excellent variety, and chockfull of personality and heaviness! Also...you guys DO realize it's considered to be one of the best progressive metal records of the last twenty years or so right? Just checkin'...

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

Upon initial listening as a high schooler, I thought the progression from song to song was rather challenging...but it really does get better and better as you go along methinks!

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

There's already been enough talk about how brilliant and moving both 'Trace Of Blood' and 'Rope Ends' are, but I actually find even the more esoteric fare interesting even when a specific message isn't immediately obvious. If you want bland "she looked at me, I looked at her' stuff, there's plenty of mindless pop out there after all: challenging music should challenge us to put our interpretive skills to work at times!

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

There's enough great guitar work throughout to get my blood pumping, but the use of keyboards+piano and lower-key instrumentation emphasizes enough contrast that I enjoyed the overall sonic approach just fine.

9. What did you think of the production?

Very balanced, and just nuanced enough as far as mixing goes to surprise you: e.g. the bassline in 'Waking Every God'.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I've been a big fan for years, so going through Remedy Lane again was....well, like a trip down memory lane I suppose.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Progressive metal of course, in a very literal sense.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

One of those albums you can't get tired of if you're in the right mood.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

Oh, 'Trace Of Blood' without a doubt. It's the album's centerpiece (both structurally and emotionally) and arguably one of the best cuts the band has ever done, period. 'Chain Sling' and 'This Heart Of Mine' would be my other picks!

14. And the one you liked least?

I like all of the tracks, but I also agree with the rest that 'Beyond The Pale' probably doesn't need to be as long as it is.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

N/A

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

I'm always up for a new Pain Of Salvation album!

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

It's pretty poignant stuff really: like most concept records, it attempts to map out a person's life from start to afterlife I suppose: the prog. metal equivalent to Dan Fogelberg's The Innocent Age perhaps?

18. Did the album end well?

'Second Love' and 'Beyond The Pale' needed to switch places, but I really don't have a beef with how things were structured.

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

This is one of those records that I would have personally loved to hear a bit of brass or more synth-emphasis in. Some sax or horns in 'This Heart Of Mine' would have been perfect!!

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

It's a pretty damn good record, possibly the best the band has done in their entire career. Interestingly enough, I consider it a great jumping off point to their other stuff as well for the first-time listener.

Overall album rating: 9 out of 10

Anyway, since PoS are fairly heavy stuff, how about something that walks the pop and prog fence with a fair amount of success for the next set of reviews? :)

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_urgERoYNtu...hips-front.jpg

I'm down with that, and thanks to Ki I can give yaz a link to stream t'whole t'ing....
Grooveshark - Free Music Streaming, Online Music

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Shock, honestly. I had no idea this would be as poppy as it was. It really caught me off guard and sort of put a sour taste in my mouth to start.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

There were a few moments of interplay I liked on "Ghosts". But beyond that, I was either bored or dumbfounded with how light and poppy it was.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

Things started to change at the middle track "The Wind That Shakes The Barley", it was like a booster that gave me the motivation to invest time into the rest of the album. It was the first time I felt presence of the prog, particularly with that awesome keyboard riff. The rest of the songs I met with a fairly indifferent attitude, except for "Great Disasters" which I think lives up to it's title. However, I saw "This is England" was 13 minutes long and I held out hope for some more proggyness.... and it was totally worth it!

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

I preferred the quieter vocals and whispers to the rest of them. Other than that, I really didn't have a positive or negative opinion of them at all.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

Generally, no. Between King Crimson and early Van Der Graaf Generator as my two favorite prog bands, I tend to enjoy my prog a little bit on the darker side. It's not that I don't enjoy more poppy prog, since I really like Supertramp and Pink Floyd's more accessible work. But I felt the album lacked the song writing of Tramp and Floyd and the overpowering synths weren't exactly agreeing with me.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

N/A

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

I felt like most of the lyrics were just expansions of the song titles, still I thought they were fairly solid. There really were no lines in particular that stuck out, good or bad, however.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

The guitar has probably the highlight overall, with a few shining moments in the keyboard such as "The Wind That Shakes the Barley". I really didn't notice the drums other than the final track. What impressed me most was that there were only 3 people playing on this record. That impressed me a lot.

9. What did you think of the production?

For the sound they were trying to accomplish, I thought it worked very well.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?



11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Pop-progressive or synth progressive if there is such a thing.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

I didn't listen to the whole thing again, but I've listed to "The Wind That Shakes the Barley" a few times and "This is England" several times since I first hear this.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

No question, "This is England" was incredible. "The Wind that Shakes the Barley" was a solid second. After a considerable gap, the rest are in a jumble with "Ghosts" rising to the top...

14. And the one you liked least?

...and "Great Disasters" in an infinite crater at the bottom.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

For a "comeback" album, I think it is a solid stand-alone effort. Compared to the rest of their discography, I have no idea.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

If someone can prove they do more things like the two tracks I really liked, then I would check them out some more.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

I felt the album was about death, actually. The title track pretty much summed that up for me. A few track had ideas related to that theme, but I couldn't pick them out in all honesty.

18. Did the album end well?

Did I mention I really liked, nay, loved "This is England"?

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

For this being a pop prog album, it's in a pretty good place. It's just not my taste, that's all.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

It's a fairly consistent album, but its valleys are deep and it's peaks are in the sky.



Overall, I'd say the album is a 5/10. However, "Total Disaster" and "The Wind that Shakes the Barley" cancel each other out and "This is England" is worth a few points on it's own. I thought it was that damn good. In the end, I'll call it a 7/10.

Intriguing comments, ET. You've reminded me that I need to get off my backside.

Same here, will be listening to this in the next day or two.

I'm gonna sit down and do this once I have a cup of tea and a biscuit (or ten!) :D

Guys, I'm sorry but you're going to have to wait for the review for a few days. I'm only three tracks in and I LOVE IT and I am going to now go buy it and dissect it after I've listened to it about twelve times. I don't want to just do a quick review so I'm going to take my time to compose this, but at the moment all I can say is Electrophonic Tonic, I could not disagree with you more!

Now, where's me credit card...?

I've been busily writing notes in my little black book and I want to do the album justice.

I'm the same. I've listened to it about seven times now. I'll also be doing a full review in my journal soon. I effing love this album! :thumb: Thanks Ant!

You all be a'welcome! I'm surprised nobody here had heard it before now, but for those of you digging The Tall Ships....yay! :love:

I'm listening to this again tonight. I want to find out why you guys like it so much and maybe I'll enjoy it more myself. I won't use the full format, but I'll have a re-review up later tonight.

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

A poppy version of Peter Gabriel era Genesis (hell Genesis again!) but then I have to say the poppy hooks on "Ghosts" really grabbed me and kind of reminded me of Raised on Radio era Journey.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

Ghosts a great track and I also enjoyed Playground.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

A lot of the songs in the middle part of the album, I thought had a tendency to drag and nothing is worse than pop songs that drag, they remind of those singers on those talent contest shows! The title track was a perfect example of this trait.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

I thought the vocalist a competant all round singer, whose style carried off most of the songs.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

As ET said it was mostly poppy prog which to be fair does have limited appeal to me. It was an album that I enjoyed due to its poppy edge but it's probably not something I'd put on again in a hurry, but certain songs did really stand out.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

I did appreciate some of the songs more on a second listen.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

They seemed to have clarity and were easy to understand, but I didn't follow them enough to judge them properly.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

Can't fault the instruments on the album and the band seemed very precise in what they were trying to achieve.

9. What did you think of the production?

Sounded very polished.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I knew the name and also knew they were a band that had been around in the late 1980s, when their sound would've fallen into the AOR category......possibly.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Progressive pop if such a thing exists.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

I think this is an album for moods and you really need to be in the mood for this album (just my opinion of course)

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

Ghosts.

14. And the one you liked least?

The slower stuff I wasn't overly keen on, no one song stood worse than the others on the album.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Don't know the rest of their discography to comment on this.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

I'm keen on hearing their first, which gets high ratings on some sites.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

The theme didn't register with me.

18. Did the album end well?

Hate to say it but was kind of glad when it ended, it seemed long at 64 mins.....but that's a normal length today.

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

Given the poppy style of the band, it's hard to change the core of the band, but I guess they did what they set out to do.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

It was consistent.

Overall Album Rating: 6 out of 10 A decent album but just not my style.

I'm the one who suggested this record obviously, but I'll throw in my two cents just for the record too. :)

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_oXSCaIrmSq...Tall+Ships.jpg

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Very poppy: To anyone who isn't familiar with It Bites' style to begin with, it would probably come across as 80's Genesis/Yes meets a late 90's power-pop act like Vertical Horizon....but yeah, poppy!

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

Excellent! I loved 'Oh My God' and 'Ghosts' almost instantaneously back when I first got ahold of this record. Lots of energy all around!

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

As poppy as this album is, you can't exactly say it doesn't demonstrate diversity. The title track and 'Playground' are certainly somewhat stereotypical as ballads (albeit very very GOOD ones), but the proggy side of the group comes out wonderfully in cuts like 'Memory Of Water' and 'The Wind That Shakes The Barley', plus there's some nice AOR touches on 'Fahrenheit' and 'Lights'. Overall, both side A and B are pretty strong.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

John Mitchell (who is also the lead guitarist here) had big shoes to fill going into this album, since It Bites' original guitarist/singer Francis Dunnery was quite a charismatic frontman....but he really carries this record!

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

It Bites is one of those bands you either fall in love with pretty quickly or dismiss due to getting bored with their sugary aesthetic. Their 80's output is considered to be some of the best crossover progressive pop-rock of that decade, but their songwriting approach is certainly quite divisive and almost schizophrenic in a way...but in my case, they hit just the right spot when my mood is right. :)

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

Fell in love at first listen, and over time I've only grown to appreciate their unique style even more.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

Above average actually, for the most part. John Mitchell is such a fundamentally different sort of songwriter and performer than Francis Dunnery (other than the fact they're both gods on guitar), and yet he manages to replace the quirkiness that defined the group originally with a more down-to-earth, relatable pathos successfully. Quite a feat....

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

John Beck and John Mitchell pretty much ruled this album on keyboards and guitar respectively: on the longer songs where they get to show off a bit, the results stunned me back when I first got this album.

9. What did you think of the production?

Slick like an AOR record, but mixed in such a way that the emotional content comes through nicely.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I was a huge fan of the 80's incarnation of the group before I ran across The Tall Ships, so I'd say I was fairly familiar with them overall.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Progressive pop-rock. This particular album has a lot of power pop and alternative rock influences, so those tags might apply too.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

For a long time, I had to listen to this album through atleast once a week or I wasn't happy. I don't do that anymore, but its still a great album to revisit every so often.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

Either 'The Wind That Shakes The Barley' or 'Memory Of Water'.

14. And the one you liked least?

Probably 'Great Disasters'. That's not to say its a bad song, but out of all the poppy numbers on the album, its probably the weakest in actual construction.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Any album that comes out over a decade after the band's original era has come and gone is going to have it's work cut out for it. That being said, if you aren't familiar with any of It Bites' classic 80's output...you probably need to go rectify that immediately. Its harder to appreciate just how cool The Tall Ships works as a comeback record otherwise.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

Always.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

Spoiler Alert: The big theme behind this record is communication. We have trouble talking to people in our lives, misunderstandings happen, etc. etc....and yet when people close to us die, there's nothing more we wish for then the ability to communicate with them again. Most of the songs on The Tall Ships touch upon these themes in some manner, with a few in particular ('Oh My God', the title track, 'Fahrenheit') being more obvious about it.

18. Did the album end well?

This Is Englannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.....d

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

John Beck's keyboard work could have been given a bit more room to breathe, but otherwise nah.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

This record was a seamless joy to listen to, and obviously put together with much care and ado.

Overall Album Rating: 9 out of 10!!!

Okay, after finally digesting this album what I think is enough I'm ready to make my thoughts known. I have to say, beyond the albums I suggested for the club this is the first time this hasn't seemed like work, something I have to do, get through. Which is not to denigrate any of the other albums reviewed, just that I loved reviewing this one. (For those interested I'll definitely be running a full in-depth review of this in my journal soon).

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Can I say OMG? I LOVE this! Who called this pop? Okay, I'm just talking about the first track here admittedly but this is not pop. Don't mistake those bright bouncing synths for pop music. This sounds like a continuation of my favourite, "Once around the world"! I'm settling in here! Catchy, memorable, upbeat, with great keys and fine guitar with --- with -- OMG! John MItchell! Of Arena? I just died and went to prog rock Heaven!!!

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

Loved "Oh my God" with a passion! "Ghosts" was even better! Someone give me some vallium! Best so far was the title track. This album has the energy and passion that some previous It Bites albums have lacked, to me. It's almost like a comback album in many ways.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

I loved "Playground", with its dramatic, almost cinema-soundtrack keybaord arrangements, "Memory of water" (despite their robbing the title from Marillion!) barrels along at a frenetic pace, then the title track slows everything down beautifully. Great pacing throughout the album. "The wind that shakes the barley" --- another Marillion title? Okay I know they didn't coin the phrase, but still, you'd wonder if there isn't some influence in there somehow --- is a great song, very epic but I find that the tagline/chorus is sung almost the same as a-ha's "The blood that moves the body". I also love "Safe keeping", lovely ballad. "Lights" is "Calling all the heroes" for the 21st century: about time they wrote something similar. Love the bouncy upbeat-ness.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?
I loved John Mitchell's guitar work with Arena, but had no idea he could sing. And he can! He's a powerful, emotional singer that almost -- almost --- compensates for the loss of the great Francis Dunnery. He also reminds me on occasion of Bryan Adams. He has that sort of growly, rough sound to his voice that is a little hard to get used to after Dunnery's mostly higher, lilting one, but I have already grown to love it.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

Oh I loved the music. Powerful, upbeat, almost pomp-rock at times. Energetic, passionate, mostly uptempo. Some totally gorgeous soft piano passages, such as in "Safekeeping" and "Playground", and parts of "This is England"...

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

Loved it from the first minute and it just got better as it went on. Kind of hit a high point with the title track but despite that it did not, as I often expect these albums to do at that point, fall back in quality at all.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

It Bites' lyrics are often quite obscure and hard to decipher. Although it's surely an allegory for something, I loved the image "The tall ships" drew in my mind of someone, maybe a prince or king, living their life in exile in a foreign country, waiting for the day when their homeland will send ships to bring him home in triumph. Could even refer to aliens I guess. Generally though most of the lyrics are obscure but there appears to be a common theme of loss, yearning for the past, missed chances and memories running through the album. I think. Also the power words have over people, when sometimes you want to take them back or wish you hadn't said them, other times you wish you had spoken your heart when it's too late and the chance is gone.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

Yes, I love and have loved John Michell's guitar work with every band he's been with, particularly Arena. I like the way there's a guitar riff taken right out of "Plastic dreamer" from "Once". The kyeboards have always been an integral part of It Bites' appeal, and here they certainly drive most of the album.

9. What did you think of the production?

To me the production seemed very sharp. See my previous comments as to production, but this sounded produced very well.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

Intimately. I loved "Once around the world", but came to It Bites first through "Calling all the heroes". Having heard that I knew it was going to be a hit, and it was. Sadly, the debut album was not as good as I had hoped, though "Once" redressed that disappointment. The next one had good moments but up until now I've never thought they came anywhere close to "Once".

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

I have to admit, It Bites on their website call themselves "the progressive pop rock band", so who am I to disagree?


12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

Much more

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

The title track, followed by "Ghosts" and then "Oh my God", but it's a tough choice as I like almost every track on this.

14. And the one you liked least?

I can understand ET's hatred of "Great disaster", but don't share it. You have to know this band. They use that odd phrasing, like vocalise, weird disjointed sounds like "OOH WOO YEAH -- YUP YUP YUP YUP --- OH AY!" a lot, and it's kind of their trademark. If you look past that, or even embrace it, this song, though certainly one of the weakest on the album, comes alive. I'm not saying it was the one I liked least, because there wasn't one.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Again, this question should be ignored if the album is NOT a debut, only. This isn't, so I'm passing over it.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

I'm now planning to go back and give the other albums that I found a little disappointing another chance, and I also want to listen to their latest, which didn't impress me first time out.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

I'm not sure there was one, beyond the linked concepts of past, memories, missed chances, old loves and regrets. Also the power words can have over people comes through solidly as a binding concept throughout most if not all of the album.

18. Did the album end well?

"This is England", while not in my opinion as powerful or epic a closer as "Once around the world", was a great example of how It Bites can write an epic track that goes through several changes, in mood, tempo, structure and feeling, and kind of arrive back at the beginning, bringing the song full circle. I would have preferred a little more emphasis on the chorus "This is England and you love me!" which I thought worked well, but then they moved away from that for the midsection. I think it was however a powerful, emotional song and a fine way to close an album that, had it been released this year, would already be jumping to the top of my favourites list for 2013!



19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

No es possible!

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?


Every track was great, so I'd say that consitutes holding together well.

Rating: 9.85 out of 10

A final point: this is what this club is all about! This album seems to have been one of the most polarising we've done so far. Some people love it, some hate it and some are meh about it. While I respect everyone's opinion, the rest of you are of course all wrong! :D But it's great to see an album where we're not all just agreeing, where there are such widely held and disparate views, all making good points and making for a great discussion. Let's hope the next one is as interesting!

Only a true spectacles wearing geek could come up with such a score.

It looks like I am the white rabbit. :shycouch:

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

I liked it immediately and found it similar, although not identical, to the original lineup, with high voices, sparkling guitar and bright keyboards.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

With Oh My God, It Bites! start as they intend to continue with sharp Yes-like harmonies, bright keyboards and tasteful guitar playing. The vocals are inclined to be high and the pace is continually fast. Previously, John Mitchell had been employed by bands like Arena as a guitarist first and singer second, but he has been a hidden vocal talent. Like his famous predecessor, Francis Dunnery, he sings in a high register and has an excellent voice - you never hear him sing out of tune. Also like Dunnery he is an outstanding, but slightly understated, guitar player. The pace does not slow for Ghosts, with John Mitchell sounding like Ray Wilson of Stiltskin on Scared of Ghosts and even uses the phrase, 'Walking in Your Footsteps,' from the latter's second single. Ghosts has a catchy synthesizer melody and an adept guitar solo. The third track, Playground, is a marginally slower ballad, with symphonic keyboards and pounding drums from Bob Dalton. He is a fine drummer, never too showy nor shuffling, but always appropriate to Beck's keyboards and Mitchell's guitar.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

The band does seem to run out of steam in the second half of the album with slower and more sparse arrangements. It is still full of ideas and John Mitchell is a revelation.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

John Mitchell was known more as a guitarist with Arena and took on lead vocals for It Bites! He is, however, an excellent singer and never sings out of tune. His guitar playing is nimble throughout.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

Both the music and vocals are exemplary.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

The album keeps improving, the more I listen. My feeling though, is that, in keeping with many modern bands, The Tall Ships album is too long and there is some repetition of the slow voice/ piano/ synth passages in the latter part of the album. Tony McPhee of the Groundhogs said that he felt compelled to fill the 75 minutes of a CD, but admitted that he could not come up with the material. It Bites!, like many others, seem to have soldiered on regardless.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

Rather curious. Lights is a catchy song carried along with a particularly high voice, sparring guitar and keyboards, and chorus in a stirring manner akin to Big Country, but it has the line, 'So let’s go out tonight, I feel the space between us.' Great Disasters is an upbeat song, but has a downbeat lyric. It follows the title track, which I understand is about death.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

Yes. The middle instrumental section of Memory of Water is quite heavy with a characteristically speedy guitar solo. The title track, opens with soaring harmonised guitar and keyboards, reminiscent of Dave Flett-era Manfred Mann's Earth Band.

9. What did you think of the production?

Very clear and sharp, just like the original albums.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I know the first three albums pretty well, although I don't own Eat Me in St. Louis. I remember it being in Woolworths' sale bins not long after it was released. Now it is as rare as hens' teeth.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Neo-progressive, although there are elements of seventies progressive rock, grunge and modern progressive. It Bites! also take in the high voiced bands of the seventies, like Pilot, 10cc and City Boy.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

More.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

Great Disasters is a small masterpiece. It has a scat-***-nonsense vocal motif, along the lines of, 'Dumbri umbri ayoh, dumbri umbri ayoh, ee oh ho ayoh o-oh oh oh, oh ayoh o-oh oh oh,' reminiscent of The Police, while the arrangement is similar to other seventies high vocal/ bright guitar groups like 10cc, Pilot and City Boy. There is even a touch of Billy Joel in the lyrics and it ends on synth like an A-ha song produced by Alan Tarney. This is the track to which I keep returning . . . and returning. I need not bother, as it has taken permanent residency in my head! I have read there is a radio edit, but have not been able to track it down.

14. And the one you liked least?

There isn't one particular track, although I prefer the earlier fast tracks to the later slow ones.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Although there have been a number of reunions with different frontmen, this feels like a comeback. All credit to John Mitchell for taking on lead vocals and playing guitar to the extent that I did not really miss Dunnery. Having said this, I wish he (Dunner) would sort himself out.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

Yes, I would like to hear the single edit of Great Disasters as well as a good quality version of the Japanese bonus track, These Words.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

There is a thread of death and longing, but some of the strange paradoxes do not make much sense to me.

18. Did the album end well?

This is England, the longest piece at over thirten minutes, is intended as the magnum opus. It is another song in the second half of the album with a sparse intro, this time a quiet glockenspiel-sounding synthesizer and voice. The first part brings to mind Prefab Sprout, particularly in the voice, yet the pulsing keyboards, spiky guitar and punchy drums are all It Bites! At around the five minute mark, Beatles harmonies and cello sound introduce the 'This is England and you love me,' line, followed by psychedelic wurlitzer-style keyboards and a surreal spoken word passage. The final third (at about ten minutes) has almost a hymn in, 'There once was a vicar who walked in this garden . . . ,' Linking all the parts of This is England are the lyrics, but, otherwise it sounds like three distinct songs, and serves as a prototype of the band's next studio record, a concept album, Map of the Past (2012).

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

I feel it needed editting, especially in the latter stages.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

Yes, the album is cohesive, although This is England should have been three separate tracks (imo).

Overall Album Rating: 8.5 out of 10.

I wanted to come back and say I found something new to enjoy with this album and hopefully grasp onto something other than the few tracks I enjoyed the first time... but I can't say I have.

I still adore 'This is England' and think it's one of the best progressive rock songs I've heard in a long time. Everything about it is what I love about prog, and those flashes of mellotron are always a positive for me.

I still think 'The Wind that Shakes the Barley' is a solid track with a great organ riff and the rest of the tracks I'm mostly indifferent to.

And yes, Great Disasters is still a sore spot for me. Maybe outside the context of the album I would like it more, but I'm not looking forward to hearing "De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da" on a progressive rock album, or actually any album at all.

I still stand by my 7/10 score and my rationale behind it.

My final take away is this is a very competent album and I cannot find anything technically wrong with it. It's just not my taste and that is what truly prevents me from really liking it or loving it.