Reviews discussion

"Lambertland" review > deleted

Edited by Atkingani - February 12 2007 at 09:09

inpraiseoffolly wrote: ELOY — Timeless Passages - The Very Best Of Eloy Review by Autoband I usually don't go into other people's reviews, but seyo's review of this compilation is dead wrong and just dreadful. He's discarting Eloy like some kind of B band that is uninteresting, dull and only suitable for "teenage kids" trying to understand somewhat ambitious music as he calls it. He also says Frank Bornemann has bad English, wrong again, he has an accent, but the lyrics are in good English (unlike seyo's text with various errors in it). Ok sorry for my ranting I will stop now. In my opinion Eloy is actually a great band that any prog lover should've listened to. Sure Eloy isn't one of the top ten best bands ever, but good nonetheless. Personally I don't like compilations, and since this one isn't a particulary great one it doesn't get a good rating. Still it's very long and contains some of Eloy's best work. I suggest you do not start here though, rather go with Inside if you like really psychedelic rock. If you're more into space rock then Ocean is the album for you. If you want some of the lighter stuff then I suggest Colours with the great Illuminations track. So please, don't get discouraged by the other reviews if you don't know Eloy. Eloy really is worth trying and you probably won't regret it, however don't start with a compilation like this one. Posted Sunday, February 11, 2007, 09:10 EST | Permanent link   _____________________________________   Disagreeing with a reviewer is one thing... bashing a reviewer is plain dead wrong...

\

TASAVALLAN PRESIDENTTI — Lambertland
Review by jswissman

I would just like to point out the similarity between some of the material on this recording and early "Stand Up/Benefit" era Jethro Tull. Just listening to the last track alone should ensure such a comparison.

The Miracle wrote: Flossy's review was already discussed and it stays. Fah Zi pwns ya white n00bs

Why?

Well I agree with T that there are far worse reviews than this one, and this should un doubtedly stay on the site. But one thing I did realize was that the reviewer constantly said some thinks were OK and some parts were good/decent which means it should be rated higher than one star.

Atkingani wrote:   I believe that here is the best place to discuss this manner of reviewing albums. Isn't it?

Bad assumption, judging by the enormous amount of responses after 20+ hours...

I like the idea, if it's limited to one review per album.

I think ZZ is a fine reviewer as well, he just needs to build around hs quotes with more reference from the albums, though. Otherwise I enjoy reading his numerous reviews.

http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=109181

This is just one of several Pink Floyd reviews recently posted by this reviewer where he has posted extensive quotations - half of this review is simply quotations from band members. IMO this is not what a review is for.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Wall. Live.

I have never understood (although some research work) why this album was released so late. It was actually released for the twentieth anniversary of these sets of concerts. Due to the grandiosity of the performance, it was performed only thirty times or so. The first set of shows started in 1980 (in L.A. from February 7 to 14). Followed by New York (February 24 to 28), then at Earls Court in London (from August 4 to 8). In 1981 the show moved to Dortmund (from February 21 to 28). It ended up again at Earls Court in London from June 13 to 17.

The show will be a financial disaster since Roger did not want to play in stadiums any longer. Wright being the only one to make money out of this, since he was paid at an agreed fee (which has not been revealed) on a performance basis.

I have always had difficulties (and still do) to enter into this rock opera as it was the use to call such effort in those days. It is based on Roger's personal experience. From the very beginning of the studio project, it was decided to have a tour and a movie produced (The Who did this with "Tommy" as well). Is it the studio work or this live album : my opinion does not change a lot. This dark and pessimistic adventure has never brought me a lot of joy (on the contrary of "The Lamb" and "Tommy"). But this is personal feeling.

The live albums I like the most (I have made this remark already in some reviews of live albums from the Tull) are the ones that have been recorded in the same venue. With this one, we have a kaleidoscope of bit and bites from different concerts (although most comes from the Earl's Court's ones - but I was never able to identify which track was recorded when and where as if the band would like to prevent this). The whole lacks in unity as we can get with "Live At Leeds" by The Who.

The origin of the project are well-known, so I will not cover these. Maybe provide some comments from the inside.

Let's first start with the creator of the project. Roger : "A good deal of the creative impulse for The Wall derived from my disillusionment with rock shows in vast open-air football stadiums. In the days prior to Dark Side of the Moon the excitement of a Pink Floyd performance lay in a certain intimacy of connection between the audience and the band. It was magical. By the late Seventies that magic and opportunity had vanished, crushed, as I saw it, by the dead weight of numbers - the sheer incoherent scale of those stadium events".

"There was a kind of discovery and an exorcism involved in the writing of The Wall. I had to get all that stuff out or spend the rest of my life as that man in black off to the side at the party, apparently aloof behind dark glasses and cigarette, but in reality scared to death of any ordinary human encounter".

About the shows, David will say : "For me, the best bit of The Wall was standing on top of it. We were a few songs into the second half of the show. The band had been bricked in, the audience left to confront a vast, blank barrier. 'Is there anybody out there?' sang Roger, a tiny figure now appearing stage-right. Then, a trick of the light, there I was, 30 feet up, with the heat of four enormous spotlights at my back, throwing my shadow as far as I could see over the audience while I belted out the solo to one of the best pieces of music I'd ever written: "Comfortably Numb".

"Roger's plans required a schedule so punishing that he even moved his home studio next door to our recording space. The demo had to be turned into an album, the album into a split second show and the show into a film - all at the same time. For the upcoming live performances, I took the role of musical director: choosing and rehearsing the extra musicians, then keeping them up to scratch. For the recordings, I switched between producing and writing. And, of course, playing the guitar and singing".

Nick : "I have to say that the show itself was ground-breaking. Most rock 'n' roll is conducted on the basis that there are various personalities in a band who want to show off onstage. There's nothing wrong with that, but Pink Floyd was always more interested in theatrical presentation than in promoting, as stage personalities, its individual members. This subordination of the band into images which relate to the music was always a feature of our work and The Wall in performance was the summit of that development".

Rick : "I wasn't keen on Roger's idea for The Wall show when he first presented it. I felt that building a wall on stage would deliberately exclude the audience and this infringed my conception of what a rock 'n' roll show was essentially about. As his plans developed and he introduced elements into the show which would directly appeal to the audience (such as Gerald Scarfe's animation and the wall collapsing at the end), my fears no longer applied. In fact, I could see that the show was going to be a very powerful visual experience, as well as a musical one".

What we learn here, is that even if there were lots of tension within the band, each member was quite supporting the project.

As for the studio album, I am missing a grand finale like "We're Not Going To Take It" for instance or even "It" (respectively from "Tommy" and "The Lamb" to go on with the comparison).

As for the studio work, I will rate this effort with three stars.

The T wrote: Passionist wrote: Passionist:                    la, la, la… What am I supposed to make of this? Unless this topic is only about T's reviews then I don't think my post was out of place. I demand an explanation!       No it's not (THANK GOD). You just got caught in the eye of the hurricane.

I thought the eye of the hurricane was the calm spot. It's the eye wall you look out for!


Edited by progismylife - January 26 2007 at 19:48

Passionist wrote: Passionist:                    la, la, la… What am I supposed to make of this? Unless this topic is only about T's reviews then I don't think my post was out of place. I demand an explanation!

     

No it's not (THANK GOD). You just got caught in the eye of the hurricane.