Progarchives, the progressive rock ultimate discography
Starcastle - Starcastle CD (album) cover




Symphonic Prog

3.18 | 172 ratings

From, the ultimate progressive rock music website

3 stars Unoriginal, YES, but not uninteresting or bad: 7/10

STARCASTLE is a controversial band; there is no way to deny that. It was born in 1969 in the United States, the nation that observed ecstatically the progressive juggling in progress in Europe. Many Americans looked to British bands as inspirations for their progressive attempts, STARCASTLE being perhaps the most? vigorously 'inspired'. They didn't spare any effort to mimic YES' sonority. The result was that, yes, STARCASTLE mirrored YES; but no, they didn't downright copy them.

The way I see it, it's really superficial to dismiss STARCASTLE as merely a copycat. For as much as both bands do sound alike, they are composed of different members. Therefore, the outputs are naturally different. STARCASTLE, roughly, is a diluted YES. They don't possess even one bit of the technical virtuosity or amazing composition creativity, yet they still resemble it. More than that, though, they add their own twist to their music ? you will, undoubtfully, think of YES through the entire album, but in the same way, you'll easily acknowledge it's a different band with different nuances. They created something similar, at best.

They're not just a copycat, no, because copycats often sound poor; this being the point that STARCASTLE fall shorts on the definition. They conserved YES' joviality, cheerfulness, lustful keyboards, and most importantly, enjoyability; they're far from poor. Their tracks are lighthearted and fun, with pinches ? exaggerated pinches ? of CLOSE TO THE EDGE and FRAGILE. In my opinion, Elliptical Seasons and Sunfield are the best demonstrations of STARCASTLE's potential. Potential translated into even a good attempt on Squire's unique bass line!

Terry Luttrell's voice has little to do with Jon Anderson's, whose vocal range is naturally more acute, whereas Luttrell clearly opts to remain on lower octaves. His voice sounds delicate as you'd expect from Anderson but still not imitative, which is one characteristic that also hinders to simply call them a bad replica.

Since they used an established band's music as foundations for them, they fall short on "progressive", being instead at best a symphonic rock band. I think it would be unfair to go anywhere above three stars on a band which doesn't put anything new on the table. Were it not for this, I would've solidly rated much more, because it is just so fun to listen to. Fans of FRAGILE and CLOSE TO THE EDGE, there's little reason why to avoid STARCASTLE's debut. Don't get scared by the "blatantly crappy replica" ? I think that's just (somewhat reasonable) outrage, being voiced over actual musical analysis.

Luqueasaur | 3/5 |


As a registered member (register here if not), you can post rating/reviews (& edit later), comments reviews and submit new albums.

You are not logged, please complete authentication before continuing (use forum credentials).

Forum user
Forum password

Share this STARCASTLE review

Social review comments () BETA

Review related links

Copyright Prog Archives, All rights reserved. | Legal Notice | Privacy Policy | Advertise | RSS + syndications

Other sites in the MAC network: — jazz music reviews and archives | — metal music reviews and archives