Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Giving A Clone Five Stars
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedGiving A Clone Five Stars

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 10>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
twosteves View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2007
Location: NYC/Rhinebeck
Status: Offline
Points: 4096
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Giving A Clone Five Stars
    Posted: August 31 2011 at 08:27
Originally posted by RoyFairbank RoyFairbank wrote:

an album has to have something to say musically, and if its a mere carbon copy of a great it is going to be very stale, inevitably. Foxtrot, released as a carbon copy with nothing new to say.... masks may stay the same but the faces change, and a dull childs face would be obvious behind the works. The new album has to restate what the old album was trying to say with renewed force and perspective for it to be another five star work.

An example is the Beatles quite literally translating earlier, blacker artists (like Chuck Berry). They are still five stars, though they were emulating and carbon copying. There is a similar though distinct process with the sudden sprouting of a tendency based on certain features, psychedelia, prog. It can't just be aping Sgt. Peppers or King Crimson, and it wasn't.

agree with lot's of thisClap
not sure what the Foxtrot part means---
Back to Top
RoyFairbank View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 07 2008
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Points: 1072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 30 2011 at 22:53
an album has to have something to say musically, and if its a mere carbon copy of a great it is going to be very stale, inevitably. Foxtrot, released as a carbon copy with nothing new to say.... masks may stay the same but the faces change, and a dull childs face would be obvious behind the works. The new album has to restate what the old album was trying to say with renewed force and perspective for it to be another five star work.

An example is the Beatles quite literally translating earlier, blacker artists (like Chuck Berry). They are still five stars, though they were emulating and carbon copying. There is a similar though distinct process with the sudden sprouting of a tendency based on certain features, psychedelia, prog. It can't just be aping Sgt. Peppers or King Crimson, and it wasn't.
Back to Top
Warthur View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2008
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 617
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2011 at 16:05
Having given the subject more thought, I think I can sum up my position like this.

Taking Genesis as an example, a good clone should make me think "Wow, this is really cool! It's like I'm listening to Trespass right now!"

A mediocre clone will make me think "Hm, I guess this is OK. But I'd rather be listening to Trespass right now."

And a bad clone will make me think "Gah, turn it off and put on Trespass this instant!"
Back to Top
robert45 View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: August 25 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 2
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2011 at 15:22
To be honest, I'm not at all bothered if a band don't sound original. I only care about one thing...Do i like what I'm listeneing to.
At times Kaipa remind me very much of Yes, but I still love them.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2011 at 10:39
Originally posted by infandous infandous wrote:

  There are bands I have passed on that sounded a lot like another band or couple of bands.....but it was because they just weren't very good at composing and performing, not because of a lack of originality. 


Well, it is kind of related. If a band doesn't really have a distinct style, they are likely not very good COMPOSERS.   Because if one is good at composing, why would one not use that skill to distinguish himself from the crowd - something so valuable for musicians - is beyond me.  It also likely means that the reason the song is still appealing probably has more to do with high quality PERFORMANCES.  To that extent, I concede that I can make allowances for lack of originality if the quality of performance is that alluring, but I am rarely that easily swayed and usually only with pure improvisational music.  If it is something composed, I expect good composition.  Of course, none of this is to say people should not listen to bands that are not original, this is just my preference.
Back to Top
infandous View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 23 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2447
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2011 at 10:21
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by frippism frippism wrote:

 and if honestly a band doesn't have an original sound there's no point to listen to them in my opinion. 

 
Exactly.


Of course, whether or not a band has an "original" sound can be subjective (aside from outright cover bands, of course).  Personally, I totally disagree with the notion that just because a band doesn't have an original sound, there is no point in listening to them.  There are bands I have passed on that sounded a lot like another band or couple of bands.....but it was because they just weren't very good at composing and performing, not because of a lack of originality.  If something moves me and appeals to me, I really don't care if it "sounds like Yes" or whoever.  If I like it, that is all that matters.

As long as no one is suggesting that others should look at music the way they do, then I think all the opinions stated in this thread so far are perfectly valid.  If you personally don't like bands that don't sound original (which I really can't see as anything other than subjective, unless we're talking about outright cover bands), then the solution is a simple one.  Don't listen!  But also don't suggest that people who do enjoy such things are not prog fans or are not listening to the "right" kind of prog music.  Wink
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2011 at 03:56
Originally posted by frippism frippism wrote:

 and if honestly a band doesn't have an original sound there's no point to listen to them in my opinion. 

 
Exactly.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2011 at 03:54
Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by twosteves twosteves wrote:

Originally posted by DiamondDog DiamondDog wrote:

A fair point, but dont forget that Yes etc were based on something else too. It only sounds original if you aren't aware of where it came from in the first place.

Yes went back in music history to create a sound---there's a big difference in being influenced by Les Paul, Bach, Sibelius, Buddy Rich, an English Choir, or whatever ----but  a group sounding like another group---is not acceptable to me on any level and certainly does NOT deserve 5 stars. How can attempting to photo copy a band's sound be a good thing? It's only good if you are a tribute band. 
 
The core of anything good is the composition of the music. A lot of neo prog bands have a Genesis or Yes sound but usually manage to add their own thing. I tend to find Genesis and Yes at times a little too 'pretty' and need to hear music with a bit more directness and passion (but not not punk!). Neo prog bands like Marillion and IQ had a what I would call a 'dirtier' approach and really hardly ever sound like a photcopy of Genesis or whatever you were alluding to (imo)
 
I partly agree with both.  I agree that being influenced by the 'source' is entirely different from being strongly influenced by the music of ONE BAND or a few bands within one small part of rock music.  Thus, there's no doubt to me that Yes are far more original than Marillion.  However, as I said earlier in the thread (or was it the "Emulating..." thread? Confused LOL) Marillion are not Genesis clones either.  But I do agree that the line "Yes etc were based on something else" is not a satisfactory defence to me. Everything is based on something, doesn't mean they are all equally original or derivative, as applicable.
Back to Top
frippism View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: July 27 2010
Location: Tel Aviv
Status: Offline
Points: 4160
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2011 at 03:54
Ummm well lemme see...

I think that people might define clones depending on their tastes. So while someone might think Marillion is a Genesis clone (somewhat yes in my opinion, but my opinion isn't what matters) some might not. The second factor is how much you care if something sounds like a clone. I for one care a lot. It's not that I don't enjoy something that has good songwriting but sounds very similar to the original material, but the fact that the sound is very similar annoys me and if honestly a band doesn't have an original sound there's no point to listen to them in my opinion. 

On the other hand I can't honestly say I heard too many bands who are complete clones- but the few I did didn't bring me much joy.


Edited by frippism - August 17 2011 at 03:54
There be dragons
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 30072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2011 at 01:47
Originally posted by twosteves twosteves wrote:

Originally posted by DiamondDog DiamondDog wrote:

A fair point, but dont forget that Yes etc were based on something else too. It only sounds original if you aren't aware of where it came from in the first place.

Yes went back in music history to create a sound---there's a big difference in being influenced by Les Paul, Bach, Sibelius, Buddy Rich, an English Choir, or whatever ----but  a group sounding like another group---is not acceptable to me on any level and certainly does NOT deserve 5 stars. How can attempting to photo copy a band's sound be a good thing? It's only good if you are a tribute band. 
 
The core of anything good is the composition of the music. A lot of neo prog bands have a Genesis or Yes sound but usually manage to add their own thing. I tend to find Genesis and Yes at times a little too 'pretty' and need to hear music with a bit more directness and passion (but not not punk!). Neo prog bands like Marillion and IQ had a what I would call a 'dirtier' approach and really hardly ever sound like a photcopy of Genesis or whatever you were alluding to (imo)
Back to Top
twosteves View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2007
Location: NYC/Rhinebeck
Status: Offline
Points: 4096
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2011 at 21:57
Originally posted by DiamondDog DiamondDog wrote:

A fair point, but dont forget that Yes etc were based on something else too. It only sounds original if you aren't aware of where it came from in the first place.

Yes went back in music history to create a sound---there's a big difference in being influenced by Les Paul, Bach, Sibelius, Buddy Rich, an English Choir, or whatever ----but  a group sounding like another group---is not acceptable to me on any level and certainly does NOT deserve 5 stars. How can attempting to photo copy a band's sound be a good thing? It's only good if you are a tribute band. 
Back to Top
paganinio View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 07 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1327
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2011 at 05:35
Originally posted by DiamondDog DiamondDog wrote:

A fair point, but dont forget that Yes etc were based on something else too. It only sounds original if you aren't aware of where it came from in the first place.


That's a great point. I'm gonna listen to Fragile right now and try to find their influence. Will be a good listening experience for sure. I'll especially pay attention to Jimi Hendrix influences.
Back to Top
octopus-4 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
RIO/Avant/Zeuhl,Neo & Post/Math Teams

Joined: October 31 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14798
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2011 at 03:38
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by octopus-4 octopus-4 wrote:

Marillion were often considered a Genesis clone in the 80s, but Fugazi was really better than anything the Genesis were doing in the same period.

Well Octopus; Duran Duran, Blondie and The Go Go's were making better music than Genesis in the 80's (At least you got the music you paid for).

Iván
 
The reason is that those you mention were making their honest job, what they were created for, while Genesis and non only them were trying to do something that wasn't in their pot. The attempts to commercial music made by Caravan, Magma, Camel just to say some, are some of the worst things of the 80s. At least Duran Duran were a pop band and made almost good pop. I have never liked them and their music but I have to recognize a bit of quality.
I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2011 at 10:26
Originally posted by octopus-4 octopus-4 wrote:

Marillion were often considered a Genesis clone in the 80s, but Fugazi was really better than anything the Genesis were doing in the same period.

Well Octopus; Duran Duran, Blondie and The Go Go's were making better music than Genesis in the 80's (At least you got the music you paid for).

Iván


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - August 15 2011 at 10:28
            
Back to Top
DiamondDog View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 15 2011
Location: Cambridge
Status: Offline
Points: 320
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2011 at 07:16
A fair point, but dont forget that Yes etc were based on something else too. It only sounds original if you aren't aware of where it came from in the first place.
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 19233
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2011 at 18:23
Originally posted by Textbook Textbook wrote:

AAAAH!

You mean the Marillion album Fugazi! I thought you meant the classic post-hardcore BAND Fugazi!
 
I read once that the singer-guitarist got hit with a shoe thrown by a "fan" at one of their shows. Said band member promptly reached into his pocket, pulled out enough dollars equivalent to that night's show's ticket price, had security give it to the guy and told them to throw him out.
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23108
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2011 at 15:21
I knew about Copeland, but had to check back when I got the Curved Air album...

I canīt believe, the Eurythmics dude had to add an A to his name. Was Canterburian Dave really that known? 
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
Evolver View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover & JR/F/Canterbury Teams

Joined: October 22 2005
Location: The Idiocracy
Status: Offline
Points: 5484
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2011 at 14:57
Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

What about artists who clone themselves? Biglietto per LīInferno recently re-did their debut, Tangerine Dream has done several new versions of old material like Phaedra and Tangram, Nik Turnerīs Sphinx underwent considerable surgery as well, and how about that Mike Oldfield?

None of the mentioned examples here would get anything near 5 stars just for the record. Especially the TD and Nik Turner ones are really awful. Weīre talking classic albums thrown in the "letīs make it modern and contemporary"-machine, and such a thing should be outlawed if I had my say. The scary thought however is, that these fabulous musicians at some point in time honestly felt it was a brilliant idea....
 
I havn't heard the re-recordings of Tangram or Phaedra but I do like the Booster series that features reworkings of old tracks like Logos and Sphinx Lightning (+ some new material)
 
Does JM Jarre's reissue of Oxygene count? Apparently it was totally re-recorded yet can anyone really tell the difference compared to the original release?
 
 
 
 
I like the Booster series as well, although I much prefer Cloudburst Flight in its original formSmile

Back on topic: A very good "clone" album is Babylonīs sole album from 78. I really like The Mote in Godīs Eye. 
As to giving a clone five stars - I donīt know what to think. Iīd rate Marillionīs Fugazi 5 stars, and a lot of people write them off as Genesis clones - although I donīt hear it on Fugazi. The one where I hear the Genesis parallels is the debut. 
 
Fugazi is my favourite Fish era Marillion album and I agree that it sounds nothing like Genesis. The main connection was Fish's voice sounding like Peter Gabriel .Pete Nicholls (IQ) also had the same thing levelled at him. ( I love IQ btw)
 
My favourite 'clone album' would likely be Glass Hammer Chronomotree which sounds like Yes,Genesis and ELP at various points but is very enjoyable. Personally I think they have now become too much of a Yes clone with their latest album If.


I think IQ sounds even less like Genesis. Especially on those first two releases. I think itīs down to the punk - post punk feel there is to the music - very bleak and dark, somber romantic expression - which also emanates from former Sex Pistols drummer Paul Cook. 

As to Fish sounding like Peter, I honestly donīt hear it, other than in the sometimes impenetrable imagery they both explore within their lyrical universes.  
 
Not the same Paul CookWink although there was a bit of a new wave punky thing running through IQ that made them a bit more interesting to me than other neo prog bands of the time . The Wake did in places sound very like Genesis , but not Gabriel era Genesis.


LOL Thatīs the second time Iīve been waaay off concerning prog musicians. Some time ago, when I first got into the Canterbury scene, I was sure that Dave Stewart from Egg and National Health (and a heap of other bands) in fact was the same as the one from Eurythmics... Good olī Dave must have changed quite a bit - I thought to myself.
And I agree, which incidentally also supported my theory on The Sex Pistols and Cook, that those two first IQ albums certainly got a post punk feel to them. Maybe thatīs why they are my faves from the band.
Thanks for clearing things up for meTongue 
no worries and just in case you are wondering whether the Stewart Copeland that played in The Police is the same as the one that was in Curved Air..then this time you would be correctBig smile
However, the great Dave Stewart and the Ew-rythmics Dave Stewart are two very different folks, the latter has been going by "David A. Stewart" to avoid confusion.
Trust me. I know what I'm doing.
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 30072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2011 at 14:45
Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

What about artists who clone themselves? Biglietto per LīInferno recently re-did their debut, Tangerine Dream has done several new versions of old material like Phaedra and Tangram, Nik Turnerīs Sphinx underwent considerable surgery as well, and how about that Mike Oldfield?

None of the mentioned examples here would get anything near 5 stars just for the record. Especially the TD and Nik Turner ones are really awful. Weīre talking classic albums thrown in the "letīs make it modern and contemporary"-machine, and such a thing should be outlawed if I had my say. The scary thought however is, that these fabulous musicians at some point in time honestly felt it was a brilliant idea....
 
I havn't heard the re-recordings of Tangram or Phaedra but I do like the Booster series that features reworkings of old tracks like Logos and Sphinx Lightning (+ some new material)
 
Does JM Jarre's reissue of Oxygene count? Apparently it was totally re-recorded yet can anyone really tell the difference compared to the original release?
 
 
 
 
I like the Booster series as well, although I much prefer Cloudburst Flight in its original formSmile

Back on topic: A very good "clone" album is Babylonīs sole album from 78. I really like The Mote in Godīs Eye. 
As to giving a clone five stars - I donīt know what to think. Iīd rate Marillionīs Fugazi 5 stars, and a lot of people write them off as Genesis clones - although I donīt hear it on Fugazi. The one where I hear the Genesis parallels is the debut. 
 
Fugazi is my favourite Fish era Marillion album and I agree that it sounds nothing like Genesis. The main connection was Fish's voice sounding like Peter Gabriel .Pete Nicholls (IQ) also had the same thing levelled at him. ( I love IQ btw)
 
My favourite 'clone album' would likely be Glass Hammer Chronomotree which sounds like Yes,Genesis and ELP at various points but is very enjoyable. Personally I think they have now become too much of a Yes clone with their latest album If.


I think IQ sounds even less like Genesis. Especially on those first two releases. I think itīs down to the punk - post punk feel there is to the music - very bleak and dark, somber romantic expression - which also emanates from former Sex Pistols drummer Paul Cook. 

As to Fish sounding like Peter, I honestly donīt hear it, other than in the sometimes impenetrable imagery they both explore within their lyrical universes.  
 
Not the same Paul CookWink although there was a bit of a new wave punky thing running through IQ that made them a bit more interesting to me than other neo prog bands of the time . The Wake did in places sound very like Genesis , but not Gabriel era Genesis.


LOL Thatīs the second time Iīve been waaay off concerning prog musicians. Some time ago, when I first got into the Canterbury scene, I was sure that Dave Stewart from Egg and National Health (and a heap of other bands) in fact was the same as the one from Eurythmics... Good olī Dave must have changed quite a bit - I thought to myself.
And I agree, which incidentally also supported my theory on The Sex Pistols and Cook, that those two first IQ albums certainly got a post punk feel to them. Maybe thatīs why they are my faves from the band.
Thanks for clearing things up for meTongue 
no worries and just in case you are wondering whether the Stewart Copeland that played in The Police is the same as the one that was in Curved Air..then this time you would be correctBig smile
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23108
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2011 at 14:38
Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

What about artists who clone themselves? Biglietto per LīInferno recently re-did their debut, Tangerine Dream has done several new versions of old material like Phaedra and Tangram, Nik Turnerīs Sphinx underwent considerable surgery as well, and how about that Mike Oldfield?

None of the mentioned examples here would get anything near 5 stars just for the record. Especially the TD and Nik Turner ones are really awful. Weīre talking classic albums thrown in the "letīs make it modern and contemporary"-machine, and such a thing should be outlawed if I had my say. The scary thought however is, that these fabulous musicians at some point in time honestly felt it was a brilliant idea....
 
I havn't heard the re-recordings of Tangram or Phaedra but I do like the Booster series that features reworkings of old tracks like Logos and Sphinx Lightning (+ some new material)
 
Does JM Jarre's reissue of Oxygene count? Apparently it was totally re-recorded yet can anyone really tell the difference compared to the original release?
 
 
 
 
I like the Booster series as well, although I much prefer Cloudburst Flight in its original formSmile

Back on topic: A very good "clone" album is Babylonīs sole album from 78. I really like The Mote in Godīs Eye. 
As to giving a clone five stars - I donīt know what to think. Iīd rate Marillionīs Fugazi 5 stars, and a lot of people write them off as Genesis clones - although I donīt hear it on Fugazi. The one where I hear the Genesis parallels is the debut. 
 
Fugazi is my favourite Fish era Marillion album and I agree that it sounds nothing like Genesis. The main connection was Fish's voice sounding like Peter Gabriel .Pete Nicholls (IQ) also had the same thing levelled at him. ( I love IQ btw)
 
My favourite 'clone album' would likely be Glass Hammer Chronomotree which sounds like Yes,Genesis and ELP at various points but is very enjoyable. Personally I think they have now become too much of a Yes clone with their latest album If.


I think IQ sounds even less like Genesis. Especially on those first two releases. I think itīs down to the punk - post punk feel there is to the music - very bleak and dark, somber romantic expression - which also emanates from former Sex Pistols drummer Paul Cook. 

As to Fish sounding like Peter, I honestly donīt hear it, other than in the sometimes impenetrable imagery they both explore within their lyrical universes.  
 
Not the same Paul CookWink although there was a bit of a new wave punky thing running through IQ that made them a bit more interesting to me than other neo prog bands of the time . The Wake did in places sound very like Genesis , but not Gabriel era Genesis.


LOL Thatīs the second time Iīve been waaay off concerning prog musicians. Some time ago, when I first got into the Canterbury scene, I was sure that Dave Stewart from Egg and National Health (and a heap of other bands) in fact was the same as the one from Eurythmics... Good olī Dave must have changed quite a bit - I thought to myself.
And I agree, which incidentally also supported my theory on The Sex Pistols and Cook, that those two first IQ albums certainly got a post punk feel to them. Maybe thatīs why they are my faves from the band.
Thanks for clearing things up for meTongue 
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 10>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.162 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.