Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 21:26:14 GMT
Yeah sorry Paul, with Chris and John on this one... I am sure this album would sound atrocious on whatever format it was played. I will have to listen to the Spotify version. If you don't like this you must hate FM post 1975. I suspect this is partly a format issue as the vinyl sounds rather good by modern recording standards. No way could it be described as atrocious even if it is not to taste. Just listening - the Spotify version suffers from appalling mastering. Sounds like a different mix to the vinyl. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 4, 2017 21:59:56 GMT
I think quite a few of us have said it isn't about sound quality.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Jul 4, 2017 22:10:54 GMT
Martin, earlier you mentioned 'the big four' Fleetwood Mac albums.
Which ones would those be?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Jul 4, 2017 22:36:53 GMT
I think quite a few of us have said it isn't about sound quality. Quite! It's rare that I dislike something to the point that I turn the radio off or switch channels, but hearing this drivel has made me do just that on a few occasions. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 5, 2017 6:14:12 GMT
Martin, earlier you mentioned 'the big four' Fleetwood Mac albums. Which ones would those be? That wasn't me, Chris. For me, the big FM albums are Fleetwood Mac (1975), Rumours, Tusk. |
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Jul 5, 2017 6:25:55 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2017 8:45:37 GMT
My favourite FM albums are the ones Martin says plus Tango in the Night which is actually probably my favourite of all. I also quite like elements of Behind the Mask but overall it was a let down.
|
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Jul 5, 2017 10:40:48 GMT
Yes I would include Tango ...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2017 11:56:11 GMT
This album does have elements of Tango In The Night that have been widely mentioned elsewhere. Perhaps peeps should compare them on vinyl. You can't give one ten and the other one, there just isn't that difference in quality if prejudices are put aside. Anyway opinion on Hoffman is closer to my view on this title. As I have said you don't have to like it but it certainly isn't a 1/10 on any sensible rating scale. Hoffman Buckingham McVie thread. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2017 12:39:33 GMT
This album does have elements of Tango In The Night that have been widely mentioned elsewhere. Perhaps peeps should compare them on vinyl. You can't give one ten and the other one, there just isn't that difference in quality if prejudices are put aside. Anyway opinion on Hoffman is closer to my view on this title. As I have said you don't have to like it but it certainly isn't a 1/10 on any sensible rating scale. Hoffman Buckingham McVie thread.Totally disagree with you Paul. I don't like the music on this album and personally don't believe it is in the same league as Tango in the Night. My other point is that both of these artists are so much better than this type of drivel, so therefore that also contributes to my 1/10 marking which stands. Listening to it on Vinyl, CD, Streaming, DAT, Tape, Cassette, DCC, Mini Disc, SACD or DVD Audio won't change my opinion on terrible songs. |
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Jul 5, 2017 14:36:10 GMT
People are rating it on the quality of songs, not the recording ...
The issue is that the song writing is so many leagues below what we are used to and expect from the talent involved.
There's no prejudice - I would have loved this album to have been as good as it should have been.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Jul 5, 2017 17:32:33 GMT
People are rating it on the quality of songs, not the recording ... The issue is that the song writing is so many leagues below what we are used to and expect from the talent involved. There's no prejudice - I would have loved this album to have been as good as it should have been. I fully agree with everything said in this post, especially the last line. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2017 20:25:57 GMT
This isn't so much about your supposed expertise on good song writing. Often I like an album when I hear it better reproduced having previously dismissed it as poor so it could be relevant to out opposing views. Everyone is welcome to dislike it but giving an album that has at least IMO a few decent sounding tracks (even if one regards it mainly as formulaic or filler) 1/10 is puzzling. This calls into question peoples marking criteria on the album of the month threads. I know Martin started another thread on this so I think best to carry on the conversation there. We appear to be getting fairly extreme opinions on many of these.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 5, 2017 20:37:59 GMT
It has two decent songs so I think my 4/10 rating is pretty fair.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Jul 5, 2017 21:46:15 GMT
This isn't so much about your supposed expertise on good song writing. Often I like an album when I hear it better reproduced having previously dismissed it as poor so it could be relevant to out opposing views. Everyone is welcome to dislike it but giving an album that has at least IMO a few decent sounding tracks (even if one regards it mainly as formulaic or filler) 1/10 is puzzling. This calls into question peoples marking criteria on the album of the month threads. I know Martin started another thread on this so I think best to carry on the conversation there. We appear to be getting fairly extreme opinions on many of these. Martin didn't start another thread on this album, so here is the obvious place to carry on. I have an immense dislike of this album. To the point of switching channel, muting the sound, or turning it off whenever one of the tracks on it is played on the radio. Just accept that for what it is, just my immense dislike of something. If you like it that's fine, just don't think that anyone else should think better of it just because you do. It's OK to have opposing views, and there's no puzzling to be done. I will never buy a copy of it on any format, such is my regard for this album. I think 1 out of 10 is being generous, because for me there is nothing on this album that makes me want to listen to any of it ever again. There's nothing memorable on it, and there's nothing musically challenging either. I can tolerate decent songs with dodgy recording and production techniques (Michael Schenker Group "MSG" album, anyone?), but not decent recording and production techniques with dodgy songs. Style over substance has never been my thing. |
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Jul 5, 2017 22:47:35 GMT
This isn't so much about your supposed expertise on good song writing. Often I like an album when I hear it better reproduced having previously dismissed it as poor so it could be relevant to out opposing views. Everyone is welcome to dislike it but giving an album that has at least IMO a few decent sounding tracks (even if one regards it mainly as formulaic or filler) 1/10 is puzzling. This calls into question peoples marking criteria on the album of the month threads. I know Martin started another thread on this so I think best to carry on the conversation there. We appear to be getting fairly extreme opinions on many of these. I can tolerate decent songs with dodgy recording and production techniques (Michael Schenker Group "MSG" album, anyone?), but not decent recording and production techniques with dodgy songs. I've just checked to see if I still have that MSG album and I do, along with three others ... All I can remember is the great songs so I will have to give it a play and see what the production is like - I remember they did have some 'issues' with it but don't think I would have noticed the bad production on my system back in 1981 ...  They were my favourite group back in the 80's and I saw them three or four times at the Manchester Apollo. A master guitarist indeed. Saw him again a year or so ago in London and put on a great show playing UFO, MSG and Scorpions classics ... He even had a couple of guys from Scorps in the band that night. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2017 22:49:24 GMT
This isn't so much about your supposed expertise on good song writing. Often I like an album when I hear it better reproduced having previously dismissed it as poor so it could be relevant to out opposing views. Everyone is welcome to dislike it but giving an album that has at least IMO a few decent sounding tracks (even if one regards it mainly as formulaic or filler) 1/10 is puzzling. This calls into question peoples marking criteria on the album of the month threads. I know Martin started another thread on this so I think best to carry on the conversation there. We appear to be getting fairly extreme opinions on many of these. Martin didn't start another thread on this album, so here is the obvious place to carry on. Was referring to this. theaudiostandard.net/thread/3186/album-choice-scoring-methodHow do you arrive at 1 when there is much worse? Appears no likey = 1, likey = 10 for some at least? |
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Jul 5, 2017 23:07:02 GMT
Martin didn't start a thread about it. ChrisB did. The current discussion about the Buckingham/McVie album throws up an interesting question, to which all answers are correct: When you are giving an album a score, what is the frame of reference that you use? For me, I ask myself whether I would ever play it again if it were sitting on a shelf in my living room. If the answer is no, then it gets the minimum score. Sometimes I'll add a point if I want to acknowledge the craft involved - musicianship, songwriting etc. On another forum, I once gave 'Thriller' by Michael Jackson the minimum score which happened to be zero and I was challenged over my decision. I scored it based on how musically rewarding it is to me. I decided that I couldn't ever envisage circumstances where I might derive any pleasure from it. However, I fully understand that others think it's fantastic. That's great & I fully respect their opinion but musically (which is the only measure I use) the album did nothing for me - I was unable to see how I could give it any other score. I did recognise that there was a high point on the record, however: The running out track on side two. The second paragraph covers it all. For me, if I had a physical copy I would take it off the shelf, go outside, open the bin lid, and store it there until the refuse collectors come and take it away. I have given it the lowest score I can. I would have given it 0, with a 1 for musicianship. Songwriting? If there were decent songs trying to get out there's a chance I'd pick up on it, but I didn't. To me it's apocryphal shite. For me the high point was turning it off! However, I fully understand that others think it's fantastic. That's great & I fully respect their opinion but musically (which is the only measure I use) the album did nothing for me - I was unable to see how I could give it any other score. You like it, and I'm fine with that. Why can't you accept that I don't agree with you over this, and I likely never will? |
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Jul 5, 2017 23:30:48 GMT
I can tolerate decent songs with dodgy recording and production techniques (Michael Schenker Group "MSG" album, anyone?), but not decent recording and production techniques with dodgy songs. I've just checked to see if I still have that MSG album and I do, along with three others ... All I can remember is the great songs so I will have to give it a play and see what the production is like - I remember they did have some 'issues' with it but don't think I would have noticed the bad production on my system back in 1981 ... They were my favourite group back in the 80's and I saw them three or four times at the Manchester Apollo. A master guitarist indeed. Saw him again a year or so ago in London and put on a great show playing UFO, MSG and Scorpions classics ... He even had a couple of guys from Scorps in the band that night. I had the pleasure of seeing MSG a couple of times before Michael returned to the bottle, and they were superb both times. First time was the Armed And Ready tour, the second was the MSG tour, when they played pretty much all of the second album, and it was pretty powerful stuff. The record was awful - Ron Nevison made a right mess of it all, and the songs never came across with the same power as they did live. All IMO, of course. The first album was produced by Roger Glover, and was by far the better record of the two. Again IMO. Had some killer session players too, with Simon Phillips, Mo Foster and Don Airey making up the band. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 6, 2017 4:05:45 GMT
People are entitled to thimk its good or crap I happen to think it very poor hence my low vote of 2 and like Chris I would not want to listen to it again
Music is a subjective experience
|
|
