Onholiday(somemightsay)
Well-Known Member
A way to go before I reach those dizzy heights........
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
All Time Top 1100 Albums (Aerosmith - Big Ones) P265
- Thread starter BlueHammer85
- Start date
Nicely penned, as usual.Iron Butterfly
In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida
Don't like the guys voice
First things first, what a set up the band is! The sound they output is beautifully raw but balanced, exactly how you would picture and expect a band of that makeup and era to sound - it's brilliant. If I went back in time to play psychedelic rock, that's pretty much how I want it to sound.
That's enough of the positives (sorry guys ;-) ), how one earth do you go from that brilliant brilliant sound to create something that doesn't excite or go anywhere!?! Riffs are ok-ish (title track aside) throughout but uninspiring.
Probably the most damning and cutting element of this review is that I can sum it up easily off 1 listen. I don't need to revisit any parts to check whether I heard it correctly or whether I am unsure on how likeable some of it it, I have it summed up - It has no depth.
As @Bill Walker as already mentioned, at one point the guy tinkling the faux ivories is literally plagiarising Ray Manzarek (not unlikeable and there are plenty of artists that have an can get away with this, but you immediately pause and go 'did he really just play that?') and on such an iconic melody as well.
We're not going to drag this one out, so let's end where the album does with the title track. Now, I could very easily not be remembering this 100% accurately but the first time I came across this song I am certain that the version I heard was probably around the 5-6-7 minute mark (which lets face it is plenty). So to say I was taken back and slightly horrified that it is now clocking in at just shy of 20 fucking minutes!!!!!!!!
What's that all about - Has the world gone mad?
Did no-one have the foresight to tell them that they have just destroyed the best riff they have on the album (that lovely sounding guitar with the perfect amount of gravel in its make up)? Drum solo's and endless and noodling without any hint of direction - no thanks.
Whoever was in the studio with them has done them a great disservice, ' stop that fucking drum solo, go smoke another joint you're done for the day. I'll trim this back to a five minute song and everyone will thank me in 50 years time that they have been given quarter of an hour back into their daily lives'.
Huge disappointment for me, maybe my hopes and expectations were too much coming into this one as I was really looking forward to getting into one of their albums.
They're getting Carly Simon'd with a 3/10. My favourite part of the album was @BlueHammer85 's anecdote on how the guy was too stoned to say 'In the garden of Eden'.
What a landmark week this has been, I have managed to score psychedelic rock lower than Phil Collins - what have I become........... :-(
Great stuff.
GoatersLeftShin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 1,581
- Team supported
- MCFC
Had a listen to this today and I'm filing it under "another album on the list that shows the list is too long".
It's obviously psychedelic rock, but all it reminded me of was how much better the other bands were who did psychedelic material. The Beatles, The Doors, Pink Floyd, Byrds etc all did it far better. It's not aged well at all and as much as I like In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, it stands out a mile on this album. Well the first few minutes do before it drifts away.
The songs on the album are fairly "meh" and part of me wonders if they had them as pop songs before discovering LSD by the bucketload. In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida starts with an amazing heavy rock riff and, scandalously, they allow it to disappear. That riff was the best part of the album.
The production is lacking as the sound was very 'mushy' too. It sounded like the producer had a few microphones in the room and did a take. When you listen to this say In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida and then - say - A Day in the Life or Good Vibrations, the production is 60 years apart.
I have a real soft spot for psychedelic rock as it acted as a catalyst for making modern music. Without it, pop music would be very, very different. To go from simple 2 minute songs to songs like In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, Good Vibrations, Eight Miles High, Astronomy Domine, not to mention Tomorrow Never Knows and Lucy In the Sky etc with a few years is astonishing. I thank all these bands for the creative explosion that revolutionised music and I'm certain that Iron Butterfly would've influenced every heavy metal or hard rock band who followed them a few years after.
However, In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida just hasn't aged well. The title track will continue to be played in it's shortened version for years to come, but the author of the book should look at this album and wonder if he book would've been far better if he'd made it (say) 200 albums :)
4/10.
It's obviously psychedelic rock, but all it reminded me of was how much better the other bands were who did psychedelic material. The Beatles, The Doors, Pink Floyd, Byrds etc all did it far better. It's not aged well at all and as much as I like In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, it stands out a mile on this album. Well the first few minutes do before it drifts away.
The songs on the album are fairly "meh" and part of me wonders if they had them as pop songs before discovering LSD by the bucketload. In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida starts with an amazing heavy rock riff and, scandalously, they allow it to disappear. That riff was the best part of the album.
The production is lacking as the sound was very 'mushy' too. It sounded like the producer had a few microphones in the room and did a take. When you listen to this say In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida and then - say - A Day in the Life or Good Vibrations, the production is 60 years apart.
I have a real soft spot for psychedelic rock as it acted as a catalyst for making modern music. Without it, pop music would be very, very different. To go from simple 2 minute songs to songs like In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, Good Vibrations, Eight Miles High, Astronomy Domine, not to mention Tomorrow Never Knows and Lucy In the Sky etc with a few years is astonishing. I thank all these bands for the creative explosion that revolutionised music and I'm certain that Iron Butterfly would've influenced every heavy metal or hard rock band who followed them a few years after.
However, In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida just hasn't aged well. The title track will continue to be played in it's shortened version for years to come, but the author of the book should look at this album and wonder if he book would've been far better if he'd made it (say) 200 albums :)
4/10.
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
LOL. Savage! Can’t wait to hear this. On holiday this week but sounds like good music for the beach headphones and a few rum-based drinks!Iron Butterfly
In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida
Don't like the guys voice
First things first, what a set up the band is! The sound they output is beautifully raw but balanced, exactly how you would picture and expect a band of that makeup and era to sound - it's brilliant. If I went back in time to play psychedelic rock, that's pretty much how I want it to sound.
That's enough of the positives (sorry guys ;-) ), how one earth do you go from that brilliant brilliant sound to create something that doesn't excite or go anywhere!?! Riffs are ok-ish (title track aside) throughout but uninspiring.
Probably the most damning and cutting element of this review is that I can sum it up easily off 1 listen. I don't need to revisit any parts to check whether I heard it correctly or whether I am unsure on how likeable some of it it, I have it summed up - It has no depth.
As @Bill Walker as already mentioned, at one point the guy tinkling the faux ivories is literally plagiarising Ray Manzarek (not unlikeable and there are plenty of artists that have an can get away with this, but you immediately pause and go 'did he really just play that?') and on such an iconic melody as well.
We're not going to drag this one out, so let's end where the album does with the title track. Now, I could very easily not be remembering this 100% accurately but the first time I came across this song I am certain that the version I heard was probably around the 5-6-7 minute mark (which lets face it is plenty). So to say I was taken back and slightly horrified that it is now clocking in at just shy of 20 fucking minutes!!!!!!!!
What's that all about - Has the world gone mad?
Did no-one have the foresight to tell them that they have just destroyed the best riff they have on the album (that lovely sounding guitar with the perfect amount of gravel in its make up)? Drum solo's and endless and noodling without any hint of direction - no thanks.
Whoever was in the studio with them has done them a great disservice, ' stop that fucking drum solo, go smoke another joint you're done for the day. I'll trim this back to a five minute song and everyone will thank me in 50 years time that they have been given quarter of an hour back into their daily lives'.
Huge disappointment for me, maybe my hopes and expectations were too much coming into this one as I was really looking forward to getting into one of their albums.
They're getting Carly Simon'd with a 3/10. My favourite part of the album was @BlueHammer85 's anecdote on how the guy was too stoned to say 'In the garden of Eden'.
What a landmark week this has been, I have managed to score psychedelic rock lower than Phil Collins - what have I become........... :-(
Bill Walker
Well-Known Member
I think its worth more than a 3 :)Iron Butterfly
In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida
Don't like the guys voice
First things first, what a set up the band is! The sound they output is beautifully raw but balanced, exactly how you would picture and expect a band of that makeup and era to sound - it's brilliant. If I went back in time to play psychedelic rock, that's pretty much how I want it to sound.
That's enough of the positives (sorry guys ;-) ), how one earth do you go from that brilliant brilliant sound to create something that doesn't excite or go anywhere!?! Riffs are ok-ish (title track aside) throughout but uninspiring.
Probably the most damning and cutting element of this review is that I can sum it up easily off 1 listen. I don't need to revisit any parts to check whether I heard it correctly or whether I am unsure on how likeable some of it it, I have it summed up - It has no depth.
As @Bill Walker as already mentioned, at one point the guy tinkling the faux ivories is literally plagiarising Ray Manzarek (not unlikeable and there are plenty of artists that have an can get away with this, but you immediately pause and go 'did he really just play that?') and on such an iconic melody as well.
We're not going to drag this one out, so let's end where the album does with the title track. Now, I could very easily not be remembering this 100% accurately but the first time I came across this song I am certain that the version I heard was probably around the 5-6-7 minute mark (which lets face it is plenty). So to say I was taken back and slightly horrified that it is now clocking in at just shy of 20 fucking minutes!!!!!!!!
What's that all about - Has the world gone mad?
Did no-one have the foresight to tell them that they have just destroyed the best riff they have on the album (that lovely sounding guitar with the perfect amount of gravel in its make up)? Drum solo's and endless and noodling without any hint of direction - no thanks.
Whoever was in the studio with them has done them a great disservice, ' stop that fucking drum solo, go smoke another joint you're done for the day. I'll trim this back to a five minute song and everyone will thank me in 50 years time that they have been given quarter of an hour back into their daily lives'.
Huge disappointment for me, maybe my hopes and expectations were too much coming into this one as I was really looking forward to getting into one of their albums.
They're getting Carly Simon'd with a 3/10. My favourite part of the album was @BlueHammer85 's anecdote on how the guy was too stoned to say 'In the garden of Eden'.
What a landmark week this has been, I have managed to score psychedelic rock lower than Phil Collins - what have I become........... :-(
But I agree it has little depth, this band could play ok but their songwriting ideas are quite baron, melodically speaking they were quite bereft of ideas and memorable melody.
The title track was indeed released as a short version single so that is what you heard before the album filler 20 minute version. Probably the main reason I felt ripped of when I bought it :)
Flowers and Beads isnt a bad melody, in fact in the verses its almost poppy, but it has some nice Bass playing and interesting chords.
If you take a similar song to their heavier rock stuff, say Hendrix's Stone Free, that wouldve been a great song for them to have written, it wouldve suited them.....but they didnt come up with anything that good.
Flowers & Beads, have a couple more listens its quite catchy.
Last edited:
BlueHammer85
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 35,911
I think its worth more than a 3 :)
But I agree it has little depth, this band could play ok but their songwriting ideas are quite baron, melodically speaking they were quite bereft of ideas and memorable melody.
The title track was indeed released as a short version single so that is what you heard before the album filler 20 minute version. Probably the main reason I felt ripped of when I bought it :)
Flowers and Beads isnt a bad melody, in fact in the verses its almost poppy, but it has some nice Bass playing and interesting chords.
If you take a similar song to their heavier rock stuff, say Hendrix's Stone Free, that wouldve been a great song for them to have written, it wouldve suited them.....but they didnt come up with anything that good.
Flowers & Beads, have a couple more listens its quite catchy.
Agree with all that.
also thought ‘Are you happy’ deserves some credit, awesome driving rift towards the second part of the song
From what I've heard of it so far, 4 seems fair.Had a listen to this today and I'm filing it under "another album on the list that shows the list is too long".
It's obviously psychedelic rock, but all it reminded me of was how much better the other bands were who did psychedelic material. The Beatles, The Doors, Pink Floyd, Byrds etc all did it far better. It's not aged well at all and as much as I like In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, it stands out a mile on this album. Well the first few minutes do before it drifts away.
The songs on the album are fairly "meh" and part of me wonders if they had them as pop songs before discovering LSD by the bucketload. In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida starts with an amazing heavy rock riff and, scandalously, they allow it to disappear. That riff was the best part of the album.
The production is lacking as the sound was very 'mushy' too. It sounded like the producer had a few microphones in the room and did a take. When you listen to this say In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida and then - say - A Day in the Life or Good Vibrations, the production is 60 years apart.
I have a real soft spot for psychedelic rock as it acted as a catalyst for making modern music. Without it, pop music would be very, very different. To go from simple 2 minute songs to songs like In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, Good Vibrations, Eight Miles High, Astronomy Domine, not to mention Tomorrow Never Knows and Lucy In the Sky etc with a few years is astonishing. I thank all these bands for the creative explosion that revolutionised music and I'm certain that Iron Butterfly would've influenced every heavy metal or hard rock band who followed them a few years after.
However, In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida just hasn't aged well. The title track will continue to be played in it's shortened version for years to come, but the author of the book should look at this album and wonder if he book would've been far better if he'd made it (say) 200 albums :)
4/10.
So many brilliant albums were released in this period, most of which are given the accolades they deserve.
Not many are hidden gems, and this isn't one of them.
Good review
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
Very little can ruin a holiday in Hawaii on the first day. This came uncomfortably close.
So they do a whatever-minute long song, the only one with a real hook, the only one that ever made anyone ever hear of the band, so that the keyboardist can do a version of “God Rest Ye Merry Gentleman”? And so the drummer can do a solo that sounds like a true solo because he’s playing one drum with one hand? And so the guitarist can do that screechy industrial bit that was very cool but should have been done in another song with a different band maybe 20 years later?
I can see why these guys tried to reunite about a dozen times since 1972 because playing this shit today would give them a chance to sop up of of those acid-gobbling fans left stranded by the demise of the Dead at hippie festivals in America. That they were time and time again unsuccessful gives you a sense of how motivated people who grow up in lolling about in the San Diego sunshine tend to be.
The most fun this pointless exercise offered me was the chance to hear the story about how they fucked up appearing at Woodstock (read the Wikipedia entry — it’s hilarious).
Anyhow, forebears of hard rock and metal, yada yada yada. The 60s cliches are lathered thickly all over this — cheesy organ (dig the Manzarek rip from Light My Fire out a year before this LOL), lots of stuff about you, girl, and you, babe, production which sounds like a poor boom guy running around stage sticking the mike in front of whichever instrument is soloing at the moment, a song called Flowers And Beads.
Yet another band whose song title provides the summation of my review: “Termination.” 2/10
Now time for a Mai-tai.
So they do a whatever-minute long song, the only one with a real hook, the only one that ever made anyone ever hear of the band, so that the keyboardist can do a version of “God Rest Ye Merry Gentleman”? And so the drummer can do a solo that sounds like a true solo because he’s playing one drum with one hand? And so the guitarist can do that screechy industrial bit that was very cool but should have been done in another song with a different band maybe 20 years later?
I can see why these guys tried to reunite about a dozen times since 1972 because playing this shit today would give them a chance to sop up of of those acid-gobbling fans left stranded by the demise of the Dead at hippie festivals in America. That they were time and time again unsuccessful gives you a sense of how motivated people who grow up in lolling about in the San Diego sunshine tend to be.
The most fun this pointless exercise offered me was the chance to hear the story about how they fucked up appearing at Woodstock (read the Wikipedia entry — it’s hilarious).
Anyhow, forebears of hard rock and metal, yada yada yada. The 60s cliches are lathered thickly all over this — cheesy organ (dig the Manzarek rip from Light My Fire out a year before this LOL), lots of stuff about you, girl, and you, babe, production which sounds like a poor boom guy running around stage sticking the mike in front of whichever instrument is soloing at the moment, a song called Flowers And Beads.
Yet another band whose song title provides the summation of my review: “Termination.” 2/10
Now time for a Mai-tai.
Bill Walker
Well-Known Member
Any teenager growing up during the late 1960s, who had even a mild interest in rock music, most likely had a copy of In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida..
I did :)
I did :)
Onholiday(somemightsay)
Well-Known Member
I think its worth more than a 3 :)
But I agree it has little depth, this band could play ok but their songwriting ideas are quite baron, melodically speaking they were quite bereft of ideas and memorable melody.
The title track was indeed released as a short version single so that is what you heard before the album filler 20 minute version. Probably the main reason I felt ripped of when I bought it :)
Flowers and Beads isnt a bad melody, in fact in the verses its almost poppy, but it has some nice Bass playing and interesting chords.
If you take a similar song to their heavier rock stuff, say Hendrix's Stone Free, that wouldve been a great song for them to have written, it wouldve suited them.....but they didnt come up with anything that good.
Flowers & Beads, have a couple more listens its quite catchy.
Thats the ball game though isn't it BW, if they don't have enough material to fill an album, why are they releasing an album? :-)
I'll have another look at Flowers and beads.
Does anyone know if they have any better albums to go at, I'm not familiar with them as a band?
For full transparency, I was probably leaning more towards 3.5 rounding up to a 4, but when I listened to it I was walking down to pick up my eldest from school (earlier than they normally get to come home), its Friday afternoon, the sun is shining its a beautiful day and I have a nice clear head ready for some album reviewing.
I was in such a good mood, it should have been been like shooting fish in a barrel to score at least a 6 here.
What I was greeted with was an album comprised of 90% filler which included a 20 minute marathon where they basically rinsed their best riff to the point of the listener probably never really wanting to hear it again.
I can't imagine a scenario where I am clamouring to hear that 20 minute version again.
As a result, they got Carly Simon'd............