Click here to go to Music Reviews by Bryan B.: K - Z

Alice In Chains: Unplugged

Unplugged by Alice in Chains(1996)

Alice in Chains? I'm reviewing Alice in Chains now? What the hell is wrong with me? Where are the Phil Woods reviews, dammit! Heeh. Alice in Chains is supposedly a pretty good band. Maybe it's just this album that sucks. But I doubt it. They've put out acoustic stuff in the past, so they should know what they are doing here. I've always found their "plugged" music pretty boring, too. I'm just not a huge fan of mood music, sorry. Especially not this mood. Doesn't do anything for me.

But, here's the track listing!

1. Nutshell

2. Brother

3. No Excuses

4. Sludge Factory

5. Down in a Hole

6. Angry Chair

7. Rooster

8. Got Me Wrong

9. Heaven Beside You

10. Would?

11. Frogs

12. Over Now

13. Killer Is Me

I've listened to what other people have to say about this album. They seem to enjoy it. Well, screw them. I'm not going to make allowances for their reviews. This is my review, and about what I think of the freakin' record! Damn it! I'd like to actually listen to this a few more times before reviewing it, but it's so boring I don't think I can manage it. But here are all the songs on this album in a nutshell: a repetitive bass line which quietly sneaks up on you and taps you on the shoulder, saying "this is the mood for this song, buddy!" and guitars that do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. It's essentially, as I mentioned earlier, mood music. Good depressing crap. And acoustic guitars are just more depressing than say, a trumpet or sitar or conga. None of the songs really impress me. The best point of the album is when the band suddenly jumps into "Enter Sandman" intro. Alas, then they just did another one of their songs. I'm not really a lyric guy, meself. I listen to the music. I expect though that lots of people listen to this music for the lyrics, and how they relate to the musical mood of the song. Anyway, if so, good for you. I really can't praise an album that makes me think, "Hell, I've made about a dozen songs better than this" after each and every song starts up.

However, I think "Nutshell" was better than the rest. Part of my hatred for this album no doubt has to do with the bass-heavy "production." I think the main trouble is they didn't use an acoustic bass, so it ain't really unplugged, is it? Come on guys, acoustic basses aren't hard to come by these days.

2 stars(out of 10)

Legendary Hits by the Allman Brothers Band(1994)

Hey! This is one of numerous classic rock compilations I happen to have. Most of these I ain't reviewed yet, since they're just compilations to begin with, plus a lot of the groups I hardly listen to anymore for various reasons. I tell you, I have lost my taste for the Allman Brothers Band occasionally throughout the years, just like I've lost and regained and lost and regained my taste for Lynyrd Skynyrd. But I'm starting to get back into 'em. I guess I should say for starters that you could call the Allman Brothers the classic rock radio band of the American South. Classic rock fans round here take the Brothers very seriously, and so do radio stations. You'll not just hear stuff like "Midnight Rider" or "Whipping Post" played in between Zep and Bad Company; you'll hear fantastic "obscure" album tracks just as often that I suspect most people in other areas of the country are hardly familiar with. Based on my limited surveys of classic rock radio in other parts of the country other than the South, it does seem like Southern rock gets put on the backburner aside from the hits that most of us are rather annoyed with by now anyway. So, when it comes to the Allman Brothers Band, I think I have a good idea as to what's hot and what's sauerkraut. Without further ado, here's the tracking listin' for this compilation, just as you like it, Mr. Shakespeare:

1. Midnight Rider

2. Whipping Post

3. Little Martha

4. Hoochie Coochie Man

5. Wasted Words

6. Statesboro Blues(live)

7. Jessica

8. Win, Lose, or Draw

9. Revival(Love is Everywhere)

10. Trouble No More(bonus)

11. Hot 'Lanta(bonus, live)

12. Stormy Monday(bonus, live)

While I have no doubt that these "hits" are legendary, I have to wonder what happened to a bunch of MY favorite Allmans Brothers' tunes. Where's the country rockin' of "Blue Sky"? Where's the brilliant Sonny Boy Williamson cover, "No Way Out"? Where's that in memory of Lizzy Reed tune? I mean, sure, it's great to have "Midnight Rider", "Whipping Post", and "Jessica" on here...that's what you'd expect from a greatest hits collection. But why do we have "Hoochie Coochie Man"? It's just a hyped up blues cover with rather mediocre vocals courtesy of (now deceased) bassist Berry Oakley that simply goes to show just how nice unhyped up blues originals are when left unscathed by overzealous blues rock acts. It's not that horrible a song, but you get my point. It's just not really necessary, and while I can enjoy it when I'm in a good mood like I am today, if I'm feeling militantly anti-wankfesty(if you'll allow me to use a Prindle-ism) I'm likely to toss the whole album in the trash just cuzza it! And who the heck stuck "Win, Lose or Draw" on here? Isn't that the title track from a dull post-Duane mid-70s ABB album? Sounds out of place here amongst the true classics. Sheesh, whoever stuck it next to "Jessica" must be some sort of idiot. The bonus CD tracks are dispensable as well, though I do enjoy "Trouble No More" and 'Stormy Monday" a lot.

But...hey! Maybe I'm not raving enough about what's good. Two lead guitarists, two percussionists, a singer/acoustic guitarist/organist, and a bassist producin' a sensitive fusion of rock and roll, blues, country, Latin, and jazz music. Can't ya'll dig it? Yes, the Allman Brothers Band are(or at least, were...I'm not sold on their late 70s-80s-90s output, though they're still a great live outfit) one of the finest bands classic rock have to offer. Even on this collection, the songs that are good are truly good. They kick my arse to Birmin'am, in fact. I just don't want you to waste your money on a compilation that leaves a good deal to be desired when you could always purchase one of the classic(up to 1973 you're pretty much in the clear) Allman Brothers' albums and get the full experience. The Jimi Hendrix Experience, even. That kinda experience.

By the way, sorry for the mediocre review here. I didn't get much sleep last night and I'm kind of tired...zzzzzzzzzzz. Plus I was involved in a minor car accident this morning(my fault, too). Nothing too serious, but it's always a rather unnerving experience, you know?

Excuses, excuses. Why does every review I write suck, anyway? The world will never know! Hey, I know! I must be an idiot!

7 stars(out of 10)

The Four Seasons by Antonio Vivaldi(1725)

This Italian music is good stuff - just ask my good friend philosopher/writer/composer/poet Jean Jacques Rousseau. He'll tell you! But I do believe with all my heart and a portion of my mind and soul that the king of the many great Italian composers is Antonio Vivaldi, and his finest work is probably this. In fact, many people count these four concertos together as their very favorite piece of classical music anywhere. I don't agree with them completely, but I can certainly understand why they like this as much as they do: this is a magnificent work of art! Vivaldi was a very Italian composer, if you know what I mean - he was very direct and passionate in his music, not someone who would bury his own feelings inside deep, massive, and impressive works as some of the great Germans did. He was especially gifted at composing fast pieces, I think. Also, he was a pure genius at layering instruments on top of each other. Never do his instruments play anonymous little harmonies in backup for a lead instrument...if there's a guitar or an oboe or recorder or flute playing in a Vivaldi work you can bet your life that it's going to be playing something which you'll want to hear. Vivaldi didn't allow for superflous instrumentation, you see, which is why I suspect he liked concertos so much though many other Baroque composers thought them too limiting and restrictive a musical form. The concerto, in case you didn't know, is comprised of three movements, with the first movement usually(always?) being fast, the second slow, and the third fast again. I'm fond of concertos myself - note that Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto in D is my favorite classical piece ere written. Eh, well, you don't really need to note that I suppose. Where was I?

Musically, this is a wonderful work, but it has received especial attention due to the fact that it is a 'conceptual' piece, divided into four sections with each section referring to one of the four seasons. In my opinion, however, the concept is even a little bigger than that! I think Antonio was trying to do what not many composers or writers or musicians had ever even dreamed of doing before: to sum up the many faces, the many moods(the many seasons, if you will) of life in a single, coherent, and relatively short musical opus. And is it successful? Strangely enough, yes, it is! Happiness, sadness, anger, joy, love, despair, spirituality, oppression, energy, catharsis, nostalgia, melancholy, depression, hope - all these emotions and more are reflected in The Four Seasons. This work reminds me of one of my favorite paintings: Hans Baldung's The Three Ages Of Man And Death, in that the concept behind the work is so huge, so ambitious, yet the respective artists in presenting that concept are simple and direct. That's what I like to see in my art: ambition without pretension! It is possible, you know. Each of the concertos is dominated by the strings, and especially the solo violin(one of Vivaldi's favorite instruments. He not only composed for it, but he also played it quite avidly), but there are a few interludes led by other instruments, too. Some of the violin work is pure loveliness, but I suspect I should present you with a track listing before continuing:

La Primavera(Spring)

I. Allegro

II. Largo

III. Allegro

L'Estate(Summer)

I. Allegro non molto

II. Adagio - Presto

III. Presto

L'Autunno(Autumn)

I. Allegro

II. Adagio molto

III. Allegro

L'Inverno

I. Allegro non molto

II. Largo

III. Allegro

I don't like to discuss "performances" when reviewing classical music because there are far too many classical review sites that do just that. It isn't that important, in my opinion. Is it more important to know how good the orchestra is than it is to know how good the piece is? Hardly! But I would like to say that the St. Petersburg Radio and TV Orchestra sounds magnificent conducted by Stanislav Gorkovenko, which is rather surprising quite frankly..."Radio and TV Orchestra"? Sounds like something more adept at performing "light" classics and modern pops. Nonsense, however - these guys are good, and especially that Pavel Popov on the violin(I thought all the Popovs had moved to Bulgaria. Must not be!). In fact, now that I think of it, the best orchestras I've heard have been either German or Russian - the Brits and Americanos seem to lag greatly behind those two nations.

It's important to note that in no point does The Four Seasons "lag" or become boring and overblown - every movement is fantastic. There are no slow parts. How many of your crazy rock operas can you say that for?? There are some slow movements, sure, but these are just as excellent as the fast ones. These four concertos really are a piece of work. In fact, I'm having trouble thinking of any other equivalent work of music that touches on more "moods" - I don't think there is one. The "red priest of Venice" wasn't joking around with this "four seasons" stuff. But, nevertheless, song variety aside, how good is the music? Well, you probably already know - several movements are very familiar themes widely featured on television and in the cinema. From "Spring" comes the opening allegro, a lively jaunt(dig the great bass woodwind playing behind the echo of the strings...a Vivaldi trademark!) that is delightful for the duration of its three minutes. From "Summer" comes the stunning third movement - so overpowering and oppressive! It features a great raggedy violin solo, too. "Autumn"'s contribution is the lilting waltz of the second allegro. It is as graceful as an impala skipping through the Serengetti, which I think is rather graceful. And from "Winter", my least favorite season, comes the greatest of all, in my opinion, the middle movement "Largo." It is a theme one can never forget...it speaks volumes without saying a word, it imprints itself on thy soul, and what can ye do? It is one of the most beautiful pieces of music I know of, and also the one The Four Seasons track that really imprints itself indelibly upon my soul. And it lasts only two minutes?? How much is said in so little. Pavel Popov's version is the best I've heard, I must say - he really captures the essence of the piece. His playing brings a tear to my eye and a chill down my spine as I cross the Rhine in order to reach that dark pine whereby I hope to dine. The non-standards are as good as the ones I've just mentioned(aside from "Largo" from Winter, that is - it's something EXTRA special) - in fact, movements such as the second allegro from "Spring" and the fantastic "Adagio molto" from "Autumn" will arguably give the listener even more pleasure than the more popular themes I've already mentioned from those concertos. I could go on ad infinitum about each of these movements, I suppose, but I think you get the gist of what I'm trying to say. The Four Seasons is a little record everybody should own - perhaps the best "conceptual" non-opera piece in music. Get it before collecting the 90s Black Sabbath and Jesus & Mary Chain records, at least - you'll be glad you did. We've really got to get rid of this nonsense about certain musical genres being "beyond" people's understanding - that's all rubbish. All people can understand all music if they wish to - some music, I grant you, is probably not worth understanding. It's too limiting to align yourself with but one musical genre - there's so much to be heard everywhere! Don't settle for merely average artists in a genre you're comfortable with when you could be hearing a genius... This piece gets a 10...how could it not? If there is nothing bad and nothing boring to be found, what is there to criticize?

10 stars(out of 10)

The Best of B.B. King by B.B. King(1973)

B.B. King is good music. Damn good. Great guitarist. He was born about 15 miles from where I was born and still reside. People call him the King of the Blues. Ok, I might argue a bit with that, but B.B. King deserves all the praise in the world. He's actually pretty fancy blues; blues sometimes mixed in with some R&B and jazz, but it's always special. Oh, the track listing?

1. Hummingbird

2. Cook County Jail Introduction/How Blue Can You Get

3. Caldonia

4. Sweet Sixteen

5. Why I Sing the Blues

6. Nobody Loves Me but My Mother

7. Ain't Nobody Home

8. The Thrill Is Gone

This isn't a very long album, so I'll take it track by track. "Hummingbird" is beautiful. "How Blue Can You Get" is a fantastic live track....man, only B.B. King could come alive like this in a jail! Good music, that's what it is, my friend. "Caldonia" is loads better than the original. "Sweet Sixteen" is maybe my favorite song on this thing. "Why I Sing the Blues" is a great blues anthem, plus it has a funky bass groove so you can shake your booty, too! "Nobody Loves Me but My Mother" would be ok, except for that crazy production thigamarjoo at the end, which is just plain annoying. "Ain't Nobody Home" is probably the best non-guitar driven song by a electric blues great that I've ever heard! Ooh, it's good! "The Thrill is Gone" is B.B.'s signature song. Great song it is. My only complaint with this album is that it's pretty short. It's not really a must-have. Check out some of B.B.'s live recordings. Now there is brilliance! But I mean this sure ain't wasted money. Actually...wait a second. Maybe this is a waste of money. Sure, this compilation is really cheap, but it's awful short, too. Come to think of it...don't buy it. There are lots of B.B. King compilations about, and I'm sure you can find another one. But better yet, buy a real album or a live recording. B.B. King is one of the best guitarists you'll ever listen. The real blues; not Clapton. The main difference between the two? B.B. King's guitar tone is so sweet it sounds as if Lucille is singing! Clapton's "woman tone" is, on the other hand, often quite grating and unpleasant.

8 stars (out of 10)

Against the Grain by Bad Religion(1991)

Oops. Here I go again: reviewing an album in a genre I know next to nothing about. I haven't quite made my mind up about punk/hardcore. I enjoy the Ramones and the Clash, but much of the other punk I've heard didn't do a damn thing. See, I also have no problem assimilating the Ramones and Clash into my definition of classic rock(which I'm sure they'd hate......but think about it...all rock that is good and powerful years after it is made is "classic", eh?). So I just haven't made my mind up on whether punk is a worthy genre of music. This Bad Religion album is pretty good, though!

Track listin':

1. Modern Man

2. Turn on the Light

3. Get Off

4. Blenderhead

5. The Positive Aspect of Negative Thinking

6. Anesthesia

7. Flat Earth Society

8. Faith Alone

9. Entropy

10. Against the Grain

11. Operation Rescue

12. God Song

13. 21st Century (Digital Boy)

14. Mystery and Famine

15. Unacceptable

16. Quality and Quantity

17. Walk Away

I've given some thought on what this album really deserves. Forget musical genre. I shouldn't make the mistake so many reviewers make of reviewing underground albums on a lower standard than more "mainstream" releases(although by the punk definition, I guess Epitaph Records is practically mainstream. Screw definitions...Bad Religion made Epitaph into the giant pusher of crappy music that it is today, not the other way around.) Originally, I gave this record a '9', but I've come to realize that there is no getting around it: those first few songs do sound awfully similar. You can't just ignore that(although, granted, on a hardcore album filled with really short songs, it is more forgivable than if you were listening to 10 minute jazz pieces). So I've given it an eight. I stand by my previous comments: there is some killer stuff to be found on this album, if you want to find it.

Oh, and by the way: I'm reviewing the music on this album here. Not the lyrics. Lyrics are a pretty crappy way to get your ideas across, unless you really like propaganda. I can tell that Bad Religion offers me absolutely nothing in terms of philosophy. For philosophy, I'd pick the written word over music any day. If they aren't marketing propaganda, then why not develop their ideas further by placing it on that crappy white stuff that we make out of poor, innocent trees and allowing BR fans to read and fully understand these brilliant words that speak for themselves? Still, I only oppose people looking at Bad Religion as a serious artistic purveyor of philosophy. It's commendable that they are free enough to express themselves in their music...it's some of their fans who have the problem, in me opinion.

Oh, this album. Fast punk with a singer who actually sings! That singer is Mr. David Graffin, Monsieur Note Hitter. Actually, beyond their supposed hardcore messiness, Bad Religion is a pretty damn professional band. They put the twin electric guitars to good use(and truthfully, that may be their greatest contribution to society in the form of their two 'classic' albums, this one and No Control)...in fact, they may be the best two lead guitar band since the Allman Brothers Band. Good bassist, too.

My criteria for reviewing records, or anything else for that matter is simple. Does "it" keep me entertained, interested? This album does, for the most part. It has lots of good songs. "Turn on the Light", "The Positive Aspect of Negative Thinking", "Anesthesia", "Against the Grain" are among my favorites. Ignore the crappers in the beginning and you've got one of the best records of '91.

8 stars (out of 10)

In The Flat Field by Bauhaus(1980)

This record is surprisingly good. I say surprisingly cuz I've never cared much for the "goth" genre of music. Still, you've got to take in account I've grown up in a time where 90s "industrial" music, specifically N.I.N. and Marilyn Manson, is thrown in your face much more often than should be necessary. I find the previously mentioned bands hopelessly dulll and pointless. However, Bauhaus, while some of their music is certainly dull and pointless, clearly has greater vision and purpose than MM or N.I.N. Track listing:

1. Dark Entries

2. Double Dare

3. In the Flat Field

4. God Is In An Alcove

5. Dive

6. Spy In The Cab

7. Small Talk Stinks

8. St. Vitus Dance

9. Stigmata Martyr

10. Nerves

11. Telegram Sand

12. Rosegarden Funeral of Sores

13. Terror Couple Kill Colonel

14. Scopes

15. Untitled

16. Crowds

Bauhaus were(and maybe are...they're currently touring together, but not officially reformed) a band out of England composed of art students: Peter Murphy(vocals), Daniel Ash(guitar & vocals), David J.(bass), and Kevin Haskins on the ol' drums and percussion. They're widely considered the forefathers of goth, and are still revered cult figures. That makes me a little scared to do this review, actually. Reviewing a cult album is bound to stir up controvery and rude hatemail. I don't know if I want to deal with all that. I'm really only reviewing this album in the hopes of stirring up some interest in non-Bauhaus fans who may have written the band of cuz of their "goth" image. Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to take away the "goth" image away from Bauhaus. I'm just saying you don't have to go ahead and annoint thyself a Visigoth to listen, and possibly even enjoy, this album. You don't have to wear white makeup, black clothes, dye your hair green, and get hundreds of odd body piercings. Really!

In The Flat Field caught my ear from the start. It was weirdly intriguing, and terribly hard to label. The vocals ranged from sounding very Jim Morrison-like to disembodied howls with unintelligible enunciations. Daniel Ash on is a very good riffer, but he chooses to instead fill most of the songs with odd guitar noise that usually does nothing. The best songs are driven by Ash's riffage; it's a crying shame that he doesn't try harder on certain tracks. If he had, I would have been forced to rate the record a few points higher, at least. Bassist David J. is a very good bass player. He comes up with all sorts of pleasant, melodic bass lines that seem to hold strong even when the rest of the band vanishes into the realm of Bizarritude. Haskins is a decent drummer, and nothing more. The first time I listened to this album I followed the lyrics along with the songs as best I could, since I couldn't make head or tails for the most part out of what they were singing about. Some of it is what you'd expect from a goth band...dark, macabre tales concerning that side of the world that many of us ignore and wish wasn't there, but still exists. You know, that side where the Spice Girls came from? On the other hand, some of the lyrics make a limited amount of sense, and sometimes seem utterly pointless("Spy In The Cab" for example...did somebody really need to write that song?). Oh yeah, there's also some very Morrison-like "rock poetry" in a few songs. I'm telling you, folks, the Morrison influence is all over!

The CD edition of this title includes several bonus tracks: early singles. These are actually something of a relief, when compared to the rest of the album, in their mellowness. You'll know what I'm talking about if you listen to the album. I've written a good bit about this album, but, as you'll soon see, I'll be giving it a relatively low grade. There are some things that really impress me about this Bauhaus band, but this CD is overkill, clocking in at over an hour. There's far too much ridiculous, drawn out material that does me no good at all included with the genuinely good stuff. You might say that this "ridiculous, drawn out material" helps give the album its aura. I'd agree with you. This album is a very imposing, almost frightening listening experience. However, to me, the quality of music is far more important than the "listening experience." Guess that's why I've never been a huge fan of concept albums.

5 stars(out of 10)

Beatles For Sale by the Beatles(1964)

Beatles for sale...but who's buying?? Who's buyin?? Only joshin, I don't have any particular hard feelings towards this particular Beatles release. I rather enjoy a number of the tunes contained herein, in fact. I went through great struggle debating amongst myselves deciding wheter to review one of the Beats' "classic six" or one of these innocent earlier LPs not so many people care about. I think I made the right choice, cuz for one thing I haven't heard all these songs a hundred times before so there's still a little novelty to 'em for me, plus all these earlier albums have covers of great songs so even if the Beats weren't writing anything special themselves you can still have a good time! Actually, back in the daze when I considered myself something of a Beatles fan, this particular record didn't get much airplay at my den at'all. Probably cuz so many people claim this is the worst Beatles studio album in existence, but I can't agree with that all. This has got at least one song that's better than any of the tunes on Sgt. Pepper. Granted, it's not written by Lennon or McCartney, but who cares? George was a great Beatle, too! And so was Chuck!

Chuck?

Track listing:

1. No Reply

2. I'm A Loser

3. Baby's In Black

4. Rock And Roll Music

5. I'll Follow The Sun

6. Mr. Moonlight

7. Kansas City/Hey, Hey, Hey, Hey

8. Eight Days A Week

9. Words Of Love

10. Honey Don't

11. Every Little Thing

12. I Don't Want To Spoil The Party

13. What You're Doing

14. Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby

I thank the good Lord for the abundance of rock'n'roll covers on this album. I love 'em cuz they're such great songs in the first place, even if the Beatles were never the cover band the Stones were. The best song on record has to be Mr. Chuck Berry's "Rock And Roll Music" which is still the best rock'n'roll anthem ever written. (Paul)McCartney and (Ringo)Starr have got the rhythm down pat, John(Lennon)'s singing his guts out like he ONLY did on rock'n'roll covers, the guitar playing is satisfactory, and I couldn't have done those piano flourishes better myself. Great song, great cover. The Buddy Holly cover "Words Of Love" is another highlight. The guitar playing is just perfect, just wonderful. The vocals are a little oversweetened on what is already an awful sweet song, but we can forgive 'em that. Heck, you even get to hear "Honey Don't", a Carl Perkins classic performed by latest boy pop group from Liverpool! It's great to hear the boys imitating the singers of the originals. They didn't do anything nasty like "make these songs their own." Honestly, don't pass this around, but I really like "Mr. Moonlight" too. It was probably written by Billy Corgan's papa(which is to say that lyrically it's the English equivalent of Vogon poetry.), but I'm in love with that crazy organ or other strange keyboard instrument that appears a minute and a half into the tune. The exotic guitar line and hilariously sincere vocals are also standouts. But that bass organ or whatever it is amazing! It's so awesome it'll make you love "Mr. Moonlight", too.

Unfortunately, there are also originals on this LP as well. Endurable, yes, but they don't particularly move me in any way. I figure the reason I can't get into the Beatles anymore is probably the same reason I can't get into most of the great female jazz singers: this style of singing just doesn't appeal to my sensibilities. To be a Beatles fan, you HAVE to be in love with their vocal melodies, counter-melodies, and harmonies - that's what their music is about, and that's where the focus of their songs is. Me, I'd rather hear some blues singing or blues-influenced rock'n'roll singing...or at least some opera. That said, I of course don't hate any of these songs. "No Reply", for instance, has that loungey, relaxed rhythm guitar playing music straight outta Leisure Suit Larry 3, and I can enjoy the chorus, but the first minute...bleck. The vocals make me feel all blah and zay. But here's something interesting I've noticed listening to this album: the Beatles didn't wait for Let It Be to show off their country influences. It's right here, folk! Take a listen to the guitar and vocals on "I'm A Loser"(which has a harmonica solo, too, though it's none too good), the vocals on "Baby's In Black", and the guitar and vocals on "I Don't Want To Spoil The Party." Rather obvious, I'd say. No real standouts among the originals for me this time, but "I'll Follow The Sun" is a good ballad if you can get over that Brit-pop obsession with the sun, "I Don't Want To Spoil The Party" is a super emotional song 'bout losing your baby at a party with scruffy rhythm guitar and a nice lead, and "Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby" is a great Elvis ripoff sung by George Harrison with extra heavy reverb on them thar vocals... nice lead, too, Georgie. I also forgot to mention the fine medley of "Kansas City/Hey, Hey, Hey, Hey" earlier - it's good enough though quite disappointing compared to the originals. I can pretty much take this album or leave it by the roadside. It's super consistent like all Beatles records(no bad songs), but I just can't get too excited about anything except those great covers which aren't as great as their originals. But if you're a big Beatles fan, do pick this rec up. You'll probably love those first three songs that I don't and so would probably rate this album at least couple points higher than I am. Of course, you might just consider buying a Chuck Berry compilation instead.

6 stars(out of 10)

Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band by the Beatles(1967)

Ever since I first wrote this review, I've been itching to rewrite it. I may not be crazy about this album while a lot of other folks are, but that didn't give me the right to be so damned vindictive about it all. If there's one thing I can't stand, it is critics so arrogant that they honestly think that their personal opinion on anything is the single definitive and correct one. I never claimed to know anything about anything, and I don't think my opinion's better than anyone else's. I may have listened to quite a lot of records in lots of different genres, but there's plenty of people who have listened to more. I echo Mark Prindle when I say that no one's opinion is more valuable than anyone else's - you see, there's no such thing as an idiot.

I've recently been paying more attention than usual to a couple Brit Invasion bands: the Beatles and the Kinks. I've come to some surprising revelations concerning the Kinks(look for more on this over the next couple of weeks), but haven't really changed my mind too much concerning the Beatles. I had my time to be a Beatles fan, but I moved on - and I seriously doubt I'll ever fully regain my taste for them. I don't deny their greatness - that would be foolish. What I do do is reserve the right to dislike the Beatles style, revolutionary though it was. For me, the Beatles normal songs sound a lot like reverse Chuck Berry: Chuck wrote catchy melodies so people would listen to the great guitar playing, the Beatles wrote pleasing, simplistic music so people would listen to their catchy melodies. I don't know about the rest of you, but the first thing I get sick of in a song is the vocal melody. For me to keep going back to a song, it has to have something more than that melody to bring me back. Too often the Beatles fail to deliver instrumental music that I find interesting. Occasionally, they do. Some day, I'll review some of the Beatles records I like the most - it's really only this one and Abbey Road that I have serious axes to grind with. Well, aside from "Revolution 9" and a some other pure throwaway stuff on The Beatles, of course. The Beatles didn't write all normal reverse Chuck Berry pop tunes, however: they also had an 'experimentary' side to 'em, but for the most part, I find their experimentations dull also. This album itself was designed to be a grand conceptual experiment for the Fab Four - they wanted to move beyond this rock stuff(and beyond their own stereotyped image) and bring in diverse instrumentation and songstyle in order to create a new Beatles style. I think this was a rather nice idea myself. But the results I'm not entirely thrilled with.

View the song listing, if you please:

1. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band

2. A Little Help From My Friends

3. Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds

4. Getting Better

5. Fixing A Hole

6. She's Leaving Home

7. Being For the Benefit of Mr. Kite

8. Within You Without You

9. When I'm Sixty Four

10. Lovely Rita

11. Good Morning, Good Morning

12. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band(Reprise)

13. A Day in the Life

The album, to me at least, loses much of its power when you evaluate it song by song. I really don't hear ANY songs on here that are incredible and that I'd really miss not ever hearing again. This might sound sacreligious(but the Beatles aren't a religion, are they??) to some, but, truth be told, I find most of these tracks to be basically what I would call disposable music. Where's the timelessness, I ask? I don't hear it. If I've already gotten tired of these "classic" tunes, I have serious doubts about whether or not this album truly deserves the legendary place in music history it currently occupies.

The album opens with the title track, which presents the Beatles as a funny old English band known as "Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band." It's quite amusing, with fake crowd laughter thrown in and silly horn work throughout. I also rather like the minimalistic, downplayed guitar work, too. At one time, I dismissed George Harrison as a mediocre guitarist with poor tone - I still think his axe attacks are too trebley, but I've heard a lot worse. Suffice to say, George wasn't a John Fogerty. Just a happy pop guy, so let's forget about guitar tone for a moment. All in all, it's quite a decent start to the album, but it certainly is overplayed on radio, and I think you'll get sick of it after you've listened to it x number of times.

The title track is segued with "A Little Help from My Friends", another radio classic. The whole song is the melody, which is lovely - but does it really matter what happy stuff Paul McCartney's playing on his bass, or that George is playing a guitar line quite similar to the "Getting Better" riff in the background while John Lennon sings? Good melody, though.

Perhaps the most "psychedelic" track on the rec is the third tune, "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds." It has amused some folks to no end to find drug correlations in the song's abstract lyrics, but it probably was simply inspired by a kid's drawing as Lennon claimed. I don't like the song myself. The nasal, studio-affected vocals annoy me, as does the swirly keyboard/guitar. Elton John had a huge hit with his pure pop version of the song in the 70s...his version might actually be better than the original, but I haven't heard it for about four years, so I can't really say.

I really like the fuzzy guitar in "Getting Better", but the rest of the song is...well, I think Brian Burks put it best when he said that the tune could just as well have been performed by Herman's Hermits. That sums it up. Who needs half-inspired, overly sentimental, and completely boring soft rock(I mean "adult contemporary")? I certainly don't, no matter whether it's coming from the Beatles or Phil Collins.

"Fixing A Hole" I like quite a bit better. The lyrics remind me of Billy Corgan for no good reason, but I totally dig Paul McCartney's bass playing. Just pleasant, not overly complex stuff, but take a listen to that awesome thumbed "leap bass" effect of his! That's very, very nice. Paul clearly had a better understanding of tone than did his bandmates.

Track number six, "She's Leaving Home" is perhaps the most original and interesting song on the album. Unlike many of the other tracks here I cannot spot the direct influences which inspired the song. Where did those excellent strings come from? How'd they think of putting in that intelligent counter-melody? It does seem a bit strange to have this enormously affecting ballad after two rather poorly written pop songs, but I suppose that's the whole idea of this album.

Side A ends with the fan favorite "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite." I like the organ and the bass, but it's all "no great shakes": it's really a novelty tune designed to show off the Beatles Englishness, perhaps. I don't think most Brit Invasion bands of the time would even have considered recording a song such as this one. They all wanted to sound more "American"(certainly the Beatles did too, especially in their earlier years) and downplayed their own heritage. Wasn't until the Kinks made it cool to be stuffy, repressed, and English again that this changed.

The next side begins with my favorite song the record, "Within You, Without You." Written by George Harrison, it presents Western audiences with some of George's personal philosophical beliefs(which seem to have been highly influenced by Hinduism at this point in his life). Lots of people call this song garbage, and I have to admit transcendentalism and Hinduism never really impressed the philosopher in me all that much. So what do you do? Look past the dang philosophy, of course! That's not the point of the song. The music is great, complete with sitar, tabla, and some other instrument played very intelligently and well. The melody is neat, too: a perfect amalgation of Indian and Western pop music. There certainly IS such a thing as Indian pop music, and some of it's dang catchy...nice that George recognizes that there is Indian music beyond the great Ravi Shankar. Unlike just about every other song on this record, "Within You Without You" actually sounds better the more you listen to it. Check it out, dude.

In my initial review, I gave high praise to "When I'm Sixty Four." But it's not really any better than any of the other songs here, and, even worse, it is terribly derivative of early jazz music. I recognize that the Beatles were very innovative, ingenius, and original in much of their music, but I just can't figure why everybody's so willing to shrug off the songs which clearly owe a lot to other tunes. It must be because the Beatles are supposed to be the best band of all time, huh? Still, "When I'm Sixty Four" is highly enjoyable if you don't take it too seriously. I have a weakness for derivative period pieces, I must admit. Even if the great trumpet line, hoppin' piano, and sacharine lyrics from McCartney aren't exactly the equal of "Holiday", for example. I greatly suspect I like this song because right after it come some of the band's worst musical excesses ever.

"Lovely Rita" is the sort of song that annoys me very, very much. The hick chorus "Lovely Ritar, Metar Maid" is UNSPEAKABLY bad...worse even that those "I don't care!"'s on "Porterville." The true pity is that the key work is quite excellent. It's just too far downplayed! I can't imagine how anyone could think that terrible chorus or even John's better solo singing would be more interesting(or, even, "interesting" at all.)

As I see it, "Good Morning, Good Morning" is nothing but a joke. The electric guitar soloing on top of the brass is so out of place it is purely ridiculous. The farm animals are a nice addition, however...rather more interesting that the rest of the song, in fact. But how am I supposed to take this song seriously when even the Beatles don't?

The reprise of the title track is a nice respite after my two least favorite songs of the album. It is as a whole weaker than the opener, but Ringo contributes an infectious drum lick, and it is nice to hear some rather normal sounding rock'n'roll guitar on this album even if it's nothing too special.

Finally, the album ends up with "A Day in the Life", perhaps the most overrated song of all time. Almost without fail, Beatles fans revere this song as one of the band's best songs. Personally, I'm completely puzzled by it. It's far too spare musically to win praise from me(is that orchestra hit supposed to be genius or something??). I find John's melody only passably interesting, and Paul's middle part is no better. Decent Varese orchestra rip-off at the end, I guess.

Well, that's done. Don't know if this review is any better than my first, but I believe it is a bit more complete and articulate. Just a tiny bit more. Below you'll find George Starostin's comments on my original review. They're still very spot on and appropriate. How about you - haven't you anything to share on this topic of global importance? Mail me a flame today!

6 stars(out of 10)

Struttin' Our Stuff by Bill Wyman and the Rhythm Kings(1998)

This is the first album of a trilogy that Bill Wyman and his group the Rhythm Kings have planned examining popular music from the 1920s through the 1970s. This album relies strongly on songs and styles from the 50s and 60s...and believe me, there is a lot going on here. It opens great with a cover of the Creedence Clearwater Revival classic "Green River." After that, it's a free ride...it could be jazz, could be blues, could be bluezified or jazzinated pop.

Here's the track listing:

1. Green River

2. Walking On My Own

3. Melody

4. Stuff(Can't Get Enough)

5. Bad To Be Alone

6. I'm Mad

7. Down in the Bottom

8. Motorvatin' Mama

9. Jitterbug Boogie

10. Going Crazy Overnight

11. Hole in My Soul

12. Tobacco Road

It's good to see what Bill Wyman's up to in his post-Stones period. I always thought he was an underrated bassist, and a darn good singer in the same way Lou Reed is a "good" singer. He has filled the album with honored guests like Peter Frampton, Eric Clapton, and Albert King, which is nice. He's also got very good studio players aiding in the effort like Frank Mead and Nick Payn. I've recently rediscovered this album, and I've found it's even better than I remembered. Lots of good songs. I used to really dislike both the Stones' and this version of "Melody", but now I quite enjoy it in its dull repetition. Odd.

On the other hand, you must be something of a revivalist to enjoy this stuff. If your world consists solely of the Spice Girls or Portishead, you won't have time for this. However, if you enjoy a trip through our musical past in the form of cover tunes AND originals, you'll love this. As I alluded to earlier, the record's strength lies in Bill Wyman: in his own musical talents as well as his skill is finding great musicians to work with. The piano tappin' and horn interludes can easily bring a tear to your eye. Personally, my favorite tunes are, besides the cool Creedence cover: "Walking on My Own", "Stuff(Can't Get Enough)", and "Going Crazy Overnight." But the rest are winners, too. A good fun record, and one of the best of the year(I suppose Lauryn Hill's Miseducation of Lauryn Hill is better, and just maybe Pearl Jam's latest is, too, but it's a close call. Then again, there's also Sonny Rollins new one, too, which is pretty kick ass(pardon my language.) That said, this album is only getting a '7' from me. Parts are dull, and there's certainly nothing groundbreaking here. It's retro! And I likes retro!

7 stars (out of 10)

Atlanta Twelve String by Blind Willie McTell(1949, released 1972, remastered 1991)

Now this is what I call a good buy: for $9, you get a recording steeped in mystery, history, the blues, folk, and gospel. It's amazing both as an album of music and as a vital piece of Americana. The tale of Willie McTell's life is not one I can tell, nor is it one anybody else alive can either. All we know is that he was blind, a great twelve string guitarist, a gifted lyricist, and a fantastic singer. Perhaps his music can give us some clues concerning his personality, but it cannot tell us anything conclusive or substantial(The art is not the artist). For all anybody knows, Blind Willie might still be alive today, plying his trade in some destitute corner of Atlanta while holding onto his literal last breaths. It's far more likely, however, that McTell was buried some thirty years ago. The recordings which have survived the many decades since McTell was recording are a fitting legacy to a man shrouded in enigma.

Those of you who are only familiar with the electric twelve string guitar such as the Byrds and Led Zeppelin used should be amazed at McTell's novel approach to playing the acoustic instrument. He played the blues most of the time, but they sounded richer, deeper, and fuller on the twelve. He also could branch out into dance hall and folk/gospel without missing a beat thanks to the varied qualities of his instrument. On occasion, he played the twelve string guitar with a SLIDE - what a brilliant idea! It sounds really fantastic, very much like a human voice. Expressive, warm, sympathetic: that's the McTell sound in a nutshell. More later after this track listing:

1. Kill It Kid

2. The Razor Ball

3. Little Delia

4. Broke Down Engine Blues

5. Dying Crapshooter's Blues

6. Pinetop's Boogie Woogie

7. Blues Around Midnight

8. Last Dime Blues

9. On The Cooling Board

10. Motherless Children Have A Hard Time

11. I Got To Cross The River Jordan

12. You Got To Die

13. Ain't It Grand To Live A Christian

14. Pearly Gates

15. Soon This Morning

The first Blind Wille McTell tune I ever heard was "The Razor Ball." Sure enough, he was as good as I'd heard him described by slide guitarists. The track is delightfully unique - not really bluesy at all! It's dance music about dancing. Upbeat as all heck, and backed by McTell's glorious sounding guitar. The only missing factor from the equation are the vocals. McTell is mumbling and laughing and singing all at the same time, not to mention playing his guitar. As a result, the lyrics are a bit hard to decipher, and in general his voice doesn't sound so strong here as it does on later tracks. He sounds like a nice, cheerful guy, though, if that counts for anything. Incidentally, I usually skip past the first track on this CD("Kill It Kid") cuz it's about the exact same song as "The Razor Ball" performed at a more frenetic pace with different lyrics. I prefer "The Razor Ball"'s subtlety myself. Words cannot describe how much I love the opening twelve seconds of that song...it makes even me want to dance, darn it!

The next three songs are a major departure from the good humored, danceable "The Razor Ball." They're all folk blues, from the sensitive ballad with the beautiful guitar playing, "Delia", to the several hundred year old ode to an inveterate gambler, "Dying Crapshooter's Blues." Both McTell the guitar playing and the singer have awakened for this triad! "Dying Crapshooter's Blues" is my favorite of the three(as well as one of my favorites on the entire album). The song is apparently a very, very old folk song indeed - developed over centuries. The lyrics concern a destitute crapshooter and card player on his deathbed. The man does not seem to be regretful or remorseful over a life many would consider wasted, but instead explains how at his funeral he would like to be surrounded by everything he loved while he was alive - gamblers and poker players and bootleggers and cards and dice. McTell's vocal delivery is downright incredible. Even as the lyrics become more and more depressing, McTell's singing remains confident, almost cheerful...

"Pinetop's Boogie Woogie" is a return to dance hall. McTell gives the dancers instructions("break it till ya beat it down", "kick it six", "stop", "mess around", and more!) while playing some funky old blues on the guitarrone. I would bet money that McTell is here imitating old-time minstrels who played at dances back in the good old dayz. As such, it's a fascinating glimpse of a bygone era, if that interests you at all.

"Blues Around Midnight", "Last Dime Blues", and "On The Cooling Board" are all pretty good bluesers, though they show McTell's vocal abilities more than they show off his guitar prowess. "Last Dime Blues" is a Blind Lemon Jefferson cover(McTell betters the original here, I think.)

If you wants me to rave, though, you better just flick the switch on over to "Motherless Children Have A Hard Time." SLIDE! SLIDE! SLIDE! McTell's uses the bottleneck so well, it makes his already distinctive guitar style just that much more expressive. I could listen to it all day, man, that's music. Just a simple sound, "doot...de...doooo", but it says so much. I dig the rest of the song, too. "Some folk say sister will do/soon as she marries she'll turn her back on you. Nobody treats you like mother will..."

"I Got to Cross the River Jordan" features some more super-expressive slide playing. Sounds more like the blues than gospel - course, the two are related. Gosh, that slide playing rules. Why is it whenever I try to play slide it sounds more like Turkish folk music than the blues? Oh well. I happen to enjoy Turkish folk music anyway...

The next three songs are pure gospel. The guitar playing is pretty minimal, but McTell's vocal performances are fantastic. He was even a better singer of spirituals than of blues and folk tunes. I take that back about the guitar playing being minimal throughout, cuz "You Got To Die" has a pretty nasty(meaning good) slide line goin' on. Good stuff here.

The last track, "Soon This Morning", doesn't do a whole lot for me, however. It's another traditional tune, but unlike the gospel stuff, McTell doesn't really put his own stamp on it. It sounds downright disappointing hearing this right after the incredibly soulful and impeccable five tunes which preceed it. I wouldn't say it's bad, just I don't really like it in this setting and context. Should've been track #7.

The history of this recording is pretty interesting. All the tunes were originally recorded in 1949. At the time, a couple songs were released commercially, but it seems that McTell had lost much of his earlier audience by that time(the records were not a success). In 1972, the whole session was apparently released on LP for the first time, but I take it that this has been out of print for a long time. In 1991, finally, Atlantic remastered the whole thing and released it on CD as part of their affordable blues Remasters Series. In my opinion, the album is pretty great(see my rating below) - I couldn't ask for more coming from a bluesman not from Mississippi.

9 stars(out of 10)

Highway 61 Revisited by Bob Dylan(1965)

For me, this has to be one of the best albums of all time. I really like Bob Dylan, and he's put out many high quality LPs...but this one, something about it. If it's not the best alone, it's tied with one or more Dylan albums as the best. It just wouldn't be right for me to review this record as if I was the only one who had an opinion on it, though! Lots of folks hate this LP, hate Dylan the musician and singer, but claim to like his songwriting. I don't really understand their viewpoint. I love Dylan the singer, Dylan the musician, Dylan the songwriter, Dylan the whole musical package. Why do people continue to groan how weak a voice Dylan has? Certainly, at this point in time, his voice is a liability to his music...but in '65? Hardly! He's got such a distinct, gruff voice that always sounds so sincere even when he's being silly. I like it. As for Dylan the harmonica player, I admire him greatly. He's one of the best individual non-blues staccato harmonica players I know of. As for Dylan the guitar player, it's hard to say. There is some decent guitar playing on this record, but it doesn't sound much like Dylan's personal guitar style, so I think it's safe to say he wasn't playing much lead guitar on this record at all. Here's the track listing for those of you unfamiliar with this album:

1. Like A Rolling Stone

2. Tombstone Blues

3. It Takes A Lot To Laugh, It Takes A Train to Cry

4. From A Buick 6

5. Ballad of A Thin Man

6. Queen Jane Approximately

7. Highway 61 Revisited

8. Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues

9. Desolation Row

I didn't critique Dylan the songwriter in my opening paragraph. How do I begin on that? The songs of Bob Dylan are analyzed to such a degree that it's best for each person take each Dylan song for themselves. He's a fascinating poet, not only one of the best of this century, but of any century. Go ahead, compare some Lord Byron pretentious, egoistical poetry with Dylan's best. Granted, Dylan can be a little arrogant, but he was a protest singer, after all...most political protesters(in America, at least) are only protesters because they have the chronic inability to see things from the other side, so to speak. But pretentious is something Dylan never is. He just gives you his music for what it's worth...you'll hear some guitars, some piano, some harmonica, some singing, some storytelling, some commentary, some universal truths. If you like it, fine, and if you don't, that's okay also. There's no reason to doubt his personal sincerity, which shines so well through these songs Still reading Lord Byron? Well, that's your choice I guess, so I'll just shrug my shoulders and continue on with the review.

Well, an album is only as good as its songs, isn't it? I'm sure you've all heard the overplayed classic, "Like A Rolling Stone." One of the most famous musical putdowns ever, it perhaps is a little overlong, but the repetitious organ riff is forgiven for the breathtaking harmonica work. "Tombstone Blues" is sort of a blues hoedown type thing...the guitarist is playing some bluesy leads while the drummer is definitely leaning towards the country side a' things. The leads come a bit too suddenly, so we don't quite get to absorb what Bob is singing...but that's minor criticism. It's still a good song, so anything else you can say about it is essentially irrelavent. Then we get into "It Takes A Lot to Laugh, It Takes A Train to Cry", which may be my favorite song on the record at this point. On the two tracks than open the album, Dylan is singing very sarcastically, angrily. Here, he's much more relaxed, singing in a hushed near-balladeering voice. It's an impressive mood switch, with some great piano and harmonica, of course, too. I love twelve bar blues, don't you? "From A Buick 6" is a jaunty little tune, with a great boom-de-boomdy-boom bass line. "Ballad of A Thin Man" is one heck of a protest song, with some absolutely jaw-dropping lyrics. How did he come up with so many great, relavent songs? Then there's side two...what a side it is. I'm afraid to describe it. "Queen Jane Approximately" is another absolute classic, hard to describe in words. Listen to it! The title track is also a great one, even if it comes across a little, er, too jokey. "Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues"....is Bob Dylan CROONING? Gosh, another great ditty, I can't argue with it. "Desolation Row"...man, I don't know why I don't HATE it. It's about an hour long! It's not exactly a Yes prog rock jam, either, not that many chord changes in fact...but I like it! I like the harmonica, I like the piano, and most of all, I like the Bob Dylan. How bout you?

10 stars(out of 10)

Shakedown! The Texas Tapes Revisited by Bobby Fuller(1996)

You do know Bobby Fuller, don't you? The Bobby Fuller Four? I Fought the Law? Of course you do. But you probably don't know too many of the other 49 tracks that is in this box set. It's killer, though! I reckon 60s surf rock is the defining moment of happy pop music. This stuff blows disco, Madonna, M. Jackson, Jewel, and Garbage out of the water I'm happy to say! It's pop music with singable melodies and guitars you can hear! Oh yeah! Here's the track listing for this 2 CD box set:

1. Say Sweetheart

2. You're In Love

3. Guess We'll Fall In Love

4. Gently My Love

5. My Heart Jumped

6. Nervous Breakdown

7. Not Fade Away

8. Rock House

9. King of the Beach

10. Wine Wine Wine

11. Deep On Dancing

12. Bodine

13. I Fought the Law

14. She's My Girl

15. You Kiss Me

16. Pamela

17. Fool of Love

18. Shakedown

19. A New Shade of Blue

20. Saturday Night

21. Stringer

22. You Made Me Cry

23. Only For You

24. Nancy Jean

25. The Case

26. Unreliable Irrestible Girl

27. Nervous Breakdown(alternate version)

28. Summertime Blues

29. I Fought the Law(alternate version)

30. Do You Wanna Dance?

31. Nancy Jean(alternate version)

32. Wolfman

33. Thunder Reef

34. Keep A'Knockin'

35. Linda Lu

36. Saturday Night(alternate version)

37. Guess We'll Fall in Love(alternate version)

38. To Make Love Last

39. Pledge of Love

40. Take My Word

41. Skag

42. I Want to Hold Your Hand

43. Unk. Instrumental

44. Greensleeves

45. You Made Me Cry(alternate version)

46. Pamela(alternate version)

47. Donna

48. Nancy Jean(alternate version)

49. Only For You(alternate version)

50. Faraway

I won't bother discussing too many individual tunes here(it could take a long time!) but I have to mention one of my favorite songs in this universe: "Nervous Breakdown"! Awesome. That great bass line? Wow, wow. So it ain't Geddy Lee. Methinks many bass players would've been proud to come up with that 'un. Often imitated, never duplicated. Apparently, the original was by Eddie Cochran, but it's pretty rare and I've never heard it, so gimme this version!

Strange. I'm really not a dancy pop kind of guy....but this music makes me feel so darned happy! It just be a lot of fun! The basis of rock n roll? Yeah! It's almost unbelievable that the 60s could spawn a band like this one, and then also the whole psychedelic movement. War and drugs do strange things. I can't help but feel sad that the death of surf marked the end really of free, happy rock and roll. Ironic considering my favorite music, classic rock, evolved after the poppy early 60s, eh? Oh well. If we really want to pick it apart, musically Shakedown! isn't really groundbreaking. In fact, it's mostly full of rock and roll covers(though the Bobby Fuller Four were one heckuva cover band: "I Fought the Law" was a Buddy Holly song, and as good as Buddy Holly is, there's a reason why the Bobby Fuller version is better known). No Jimi Hendrixes here. That's why I listen to classic rock: instrumental genius played on the instrument I'm the most fond of, the lectric gitar. But Shakedown! is a whole lot of fun. And don't ever diss the guitar solo in "Rock House!" At least not around me. I'd have to kill you.

So who did kill Bobby Fuller? I don't know. We probably never will know. But just think about what great music he created in twenty three years he was on this planet. No, really think about it! Madonna has been with us selling millions of records for over a decade, yet she hasn't made a single tune that can compete with these fun ditties, in MY book anyway. It's also interesting to me that it's commonly thought today that the hits of the '50s just won't measure for us present day rock afficianados, but why exactly did 50s rock n' rollers manage to inspire so much great rock? Oh sure, it's fashionable to just say rock and roll was just blues sped up. You just needed to listen to some old blues records and you were on your way. But no, that is not sufficient. Of course, there probably would be no Rolling Stones without Muddy Waters, but there would be no Rolling Stones without Buddy Holly and especially Chuck Berry. Ditto for the Beatles. And the Ramones, for that matter. So, what's my point? I think I just stated my point, you idiot. Why are you asking what my point is? I really was going somewhere with this whole early rock'n'roll thing though...lemme think. Ah hah! Well, Bobby Fuller clearly loves Buddy Holly! My guess is that the Budster would be Bobby's biggest musical influence. See, it would help if I had the liner notes for the box set, but unfortunately I don't. But Bobby's style and the cover of "Not Fade Away" makes the Holly influence rather obvious.

Ok. I realize probably the primary purpose of album reviews is to tell folks whether you think something is worth buyin' or not. I would definitely say this set is ABSOLUTELY WORTH BUYING. Caps! I'm shouting at you! How rude! I guess if you hate 60s pop and surf rock you wouldn't like this. However, why are you reading this lengthy review if you hate 60s pop n' surf? Why? Are you some kind of freak? Anyway, I've long given up making allowances for other people's tastes in music. I figure most people are just whacko and wouldn't know good music if it spit in their ear. So, speaking personally, I highly recommend this fine(did I mention it sounds great, too? good job, remasterers!) box set. I find most of the tracks enjoyable. Even the ballads. And that's somethin! Not that there are that many ballads...Bobby was mainly a rock and roll kinda guy. Don't let anyone tell you any different. Tex-Mex? Let's just call it rock and roll, please. It's music we're talkin about, not tacos, Pancho. Or were we talking about tacos?

July '98 addendum: Del-Fi Records has just put out the Mustang Years collection which covers the Bobby Fuller Four's later hits. I'll be reviewing it shortly, I hope! It's scary...I love this box set coverin' the early years, but damn, Bobby was getting BETTER! If only he hadn't died....sighs.

10 stars(out of 10)

20 Golden Greats by Buddy Holly/The Crickets(1978)

Not to be confused with a Ween album from the 90s, this is one of the many Holly compilations floating about the music marketplace(for your money, you could also pick up the only two albums released during Holly's lifetime, or even some of his "early" recordings! Yay!). I enjoy it very much. I'll try to review it simply and fairly, without dipping into needless cliches or giving you the "rules" on 1950s rock and roll. I'll also refrain from discussing the Buddy Holly story. You can read up on that at many, many other sites on the Net, and in better detail than I'd be able to provide, too. Here's the track listing:

1. That'll Be the Day

2. Peggy Sue

3. Bo Diddley

4. Everyday

5. Not Fade Away

6. Oh Boy

7. Maybe Baby

8. Listen to Me

9. Heartbeat

10. Think it Over

11. It Doesn't Matter Any More

12. It's So Easy

13. Well...Alright

14. Rave On

15. Raining In My Heart

16. True Love Ways

17. Peggy Sue Got Married

18. Words of Love

19. Brown Eyed Handsome Man

20. Wishing

Hmm. For a guy with such a short career, Buddy Holly sure wrote a lot of great songs, and some really incredible melodies. He inspired most 60s rockers in some form, and he is the clear precursor of the Beatles, who would carry on the Holly legacy of great melodies...LOTS of 'em! Unlike the Beatles, Holly certainly isn't pretentious one bit(In fact, he pretty much toys with his voice on every single song! Who would have the guts to do that while creating "serious" music? That touch of self-effacing humor makes Holly's songs seem even more personable), but, like the Beatles, he did have a female audience to please. He does this with sappy ballads. They're kind of cute, and a couple of them are deserving classics, but most are out of place on this compilation and they certainly don't date as well as Buddy's rock songs. At his rockin' best however, Buddy Holly is quite frankly amazing.

What is Buddy Holly's best? Personally, I'd list hot rockers like "That'll Be the Day", "Peggy Sue", "Not Fade Away", "It's So Easy", and "Brown Eyed Handsome Man"(Chuck Berry cover) towards the top of my list. But even I, an unromantic, cold-hearted bastard, cannot deny the inherent loveliness of "Everyday", undoubtedly one of the best ballads ever recorded by man or woman. "Peggy Sue Got Married", which I've heard dismissed as terrible, is very good, too, almost as good as the original "Peggy Sue." The music of Buddy Holly and the Crickets lives on. Great melodies, great ringing guitar lines, and most importantly, aw shucks, some great tunes! It's no wonder Buddy has his place in music history assured. Rock music would certainly have never been the same without him, and I say that though I'm a fan of more rough-edge blues-influenced classic rock than I am of the more poppy-Holly influenced Brit invasion bands. The obligatory cover of "Bo Diddley" isn't bad either. At least he covered one of Bo's songs instead of writing another song and using a "Bo Diddley beat" like so many other musicians did.

Here is one of the many Buddy Holly pages...includes biographical details plus a link to his death certificate

7 stars(out of 10)

Strange Brew - The Very Best of Cream by Cream(1983)

There aren't too many bigger bands in this universe, past, present, or future, that can compare with Cream. They were the first supergroup. Probably the best three piece band ever. You should own at least one of their albums. Just don't get the wrong idea here: I'm not a big fan of Cream. I don't really enjoy 60s psychedelic rock in the first place. And the vocals pretty much suck. Still, some great music! Not too many great songs....but great music in bits and pieces. This is a pretty decent compilation. There are more expensive Cream comps. on the market, but if you're cheap like me you'll grab this one quick! You can at least see if you enjoy Cream by listening to this. If you do, you should just go and knab Disraeli Gears next. Me, I know what I'm missing, and am quite happy with this cheapy compilation.

Track listing? You got it, babe:

1. Badge

2. Sunshine of Your Love

3. Crossroads

4. White Room

5. Born Under a Bad Sign

6. Strange Brew

7. Anyone for Tennis?

8. I Feel Free

9. Politician

10. Spoonful

Eric Clapton(lead guitar, sometimes vocals), Jack Bruce(vocals, harmonica, bass), Ginger Baker(drums). Beautiful. They were all good. Except good old Jack couldn't really sing. I mentioned that earlier though, didn't I? You see, I really don't like Jack's singing, but I never hear anybody else complaining about it? Is it because Clapton's guitar work is so good? Probably. But wow, some of the guitar solos are just beautiful. For my money, Eric would never really better his days with Cream as a guitarist. Standouts on this album: "Sunshine of Your Love", "Born Under a Bad Sign", "Strange Brew", "I Feel Free"....hey, wait a minute! They're pretty much all standouts. Well, obviously, except for "White Room." Dumb drug music. Even if I don't like any of the vocals, I still find some bass line, harmonica break, or guitar solo I like in every single damn song!

By the way, I've just recently discovered why "I Feel Free" is such a great tune. Ginger Baker(one of the best drummers of all time) is playing a melody! With his cymbals! Squeal all you like about speed demons like Keith Moon and John Boy Bonham. For intelligence, you're much better off with Ginger Baker or Charlie Watts. For my money, "I Feel Free", is the best tune Cream ever put out. The "doo doo doo" doowop intro is pleasant, and though both Bruce and Clapton merely goof off for much of the rest of the song while Ginger Baker plays lead drums, Clapton contributes a fantastic guitar line following the melody which is one of the most impressive things he's ever done, quite frankly. It sure sounds cool, anyway. Jack Bruce's vocals are also easier to take for this one. Good job, boys. "Sunshine of Your Love", though somewhat overplayed, is a great song especially when taken in this format. It's a battle royale between Bruce and Clapton. Furious riff and vocal exchanges(Bruce come up with the winner) until Clapton blows us all away with a great solo. Funny how much useless material Clapton would end up releasing. At his best...hoo boy. My other favorite tune here is "Spoonful." Jack Bruce is the head of the show here, contributing vocals, harmonica(probably his best during his Cream days...he wasn't a master harpist), and bass. Isn't it neat how my three favorite tracks are each led by a different member of the band?

Okay, before I go, let me mention the lyrics of Cream. Don't listen to them. Sometimes they're quite stupid. Listen to "Politician", though, you might get a kick out of it. I understand that Jack Bruce, though credited with writing most of the Creamies legendary hits, was helped by an outside source who contributed many of the odd, drugged-out lyrics.

Finally, has anyone but me noticed that a secondary guitar line featured in the tune "I Feel Free" was stolen by the Guess Who in their tune "American Woman"? It's there. The Guess Who do more with it, sure, but they're FREAKING RIPOFFS! Not that I don't like the Guess Who.

7 stars(out of 10)

Chronicle by Creedence Clearwater Revival(1976)

Well, what can I say? The only reason you should NOT have this album is because you already own all the CCR albums. It's the best greatest hits collection ever assembled; just take a look at the track listing:

1. Susie Q

2. I Put a Spell On You

3. Proud Mary

4. Bad Moon Rising

5. Lodi

6. Green River

7. Commotion

8. Down on the Corner

9. Fortunate Son

10. Travelin' Band

11. Who'll Stop the Rain

12. Up Around the Bend

13. Run Through the Jungle

14. Lookin' Out My Back Door

15. Long As I Can See the Light

16. I Heard It Through the Grapevine

17. Have You Ever Seen the Rain?

18. Hey Tonight

19. Sweet Hitch-Hiker

20. Someday Never Comes

Well, these days Creedence Clearwater Revival is my favorite rock and roll band. I'll be reviewing all of their original LPs, but I feel I oughter include a few compilation reviews as well for all you neophytes. On my reviews of the original albums, I'll include more song description. On with the review.

This happens to be the first album I ever bought. Damn, I had good taste. I didn't know I was a big Creedence fan at the time. I just saw it at a good price and wowed at the great track listing(I knew 18 of the songs!!) and bought the sucker. Man, I went six months of listening to this every day. It took me places! I guess it also helped through a tough period of my life. But sentimental reasons aside, this is truly one of the greatest rock'n'roll records you'll ever hear in my opinion(and I've heard plenty of great rock'n'roll records). CCR was a 4 piece band: John Fogerty(songwriter, lead singer, lead guitarist), Tom Fogerty(rhythm guitar), Stu Cook(bass), and Doug Clifford(drums). They played an exciting, simple, yet skillful form of blues rock that the world had never seen before, and ultimately, never did again. You might say that CCR knew what plenty of other bands of the time didn't: they knew they were a rock band. They loved the blues. They loved country. They loved soul. But gosh darnit, they loved rock and roll more. So they just blended their interests to create a new kind of rock'n'roll. The CCR studio sound is so perfect, yet so unpolished; rough but beautiful. I'll say it now once and fer all: they're the only rock band who were as consistently good at their blues idols. You can't go wrong with a Muddy Waters album, and you can't go wrong with Creedence neither.

What was the secret of Creedence's genius? Perhaps it isn't so hard to analyze after all; it is only rock and roll, right? At the core of the Creedence sound is the strength of the arrangements, courtesy of one John Fogerty. They fit together. They delivered song after song of great rock and roll, and you couldn't ask for the songs to be any better. They're perfect. In terms of jazz, think of the unstructured psychedelic BS bands of the time as untalented bastards trying to be like John Coltrane. Creedence Clearwater Revival is the equivalent of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue. It's not sacrilege. CCR is the best rock and roll has to offer; punk and alternative acknowledged. So...if you like your rock and roll, you might as well start your CCR collection right here. Every singles hit is here. Great songs all, except maybe "Who'll Stop the Rain" which I always thought was overrated. Great electric guitar, great songwriting, great vocals. Please buy it today!

Creedence Clearwater Revival(1968)

THE album. No, THE side. Yes, I'd compare the guitarwork on Side 1 on this disc with anything any classical master has come up with. Sadly, this album which could have been CCR's best is marred cuzza couple things. Read on, but first view the track listing:

1. I Put A Spell On You

2. The Working Man

3. Suzie Q

4. Ninety-Nine and Half

5. Get Down Woman

6. Porterville

7. Gloomy

8. Walk on the Water

Maan, what a side! First off, we get the Jay Hawkins blues ditty "I Put a Spell On You." I'd have to say this is my favorite version of the song, though Jay and Nina Simone's ain't slouches. John Fogerty's vocals on this album are up and down; sometimes he sounds better than he ever has, other times he sounds a bit iffy(but still rough and tough, you understand). That's probably why this song isn't generally considered a CCR classic: the vocals are, though it's still fine blues singin', a bit too slow and ineffectual. But the guitarwork! It's a classic, dang it! Next up is the cool blueser "The Working Man." Great solo! Intelligent, quick note changes(I always wondered if John ever listened to much bebop). Then, of course, there's "Suzie Q." Maybe the best rock song ever recorded, though I'm still partial to "Gimme Three Steps" for nostalgic reasons. But "Suzie Q", with parts one and two together as one. Wow. If you Chronicle buyers have only heard Suzie seperated, you'll be knocked out when you hear 'em together. Incredible. The intelligent guitar intro backed up by Doug Clifford's steady, powerful beat leads into some of John's best singing ever, all the while backed up by a Tom Fogerty riff and Stu Cook's bass holdin' up the rhythm section. Then, of course, there's more searing guitar work, leading into the just-as-good second part. It's classical music for the electric guitar. Don't whine about complexity...just listen to how good it is! Nobody was playing like that! It's damn near perfect, folks. Blues based rock and roll lives! Or lived, in 1968.

Now that that praise is outta my system, lemme tell you about my complaints concerning the record. First off, it's produced by Saul Zaentz(the eventual president of Fantasy Records who would rip John out of a great deal of money and ultimately hurt the band's image by releasing live work never intended for release and numerous compilations which kept buyers from the real albums). His presence can be felt, for example, in the backwards-recorded guitar solo in "Gloomy." Even after "Suzie Q" it wasn't evident that Creedence Clearwater Revival was an American band and didn't need any crap production experimentation? I wonder if we can blame Zaentz for the sissy "I don't care" recurring line in "Porterville." Sissy harmonies were all the rage amongst many Brit groups. You'll find 'em on Beatles, Kinks, the Who records, but they were usually a lot catchier than "I don't care." Who knows. Let's just blame Zaentz anyway. Zaentz can't dance!

My other big problem with this record is that the second side isn't quite as good as the first. The Cropper-Pickett(a darn near unstoppable 60s duo) cover "Ninety-Nine And a Half" fails to be as good as it might be. Fogerty is still a little unsure in his singing delivery, and the song just hain't bursting with musical ideas like other CCR covers, such as, er, "Suzie Q" or "I Put a Spell On You." The solo isn't bad, though, but even it is a bit of a letdown. At least you can hear Stu! "Get Down Woman" is a weak CCR original. Why is the piano so obscured in the background? Stu and Doug plug on, John plays some lazy guitar but doesn't do a whole lot with it. I mentioned "Porterville" already. The best part about it is the grungey Stu Cook bass line. However, the album ends strongly, with two classics: "Gloomy" and "Walk on the Water." "Gloomy" features the best J. Fogerty penned lyrics of the album, and it's a dang good song with Stu allowed to almost steal the show. And "Walk on the Water"? A great song by the brothers Fogerty. Opens up with a cool story, ends with some awesome instrumental work. That means, on this here LP, we've got five classic songs and three decent ones. That's not bad, considering the quality of the classics. Maybe not a record you should pick up before Chronicle, but, hopefully, you'll eventually feel a burning need to listen to every piece of crap Creedence Clearwater Revival recorded in their brief career, much like me!

7 stars(out of 10)

Bayou Country by Creedence Clearwater Revival(1968)

Fresh off their debut album, John and Tom Fogerty, Stu Cook, and Doug Clifford entered the studio again to record their second record of 1968. 'Artistic control' was definitely in the hands of John Fogerty now - he even produced this record. To my ears, it sounds like the first truly classic, consistent Creedence LP. I love a few songs off the debut("Suzie Q" is my favorite CCR tune of all time!), but there's also a few stinkers that really muck everything up, too. No true stinkers here, though it's not the 'perfect' Creedence album by any means either. But what a jam!

Here's the track listing for this album:

1. Born on the Bayou

2. Bootleg

3. Graveyard Train

4. Good Golly Miss Molly

5. Penthouse Pauper

6. Proud Mary

7. Keep On Chooglin'

The real question you must answer for yourselves is this, "Can I dig whatever sort of music Creedence is playing on this album?" Every Creedence album possesses a unique atmosphere and ambience. They are all completely distinguishable from one another. Their style changed right through to their very end, however subtle those alterations were. Bayou Country is in some ways a progressive step up from their debut, but on the other hand, it lacks what made the debut compelling. The lengthy and heavenly blues-rock-jazz improvisational fusions("Suzie Q") are gone, and in their place we find that more standard breed of rock songs, the blues-rock jams! Rather good blues-rock grove jams, however - if you like the style. On the plus side, there is really no one bad track to be found on this album. There's no "Porterville", in other words. Of the jams, "Born on the Bayou" is undoubtedly the best. Fantastic vocals from John Fogerty, the best guitar solo in all of rock'n'roll courtesy of John Fogerty...man, it grooves! I can't think of another word to properly describe it. John Fogerty is a talented fellow! Unfortunately, though, he's not the best harmonica player in the world. He should instead stick to the guitar, saxophone, and organ. The seemingly hastily included harmonica fills that were inserted into both "Graveyard Train" and "Keep on Chooglin'" resemble the sounds a goat would make while in the thralls of death agony(A note to my regular readers: Yes, I couldn't help repeating this line from my original review :) ). However, since "Graveyard Train" IS a spooky jam song, the goat sounds strangely appropriate. It is completely out of place in "Chooglin'", however...that's an upbeat rock'n'roll anthem with some terrific guitar work! We don't need the harmonica there. I'd rather have heard more guitar. At the least John could've developed his harp parts out a bit further so that it made sense inside the song. Possibly he could've worked a little bit on his intonation on the instrument. Perhaps he should take harmonica lessons from me. Hah! Still, both songs survive on their own merit and they are both worthwhile to listen to. I can understand why some are not fond of "Graveyard Train" as it is so painfully repetitious musically. You really just have to totally dig that groovy little riff to enjoy the tune; luckily, I do! There are a couple short, poppy numbers to be found here too: the wonderful radio classic "Proud Mary" and the surprising cover of "Good Golly Miss Molly." "Proud Mary" is a fine song any way you slice it: inspired lyrics, great countryish guitar work, and most importantly, terrific arrangement courtesy again of band-leader John Fogerty. Few songs on radio at the time were this tight and perfect; after all, psychedelic rock was still popular, and that's the worst-arranged genre of music I've ever had the pleasure to listen to. "Good Golly Miss Molly" doesn't sound like the catchy piano tune of Little Richard's you've no doubt heard...this version really rocks! Loud, screaming guitars plus vocals to die for. Can't go wrong with it really...Creedence sure knew how to cover songs and make them their own! Finally, there's one song that lets the other guys in the band shine: "Bootleg." It was written and arranged jointly by John & Tom Fogerty, and it's really Tom Fogerty's rhythm guitar work which impresses the most. Doug Clifford contributes some mighty cool drum work, and bassist Stu Cook just sits around and doodles like Stu Cook usually does unless he's performing "Born to Move." The lead guitar work by John is none too shabby either; he's smart enough to let Tom's great playing dominate though.

All in all, this is a great record. If you like this sort of music, at least.

9 stars(out of 10)

Green River by Creedence Clearwater Revival(1969)

The truly great bands seem to always have a "classic" streak. Think the Kinks' Something Else through Everybody's In Showbiz. The Stones' Beggars Banquet through Exile On Main Street(or, arguably, depending on how big a Stones fan you are, through Some Girls!). Even bands I don't particularly care too much about that are widely acknowledged as great by others have had incredible streaks of consistency: the Beatles' Rubber Soul through Abbey Road(if you discount Yellow Submarine at least) and R.E.M.'s Murmur through Document, for example. And I could go on and on. Most importantly in the context of this review however is CCR's golden period: from their debut straight through Pendulum, every album the four piece recorded touches greatness. From Bayou Country through Pendulum, every album is consistently great. I'm not mentioning Mardi Gras because it's obviously not a great album, though I would like to say how it's really stupid that people trash it as much as they do - it's not that bad. There's a difference between "average" and "abysmal." A very, very, very big difference. Whereas the debut's best moments touched on jazz, and Bayou Country was a salute to blues-rock jams, this album's got more of a country vibe. But if ere there was a rock band that knew how to play country music, it's CCR. Nor is this "true" country music, either - it's rock music, pure and simple, that has just been influenced by country music(whereas Mardi Gras is more straight-up country music without so much rock'n'roll). Green River is also really the first album CCR put out that is truly digestable for the masses. The debut was a bit inconsistent(though "Suzie Q" may be the best rock song of all time, stuff like "Porterville" doesn't really become good by assocation) and Bayou Country's blues-rock jams are best appreciated by afficianados of that musical form, but Green River is simply filled to the brim with accessible material that anybody who casually enjoys music may enjoy. It's the proto-type for Cosmo's Factory, but by no means is it certain that the latter is superior to this one. As Beatles fans argue over the greatness of Revolver as opposed to Rubber Soul or Abbey Road, CCR fans certainly do as well - basically, all of these records but the debut and Mardi Gras are fantastic, and it's very, very difficult to pick which is the truly best one. The only true weakness this album has is that it is short - only a half hour long, but I don't seem to mind. It's a heck of a half hour, full of tight and fantastically played music, and because of its brevity it is also cheap(I don't know if this is true in other countries, but in the United States the cheapest albums by 60s bands that I've found are by CCR and the Who - the Stones and the Beatles are much harder to find cheap...though I did find a $5 copy of Exile On Main Street one fine day! That was a definite anomaly). Well, check the track listing:

1. Green River

2. Commotion

3. Tombstone Shadow

4. Wrote A Song For Everyone

5. Bad Moon Rising

6. Lodi

7. Cross-Tie Walker

8. Sinister Purpose

9. The Night Time Is The Right Time

The two guys you're going to notice most on this record are(of course) John Fogerty and(not of course) bassist Stu Cook. I almost am running out of things to say about Fogerty - he was unstoppable back in the day! His guitar tone on this record is downright stunning. He incorporates a few country licks into his usual repertoire, with a twing here, a twang there, everywhere a twing-twang, and further impresses with his mastery of "sympathetic" country balladery. No cowboys here, but I'd rather listen ta this than yer average Merle Haggard rec. The songs are as always arranged tight as a drum. Even the sloppiest tune on the record, "Commotion", is arranged really concisely - you'll notice this if you stop to listen past the searing, noisy guitars. This album probably marks Stu Cook's peak until Pendulum at least - his bass lines are all over this record. His tone is great, as well. Crazy, but Stu Cook could play all this by-the-numbers bar band stuff and make it sound so original and great. You'd never confuse him for Mike Watt or Kevin Rutmanis, cuz those guys have their own distinctive styles and Stu doesn't, but Stu always is playing something interesting back there in the background that seems to always go with the tune, albeit simplistic "something interestings." Call him the definition of "competence", eh?

All the songs are brilliant aside from the cover of "The Night Time Is The Right Time" which is only average. Actually, I wonder why that tune made it onto Chronicle(the second volume) when the superior "Cross-Tie Walker" and "Sinister Purpose" did not? Great compilation, mind ye, but that was a bit of a selection mistake in my opinion. Well, never you mind: we're talking about Green River you know! The title track opens it all up in brilliant fashion. To me, that's about as good as rock'n'roll can get: the steady beat holding the rhythm, the guitars just tearing and roaming all over the place, the singer singing in all straight and strong in a lower key. Maybe the Sex Pistols or the Beatles or Fugazi or Iron Maiden do it for you, but for me, it's Creedence! To this day, I can put on this record and still be boggled from here to the potato fields of old Idaho at how incredible the guitars sound. Who on Earth has a better tone than that? I've never heard anybody else who comes close. "Commotion" is something of a different tune - the guitars are in your face, a little treblier and uglier than usual, and Stu Cook's ominous bass line really cooks(dig the pun?). Mark Prindle described it as "punkish" which I suppose is as accurate as anything. But as I mentioned before, if you listen under the noise you'll hear how carefully arranged and played the song really is. It's sposed to be loud and in your face... after all, it's about commotion, ain't it? I also love the anti-big city commotion lyrics. But this album don't let it up! "Tombstone Shadow" features some more wonderful guitar playing by the man Fogerty - I would use the word "expressive" to describe it. Honestly, it's one of the best tunes on this LP, and that's saying a lot. I love to hear that guitar meander hither and thither. Well, "Wrote A Song For Everyone" is a slower, very country sounding tune that is still remarkably good. The guitar playing is more in the background, but the solo is magnificent in an underbearing sort of way. The vocals are very strong as well. And the lyrics are about John's impending breakup with his first wife - he wrote songs for "everyone" but he couldn't talk to the person who should've been closest to him. Side 2 isn't a disappointment, neither. "Bad Moon Rising" is the first CCR song I heard that I well and truly fell in love with. Very cool sounding guitars again(there's even a countryish hook thrown in for good measure), awesome vocals, and rather good lyrics as well - interesting in their vagueness. "Hope you got your things together, hope you're quite prepared to die, looks like we're in for nasty weather...one eye is taken for an eye." What does it all mean? What's the story behind them thar words? Well, we'll never know, so we should probably just give a listen to "Lodi." It's the analog of "Wrote A Song For Everyone" - a countryish, slower tempo'ed song with great vocals and terrific underbearing guitar playing. I may have told this story before, but I'll tell it again anyhow because you've probably forgotten it by now anyhow. I once met this girl from Lodi, California(an actual town). Nice girl, you know, and so we were talking a bit and I asked her if she had ever heard the song about her hometown. She replied in the affirmative and said that it was based on a true story - the band was lost, stuck, and miserable in Lodi. That's probably not true, based on other accounts I've heard - the band may never have even been to Lodi before, but it's a nice story just the same. I don't have a story to tell about "Cross-Tie Walker", but it's a really great song not many folk know about. Terrific upbeat drumming from Doug Clifford, cool bouncing bass line from Herr Cook, and John Fogerty plays good guitar as usual(including an especially good solo) as well as singing the catchy chorus very fantastically. The next track, "Sinister Purpose", is a nice blues-rocker with intriguing lyrics. The bass line really really stu cooks - "dooo doo daa doo." That's some good stuff. The lyrics always captured my interest - it may be your standard "deal-with-the-devil" American folk mythology, but that line "I can set you free...make you rich and white" sure isn't. Awful good couple of solos also. And what a bass line. Would make a Stu Cook highlights disc for sure. After eight tracks of raw brilliance, even CCR have to stumble a teeny tiny bit: "The Night Time Is The Right Time" is a rather annoying sing-a-long cover. Honestly, I enjoy it most of the time I hear it, but it's not up to the level of the other tracks. I was going to award this record a '9', docking a point off for the song, but now that I listen to it again(especially the mid-section solo...best part of the tune) I've decided that in no way is this song of below average quality. A ten it is!

Join us tomorrow for another excursion into the arabesque and the bizarre...

10 stars(out of 10)

Reader Thoughts

glenn.wiener@entex.com(Glenn Weiner)

You are on the money on this disc.  It is very accessible to many types of listeners as John Fogerty's song-writing is at peak performance.  Lodi, Green River, Bad Moon Rising, and Wrote A Song For Everyone are great tunes. Whereas The Night Time Is The Right Time is undoubtedly the weakest song of the lot, its not because of Creedence as they play it fairly well.  The problem is that the song is lacking sustanial lyrics.

I am glad that you can see that Mardi Gras is a reasonable collection.  The other guys wrote some decent songs.  Its just different sounding.  Maybe Fogerty should have still written the majority of the songs but allowed a gradual democracy.  Maybe then CCR would have lasted a bit longer.  Its just a shame what happened at the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame with these guys.

Perpendicular by Deep Purple(1996)

Deep Purple is a tough band for a reviewer. I mean, are they hard rock or metal? They're obviously classic rock, but so are other metal stars Alice Cooper and Black Sabbath. This album is incredible though. Let me tell you how I first listened to it. Okay, I was listening to Depeche Mode's Music for the Masses, solely for the purpose of reviewing it here. I hated it. Luckily for me, the tape gave out. So what was there left for me to do? Put on some hard rock and roll, of course! And wow, Perpendicular. Great stuff. Here's the track listing:

1. Vavoom: Ted the Mechanic

2. Loosen My Strings

3. Soon Forgotten

4. Sometimes I Feel Like Screaming

5. Cascades: I'm Not Your Lover

6. The Aviator

7. Rosa's Cantina

8. A Castle Full of Rascals

9. A Touch Away

10. Hey Cisco

11. Somebody Stole My Guitar

12. The Perpendicular Waltz

13. Don't Hold Your Breath

The Record opens up with vavoom...funk metal! Fun guitar solo, too. Ted the Mechanic must've been an interesting feller. And after that it's incredibly solid, yet surprisingly variant. You know how metal albums can start to sound just the same after a while when the novelty of the band's "sound" wears off? This just isn't so with Deep Purple. Unbelievably, this album was released in 1996. The band sounds very tight, and old man Ian Gillan is still singing pretty darn well, contrary to some rumors. A classic of the 90s? Yes, and no, and maybe yes again! Deep Purple are a band who have been through several phases in their long history, and I think it's great that they are still making music(and I can say this without a shadow of a doubt in my mind) just as good as any of their earlier stuff. Quite frankly, I think this might be better than Machine Head.

Well, what else should I say about this album? If you are really listening carefully, you may notice some "artistic experimentation" too. Like there's a harmonica and a keyboard on a couple songs. All in all, we have a very solid LP here, but it's not one buoyed with hit singles: it's a good album, a good listen, but I don't quite see any possible "Smoke On the Water" type classic rock singles.

For that reason, it is difficult for me to pick favorite songs from this album. As you can see by the grade I gave it, I think it's fantastic! There isn't a bad song on this darn thing! How could you not like it? Great guitar soloing, catchy melodies, cool organs, hoppin' harpsichords, awesome ocarinas....??? Just kidding about the ocarinas. Or am I? Buy it and find out! By the way, what exactly is "Aviator"? It sounds more like Jethro Tull or maybe some cool Celtic pop band we've never heard before than Deep Purple at first listen. Not that that is a bad thing. Just interesting. However, it wasn't interesting enough for Ian Gillan to justify doing a whole album full of songs like it called Dreamcatcher. Some of you might question the validity of me giving this album a '10', but I still stand by it. This is a near-perfect album, even if it is not Earth-shattering

10 stars (out of 10)

A Broken Frame by Depeche Mode(1982)

A broken frame?

I wrote that poem just for you. I hope you like it. Okay, let's see. Where should I begin? You see, I have two sisters...now both old married folk. While growing up, our tastes would clash more often than not - I liked Creedence, one sister liked the Cure, and the other liked Depeche Mode(and hair metal, too, talk about strange bedfellows). How'd we all get in the same family, eh? The backlash of this all is that I still have a hard time swallowing either of those two bands(though it seems I enjoy the Cure more and more each coming year - at least, their earlier stuff. "Killing An Arab" is assuredly one of the best songs ever writ. Last night I heard an unreleased demo track that was even better than the studio version. Fantastic tune.) But regardless of my inherited aversion to sissy synth pop, this wouldn't be no kind of reviews site at all if it didn't cover that genre of music at all(Not that I want to take anything away from the admitted kings of boring 1980s era music reviews, Rich Bunnell and Ben Greenstein, who also happen to be two of the more talented likely lads in today's cutthroat reviewing environment.) So let us commence.

Depeche Mode were formed in 1980 by a few young Englishmen who had read one too many French fashion magazines and had forgotten how annoying synthesizers may become when not used by clever musicians like the Who, Roxy Music(some), and of course the Monkees. This early combination of the band mucked about for a couple years before lead songwriter Vince Clarke left town - the remaining members Andy Fletcher, Martin Gore, and David Gahan struggled on without them. The band's first record, Speak and Spell was something of a commercial success in England amongst that most exclusive crowd of Britishers who happen to read too many French fashion magazines - I've never heard that album, but most seem to claim it as inferior to the band's later "art." This was their second record, which was something more of a success and put the band well on the road to stardom. The band's sound was completely derived from keyboards and synthesizers. No guitar here at all. No real bass, either - it's all synth-bass. In my now unbiased opinion, these guys aren't bad at all when producing their cold, detached, atmospheric, brooding, instrumental, and electronic material - it's when they try to deliver something a mite more poppy and commercial that they become detestable. But read the review for more on that. First, view a track listing:

1. Leave In Silence

2. My Secret Garden

3. Monument

4. Nothing To Fear

5. See You

6. Satellite

7. The Meaning Of Love

8. Further Excerpts From: My Secret Garden

9. A Photograph Of You

10. Shouldn't Have Done That

11. The Sun & The Rainfall

It may seem hard to believe, but this group of Englishers who like French fashion magazines too much have some talent. Imho, the principal problem I have with their work is that they didn't know how to use their talent properly. I'm not going to sit here and pretend that I enjoy listening to synths as much as I like listening to a "real" instrument, but, on the other hand, I don't HATE synths - it all depends on what is done with them. Certainly, a genius synthesizer player is more interesting to listen to than a bad piano player is. So make no mistake about it: some of the synth and keyboard lines on this album are downright brilliant. But like Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon, the "atmosphere" on the album often overshadows the good music. Also, these guys did not know how to layer vocals on top of their music at all, which of course didn't stop them from singing robotic, non-melodic melodies on most every song(listening to the falsetto on "My Secret Garden" is enough to make me YEARN to hear some Beatles' singing!). Also, the band was not consistently good in any way shape or form. Much of their music just drones on and on in an attempt to create some sort of "hypno-mood" that it seems only narcotic addicts can truly understand. Depeche Mode actually got a little better at atmosphere on later albums I believe(I've heard three or four DM albums, but, you know, that was years ago so I don't really remember 'em.), so perhaps we should forgive them a little as amateur musicians who were too busy reading French fashion magazines to devote excessive attention to something of such miniscule importance as "music." Nah, maybe we shouldn't forgive 'em at all, and just condemn the twits. Nah, let's be open-minded. After all, this is the eighteenth century, no?

"Leave in Silence" I don't really like primarily because of the "religious" chant which is so hideous and out-of-place. Listen, fellows, you ain't Gregorian monks, and we know you ain't. I do like that pumping synth bass line a lot, but that's about the only interesting thing goin' on - certainly I could take or leave(probably leave) the horn-imitating synth and the light keyboard fills. I can't say I've ever paid any attention at all to the lyrics of Depeche Mode, but I'm pretty sure the term "emotional violence" is used in this song, which for some reason I find quite to be quite incontrollably hilarious. "My Secret Garden" comes off sounding like rather generic 80s electronica. Rather poor song. As I mentioned earlier, the falsetto vocals in the middle are absolutely revolting. Please, let's move on. I find "Monument" to be only a little bit better. The dissonant synth line and pounding fake drums open the song in decent fashion, but the vocals are horrid, and those fake drums slowly become headache inducing. But "Nothing To Fear" is next, and that's a GREAT song...I'm serious! Got to be my favorite DM track of all time. Listening to it now still brings back the memory of the time I first heard it, riding in the car late at night watching rain droplets flow across the windshield. A hypnotic, fantastic instrumental. You see, these guys DID have talent! Even the synth voices rule. The sad thing is that you know that you're not going to hear a song even of the same caliber as this one for the rest of the album. But don't weep, my little moonbeam - just hit "rewind" and listen to the theme a few more times before moving on. Well, the last song of Side A is a bouncy little pop song called "See You" which features the rousing chorus, "All I wanna do is see you/ don't you know that it's true..." Blah.

Side B begins with "Satellite", the surprisingly gritty blues-rock workout which gave the Georgia Satellites their name. I'm joking, of course. I do like this song a lot, though. The synth work is great...what they've done here is use synthesizers to effectively substitute for several ordinary instruments(piano, flute, bass) and it works surprisingly well. Especially that synth-bass line. Groovy stuff. Course, the vocals suck, but what do you expect? But "The Meaning Of Love" I could definitely do without. I rather wish it didn't exist...Depeche Mode's experimentary synth "art" sounds so much better than their synth "pop". "Futher Excerpts From: My Secret Garden" is a bit more interesting than the original on side A - it still sounds like generic electronica for the most part but at least those risible vocals are gone(this is an instrumental). "Photograph Of You" is more happy synth pop I could do without. Pretty cool sounding synth there, though. But this album seems to keep getting worse and worse: "Shouldn't Have Done That" is the worst song I've listened to today. The pseudo-religious chanting is back and there is ZERO interesting synth work to be found. If you want to know why some people hate Depeche Mode and find their music to be despicable and boring, just listen to this song. But they do redeem themselves somewhat with "The Sun & The Rainfall." It's a good song to end on, a mellowed expansion on the moody themes of "Nothing To Fear" with vocals.

So, that makes for three great songs, four abysmal ones, and four that are just a-okay. Just think what this album could've sounded like if Depeche Mode had recorded eleven songs as good as "Nothing To Fear." That would've been something. Like a 10, or perhaps a 9. This, on the other hand, is...

5 stars(out of 10)

Reader Thoughts

cbunnell@ix.netcom.com(Rich Bunnell)

Holy crap, I'm more famous than I originally thought. I'm not sure if that was an insult or a compliment-- Anyway, I pretty much agree with your assessment of this album, since Depeche Mode really had some development left at this point... not that they really so much DEVELOPED as much as they learned to clear up the production and synths and such. And then, starting in 1990 they decided to go all wacked out with the heroin and guitars and messy stuff. I agree with you about the highlights, with the exception of "Satellite," but that's because I'm not exactly the biggest reggae fan in the world-- and it doesn't even seem to me like high-quality reggae. I gave it a 6 on my page but if I were in a different mood it'd get a 5.

But-- boring '80s music? I'll give you Depeche Mode, Duran Duran, and the Pet Shop Boys (not that you want them) but I'm familiar with loads of other bands-- it's just that Mark and George and everyone already have them covered! '80s music that no one cares about anymore was all that was left!

Keep up the good reviews-- while you're not as comprehensive album-wise as other pages, that doesn't seem to be the point of your site and your reviews are incredibly detailed and thorough. A little harsh most of the time, but isn't everyone?

Everything Sucks by the Descendents(1996)

Note: This is a review I've been kicking around for about a month now. The first two paragraphs were written a long time ago, so if I seem really depressed here don't worry - I feel fine right now. Eh, what am I saying? What would you care about my state of mental health for anyway?

I'm not feeling particularly well today. All systems down. Physically, mentally, and emotionally spent. I should don a straw hat, get out the rockin' chair, and spend the afternoon undulatin' in the sun upon the front porch, just watching the world go by till I rejuvenate. However, life just don't work like that, and I figure seeing as it don't I might as well get this review written up. So, anyway, the Descendents were this real popular punk band back in the 1980s. They're still around, now signed to Epitaph Records like a number of other bands that used to mean something. I've never particularly dug the Descendents' style of muse myself, but I think it was in some ways very good for punk rock. The Descendents pretty much stripped away the punker cliches from their sound, spending little time spoutin' politics and showing off their punk image. Musically, they were/are noisy and poppy. More in the vein of the Buzzcocks than the Ramones, but they were far less interesting than either. I don't really like the Descendents cuz they don't really "rock" - Milo Auckerman sings pop melodies over guitar noise, but hardly ever is that noise anywhere near as substantial as a powerful Johnny Ramone barre chord, for example.

I find the history of the Descendents to be a little confusing. Lead singer Milo Auckerman, like that missing dude from Iron Butterfly, is now involved in scientific research of some sort - nobody really knows what the heck he does. But being a busy man of science, Milo has no time for silly punk rock music most of the time, so the original Descendents formed a group called ALL(after the Descendents '87 album of the same name) which has featured various lead vocalists over the years. In 1996, Milo announced he was returning to music on an "every other year" basis, so that in even years the Descendents would tour and record, and in odd years ALL would record and tour. Lately there has been some speculation that this is not really going to pan out(what happened in 1998, does anyone know? Did the Descendents tour?). But, anyway, here we have the "reunion" '96 record that has thrilled fans and delighted critics the world over.

Track listing:

1. Everything Sucks

2. I'm The One

3. Coffee Mug

4. Rotting Out

5. Sick-O-Me

6. Caught

7. When I Get Old

8. Doghouse

9. She Loves Me

10. Hateful Notebook

11. We

12. Eunuch Boy

13. This Place

14. I Won't Let Me

15. Thank You

At this juncture in time, the Descendents sound like they completely belong on Epitaph Records. This album certainly qualifies as skater punk(or, at least, the Descendents performing skater punk); however, it is somewhat better than NOFX and late-period Offspring. Skater punk should really be a more interesting genre of music than it is - the surf, reggae, ska, and Latin influences are easily detectable, but why isn't more done with them? Who knows! Anyway, this album is not the most original I've ever heard - probably wouldn't even make the top eight hundred. I am really fond of the self-parodic album cover, though. It's a cartoon drawing of a dorky looking kid reading a pamphlet entitled "Everything Sucks" with an extremely serious, reverent expression on his face. I don't think I've ever seen a better put-down of punk propoganda than that. The album title is tongue in cheek, too...a mockery of all those pseudo-nihilist punkers we've grown to love. But an album cover/title does not make an album. It's the music that matters! And the music? Sucks!

I should end the review now, but I'll torture you some more just to be obnoxious. Like a lot of so-called punk groups, the Descendents are really just a pop band with a lot of noise behind them. The quality of the song is very much determined by the quality of the vocal melody. Luckily, I like Milo Auckermann's voice when he SINGS - unluckily, that's not all the time. The rest of the time Milo just shouts non-melodies. The musical backing for the most part is extremely uninspired - a decent guitar or bass line might kick in every now and then, but even then they're not much better than what you'd hear coming from any dozen of your local garage bands. Oh yeah, I should also say right here that I hate the Descendents drummer(as a drummer, that is. I'm sure he's a great guy.) He drums real fast, but not in a frenetic Keith Moon-like manner. More like a "guy who doesn't know how to drum but who still insists upon drumming though he can barely keep time." This annoys me. This album is mostly filler, in my opinion, with a few decent tunes thrown in for good measure. It sure starts out great with the upbeat title track which even has a fifteen second guitar solo. And Milo sounds fantastic yellin', "Everything sucks... todddddaaaaaaaaaay!" Track duo "I'm The One" is pure pop - it could be the next Friends theme for all I and Milo know. I dig the bass playing - rest of the tune is just okay. And what about "Coffee Mug", eh? Tis a thirty second punk rock insta-classic! I know I said I don't really care for Milo shouting, but here is one of the few songs on this album where it really works - man, that's one fast vocal delivery, duder. "Rotting Out" is darn good, also - best melody on the album and a neat guitar line. Unfortunately, it starts going downhill in a hurry: "Sick-O-Me" is more over-sacharine pop but without the charm of "I'm The One", "When I Get Old"(which expresses very punk sounding sentiments but still sounds terribly wimpy), "She Loves Me", and "I Won't Let Me" are even more of the same, "Doghouse" and "This Place" are generic from start to finish, "Hateful Notebook" has a good title but I suspect that the song was already recorded by the Rembrandts(nice partial Led Zep ripoff in the mid-section, though), "Eunuch Boy" is as embarassing and as terrible as you'd expect though at least it's only ten seconds long, and "Thank You" is once again, nothing special. Perhaps I'm underrating Milo's skill at coming up with catchy melodies a bit, but I like a little instrumental action with my vox, what about you? And I'll be darned if all the slow songs and all the fast songs don't sound basically alike on this record. I seriously wonder if even a fan could hum a few of these tunes from memory. They're so generic they're absolutely forgettable. I'll pass. Should probably review the Buzzcocks instead. However, "Crash" is something of a stand-out track that I didn't mention - cool bass, great counter-melody, speedy and aggressive in sound and in lyric.

4 stars(out of 10)

Are We Not Men? We Are Devo! by Devo(1978)

Side Note Before We Begin: I've been struggling to write reviews lately. I haven't had a great deal of free time, and life's throwing all sorts of funny things my way. I have thus come to the conclusion that if I ever really want this site to take off, I must take a more laidback approach to review writing. No more beatin' meself over the head over the quality of this carp. Writing reviews aren't my forte - I've always been better at writing fiction than writing non-fiction. Since I was ten years old, at least. I don't really care for a lot of my reviews because while they may reflect part of my opinion, they can seem misleading and incorrect when examined a few months later. It all depends on what sort of mood I'm in when I wrote the review, which is why I'm allowing myself room to go back and update those old reviews frequently. A lot of you might not realize it, but this site's been a side project of mine for quite a long time. Some of my oldest reviews are about eight months old, though the site didn't go public till just a couple months ago. So my two-pronged purpose for the site is this: continue to write new reviews(at a faster pace, also) and simultaneously improve old ones, too. I'm creating a What's New page to make it easier for you, my one fan, to follow the site's growth. But enough of all that. I'm gonner write me a DEVO review, and I'm not going to include a whole lot of annoying digressions neither. This paragraph was just an exception!

Devo were founded in 1972 in Akron, Ohio. The band: Mark Mothersbaugh(keyboards and vocals), Mark's brother Bob Mothersbaugh(guitar), Gerry Casale(bass), Gerry's brother Bob Casale(guitar), plus some freak who they're not related to named Alan Myers(drums). Mark and Gerry were the undisputed band leaders. They came up with the Devo concept, and were the vital authors of the Devo sound. Recruiting their brothers proved to be a brilliant idea, as somehow, they fit right in, kicking in the proper riffs when necessary to back up Mark & Gerry. Alan Myers sometimes furious drumming was also quite impressive. After moving to L.A. in pursuit of the big time, Devo began to receive some attention. Their first single, "Jocko Homo", did well, and they hobnobbed with the likes of David Bowie and Iggy Pop, who seemed to hobnob with just about everybody in the music world at that time. After some touring in America and England, Devo were ready to sign a recording contract - and two of the biggest record companies in the world were ready for them. Virgin in the U.K., Warner Brothers in the U.S.. Devo were big all of a sudden. They went into the studio, recording some new songs and songs they'd been working on for years, and this was the resulting LP. It's considered by some a classic. I'd like to tell you why(and why it's not), but first, I'd love for you to read this track listing I've carefully prepared:

1. Uncontrollable Urge

2. (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction

3. Praying Hands

4. Space Junk

5. Mongoloid

6. Jocko Homo

7. Too Much Paranoias

8. Gut Feeling(Slap Your Mammy)

9. Come Back Jonee

10. Sloppy (I Saw My Baby Gettin')

11. Shrivel-Up

Devo were chronic underachievers. That's the best word I can think of at the moment. This record could've changed music history! At its very, very best, the Devo "sound" was fantastic, even awe-inspiring. The Devo band concept cannot be ignored either. In fact, the sound is rooted in the concept. Okay, so what's the concept? (Here's another sort of digression. It belongs here, but it's also probably a mite too lengthy). De-evolution is the concept(and not 'devolution' as some call it...that's a completely different term that refers to the passing of authority from one person to another). Humanity is slowly "de-evolving" due to their reliance on modern technology. It's the sort of idea that had been played around with by science fiction writers for years, but Devo was original in applying the theory to music. Speaking of theories, I know of no direct connections between "de-evolution" and "evolution"(though "Jocko Homo" does make direct mention of evolution, it does it in such an odd way that I hardly think that it's the point of the song) Rather than referring to any physical changes occuring to human beings, I think de-evolution is about instead intellectual and cultural decay. Humans aren't being born stupider than past humans. They just end up living their own lives in ignorance, counting on mechanization to handle all but the(in comparison) simplest of tasks. Thus, humans live shallower lives than they had before the mass rise of machines, and at best specialize in a single area of life whilst remaining in the dark concerning most other areas of life, even those areas which affect them directly. In short, they never reach their potential as human beings. If machines can do anything, what is it that the billions of human beings who live on Earth are going to do? True, while the machines may have been produced and designed by humans, most of the eventual users of the machines have no understanding as to how they work. The gap will continue to widen between those who understand and make machines and those who rely on the machines for their daily living, eventually reaching the point where many people cannot survive without the machines. It's de-evolution, baby!

How does the concept relate to the music? On this LP, I think the best example of de-evolution set to music is "Satisfaction." Yes, it is that "Satisfaction", the Rolling Stones first number one single. But why doesn't it sound the same? The lyrics are the same, the melody is basically the same...but where's the music? No guitars? The barest of bass lines, the sparest of keyboard flourishes, and steady(I want to say tribal, but that's a critic's cliche. These drum beats don't sound like any tribal music I've ever heard, really!) drum beats. It's a fascinating deconstruction of a tune a lot of us have heard hundreds of times. Of course, if you ask me, I tend not to like this "experimentation" schtuff that is passed as fine music. It is experimentation, but it's only music in the sense that it's a song not unlike any other song. It's not what I would call good music, and even its appeal to the listener is essentially non-musical in form. It's certainly interesting the first coupla times you hear it, though. "Praying Hands" is another examination of de-evolution. You could take it as a comic piece, but if you think about it...just what is IT saying?? Has the human race fallen so low that we must be told how to form praying hands? And how to bow obeisance?? And of course there's "Jocko Homo", the Devo anthem which includes the line which gave the album its title, "Are We Not Men? We Are Devo!" I really like how the chorus eventually fades into what I guess is some sort of industrial dance beat that sounds just like the melody grunted and moaned. It's like humanity driven to the point where they can no longer utter the question/statement "Are We Not Men? We Are Devo!" Losing the power of speech, they grunt and groan the affirmation in vain. Then the whole thing turns into an opera...mankind's last stand?

Then again, I guess I could be wrong about this whole de-evolution thing. Maybe Devo was just trying to say that humans are going to de-evolve back into a lower life form. If so, I shouldn't have bothered with my "analysis" above, since the theory of evolution(in both its Darwinian and later forms) frankly never impressed me any more than the theory of spontaneous generation. Now that I've given my philosophical take on Devo, let's hit the music!

Devo strike gold three times here. "Mongoloid" is the first song I heard that made me take this group seriously, not as some dorky intellectuals who wore flower pots and hated women(a reference to their famous video for their later "Whip It" single that was famously misinterpreted by jumpy females). It sounds like a real song! Pumping, simplistic bass intro segues into a fantastic clanging guitar riff. Suddenly, the trumpet-imitating keyboard crops in and dominates for a while, till we get our happy pop melody. Catchy as velcro, and the return of the keyboards never fails to knock me out. What a great sound! Sounds about a hundred times better than anything Devo's contemporary band of intellectuals, Wire(who are now better respected than Devo), ever did, because "Mongoloid" has at least four things going for it(bass, guitar, keyboard, catchy melody) while Wire was essentially just a riff band. A good riff band, but a riff band nonetheless. They don't really deserve to be considered better than say, Bachman Turner Overdrive or Bad Company. Of course, Devo's musical product is sketchier than all three of those bands' output! "Jocko Homo" I have already discussed in length. It's the best of their all-out experimental pieces(I know I said earlier that "Satisfaction" is the best example of de-evolution set to music. But "Jocko" is a more interesting experiment, though it is not as easy to understand as the simplistic "Satisfaction.") The third home run is "Gut Feeling(Slap Your Mammy)." What can you make of that intro? It's so perfect. The guitars, the bass, the driving drums...followed by the most sublime keyboard line you've ever heard in all your days! Devo goes ethereal? That's what it sounds like. What a band. Oh yeah, it turns into a rock song eventually, too, and a good rock song at that.

Unfortunately, aside from those three songs(plus "Praying Hands" and "Satisfaction" which I find interesting enough to warrant forgiveness for their musical faults), the rest of the product ain't so hot. Still conceptual, of course, but assuredly not very high quality music. "Uncontrollable Urge" sounds disturbingly like a "After Midnight" ripoff. "Space Junk" sports a neat dissonant guitar line, but that's about it. "Too Much Paranoias" sports another dissonant guitar line, but it's not very neat. Listen to Muswell Hillbillies instead for paranoia set to the proper kind of music. I HOPE "Come Back Jonee" is a biting parody of dopey circa 1980s music(yes, in 1778!). It's so...dopey. Sure, it doesn't sound like any other song on the album, but that doesn't mean it's good. I'd rather they cut away all the gloss and just played those Chuck Berry licks at the end alone all through the song. "Sloppy" seems to have inspired Dana Carvey's entire music career. And "Shrivel Up" is as bad a song as you'd expect a song called "Shrivel-Up" to be. Pretty bad. Just go back and listen to "Mongoloid" and "Gut Feeling" again, okay?

Devo are still around in some form today. They released a ton of records over the years, stopping recording only during their occasional break-ups. Henry Rollins' publishing company 2-13-61

Devo Links

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Garr's Devo

Lots of stuff for the Devo fan here, including a large collection of lyrics.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

5 stars(out of 10)

Greatest Hits by Duke Ellington, sort of(1987)

If you ever see a Duke Ellington greatest hits package for a dime with the names "Erich Kunzel", "John Dankworth", and "Newton Wyland" printed under a rather stylish cover photo of the Duke, for goodness sakes DON'T BUY IT! At least, don't buy it if you're hoping to hear some Duke Ellington. As you more discreet and intelligent music listeners know, Kunzel, Dankworth, and Wayland are all conductors of famous orchestras. Thus, this "greatest hits" package is merely a collection of symphonic renderings of Ellington jazz classics. All I personally wanted when I bought this album a year or so ago was a decent, cheap overview of Duke's career, just to see if I liked the fellow's music! Is that too much to ask? Apparently, for a dime, it is! And I still feel ripped off to this day. My grandparents didn't survive the Great Depression by wasting dimes, you know. I won't survive the 00's if I keep this up.

But here's the track listing, for those of you who like bogus entertainment in the vein of the Monkees:

1. Caravan

2. Satin Doll

3. Cottontail

4. Echoes of Harlem

5. New World A Comin'

6. Night Train

7. Prelude To A Kiss

8. Sophisticated Lady

9. In A Sentimental Mood

10. Perdido

11. Come Sunday

12. Take The "A" Train

When I actually sit down and listen to this album, I quite enjoy it. It isn't a bad idea at all, but I only wonder why whoever put it out had to resort to deceitfulness in order to sell a few more units. We'll never know. The orchestra, though the traditional domain of classical music, is surprisingly adaptable to jazz music. Granted, Duke Ellington(along with Fletcher Henderson) was the master arranger and, yes, composer of his era. During a time when many of the most popular and exciting jazz performers didn't read music, Ellington brought jazz and classical music a little bit closer by making the former more formal without selling the music out. As a bandleader, the Duke's record is no short of spectacular. He always had good players - among the best - working for him. He was friendly with his men, but he never played favorites. All he demanded was the best music from his musicians. Generally, they delivered, performing Ellington's compositions with admirable style, grace, skill, and soul. Even with his great bands replaced by great orchestras, Ellington's compositions still demand the listener's attention. The London Symphony Orchestra's version of "Caravan" which opens this album is nothing short of spectacular. The Eastern-tinged jazz classic sounds perfect in this symphonic environment, as if it was written precisely for the purpose of being performed by a large orchestra. None of the other tunes quite sound so suited for this environment as "Caravan" but "Satin Doll", "New World A Comin'"(with interesting piano by William Tritt), the hushed, soulful ballad "Sophisticated Lady", the proto-funk anthem "Night Train", and "Take The 'A' Train" are especially enjoyable listens just the same. On the downside, "Cottontail" and "Prelude to a Kiss"(much as I hate mentioning it here...I know it's a classic, but this by-the-numbers rendition does nary a thing for me) sound like barber shop "easy listening" muzak to me. Of course, barber shop easy listening muzak isn't as bad as pointless elevator muzak which isn't as bad as "serious" elevator muzak(I still have nightmares concerning a certain album of Brian Eno's entitled Music for Airports.) The other tracks are decent enough, but not worth especial mention.

Ultimately, what damns this album is its lack of authenticity. There's no real good reason for this album's existence, though the music itself isn't bad at all. These symphonized tunes simply don't hold up to Duke Ellington's original studio versions, therefore they are rendered pointless. I don't really hear any "new dimensions" being added to the songs by the orchestra. "Caravan" IS impressive, but only because it was such a good song in the first place! Go for the genuine article, I say...and only listen to this if you buy it by mistake like I did.

7 stars(out of 10)

Peer Gynt, Suites I And II by Edvard Grieg(1876)

I once knew this fellow named Keith who described Dostoyevsky and Descartes as having something he called "evil genius." I don't think he was implying that those two folks were evil in addition to being brilliant, but rather I think he was saying that the empowering force of their intensity as reflected in their art seems almost overpowering and malevolent. Okay, I have to admit that I've never really read Descartes - I thought he was a scientist who doodled philosophy in his spare time until this Keith guy started talkin'. But, regardless of whether I'm interpreting Keith's remarks correctly, I do believe Edvard Grieg fits into my version of the "evil genius" theory. His best work, typified here in Peer Gynt, is often overpoweringly intense and sinister in sound. To me, Grieg is one of the finest composers the world has ever heard, though many people have many problems with his work and I understand them completely. (Diehard classicists hesitate to embrace him because he was one of many a 'nationalist' composer in the 19th century who became interested in adding the influences of their nation's folk music into their compositions(and by nature of this connection, the music almost invariably becomes "simpler." It's such a terrible thing to judge music just based upon simplicity or complexity, though.) Other folk hesitate to embrace him just because he is often brooding and dark and overpowering and hard to understand.) But his two major works rank pretty high in a lot of people's books, including mine. His Piano Concerto in A Minor is what enraptured me at age eight, and Peer Gynt blows me away today. I enjoy many of his minor works as well, though it consistently surprises me how alternative and dissonant(almost dischordant) they sound. Believe me, more people today should listen to Grieg than to Ravel and Debussy - Edvard still sounds contemporary!

Peer Gynt is based upon an epic of Ibsen's I've never read, but hope to eventually(actually, though I've gotten more and more interested in Scandinavian literature over the past year, I've passed right over a few of the most famous literary fellows from the area for various reasons. The only Ibsen I've read was a play about four or five years ago which didn't impress me in any way, shape, or form but I do intend to give him another chance.) I'm reviewing the first two(and the most famous) suites of the piece - there is more to this work than these two suites, but I've been unable to find myself a copy of any "complete" version. Here's the track listing for what I do have:

Suite I

1. Morgenstimmung(Morning Mood)

2. Ases Tod

3. Anitras Tanz(Anitra's Dance)

4. In der Halle des Berkonigs(In the Hall of the Mountain King)

5. Der Brautraub(Ingrids Klage)(Ingrid's Lament)

6. Arabischer Tanz(Arabian Dance)

7. Peer Gynts Heimkehr(Peer Gynt's Homecoming)

8. Solvejgs Lied

Why did I bother typing out those Norwegian titles? Am I going to start reviewing Tolstoy and Turgenev novels by their Russian names soon? Probably not! But you must admit Norwegian is a nice little language. Eh, forget it: on to the music! "Morning Mood" is perhaps the most famous section from this work bar one, and it is as pure and lovely as the fresh and rosy-fingered Dawn. It's certainly not dissonant or overpowering or anything like that - just lovely and haunting, as it is supposed to be. It does make one think of morning, too. It's awful gentle(almost a lullabye), though, so you heavy metal fans should move on to track four in a hurry. As for me, though, I'm just gonna sit here and enjoy "Ases Tod" - what a song! The eerie, echoed sound of the strings just seems so huge, so evil, so magnificent... It's brilliant, absolutely brilliant. I also love "Anitras Tanz" - very unique and exotic string playing. It might just be my favorite part of this composition - at least, it certainly was for the first few weeks I listened to this near constantly. I confess that it does get a bit tiring to hear the predictable chord structure after a hundred or so listens, but now that I've gone a month or two without listening to it at all I'm quite ready to fall in love with it again. That's the mark of a good tune, eh? And then there's the number one pop single of all time, "In the Hall of the Mountain King"! I'm sure you've heard it before, so I won't go into the harrowing details, or maybe I should? It's brilliant, too, of course - I hear it as sort of a metaphor for the battle of good vs evil. Noble heroism is reflected in the bass opening, which segues into the determined but slight hesitancy of the string and wind section, and then....SWIRL, SWIRL, CRASH, CRASH - there is a sickening clash of cymbals as the melody becomes obscured in a whole mass of angry strings layered upon each other. On and on it goes in its malevolent, sweeping glory as the cymbals continue to be banged at quick intervals. Evil, here at least, overpowers and brushes away the good and the noble without so much as a snicker. By the way, all of this is done in two minutes and a few seconds. It's speedy and heart-stopping and pure genius despite its relative simplicity. But you've heard it before, surely? On commercials or Empire or somewhere, eh? Oh yeah, I don't mean to say that Grieg intended the piece to be considered the way I described it - I'm absolutely sure he had nothing of the kind in mind. That's just the way I hear it.

Though it may seem hard to believe, the second suite is almost as good, if not even better than the first - it's just harder to hear the qualities in three of this set of four because those tunes are slower and less direct in their presentation compared to that brilliant first suite. For my part, when I'm in the mood to listen to "Ingrid's Lament", "Peer Gynt's Homecoming", and "Solvejgs Lied", I am delighted(nay, even amazed) by them. Unfortunately, oftener than not I simply wait for the "Arabischer Tanz" to start up. It's as brilliant and upbeat as anything contained on that first suite. The "revolutionary" wind instrument playing(if you can't tell, I'm still more than a little uncomfortable picking out specific orchestral instruments) is perfectly complimented by appropriate horn and string backup. The sultry, sinuous mid-section is even better. And the ending? Well, it's more than a rehash of that opener: it's got drums! You can headbang to it. In fact, if you don't, I have to wonder what kind of Slayer fan you are in actuality - perhaps you'd better listen to Reign in Blood a few more times before tackling Edvard.

Eventually, I'll describe the three other selections from the second suite which I didn't in this review, as I think these are brilliant as well. For now, though, I'm going to try to get this review up on my site in time so I don't blow this whole "one review or more a day for this month" thing. Oh yeah, Peer Gynt is getting ten stars out of ten for me because it's not only a great work, but in fact one of my favorite pieces of music anywhere. I may seem to overrate classical music a mite cuz everything I've reviewed from that genre of music has been pretty darn good so far. I apologize for this discrepancy and I promise that I will attempt to review more bad pieces in the future. And of a certainty I will in the future review more Grieg - he's one of those very rare artists whose art touches me to the very depths of my soul, my very essence, instead of just reaching the surface. I haven't quite decided whether his music is merely an expansion on German themes or something else more in common with the fjords and hardanger fiddles of old Norvay, yet. Perhaps the answer lies in the middle of the two. It often does, doesn't it?

10 stars(out of 10)

Special Beat Service by the English Beat(1982)

This is a new review, yet it is not. I really did write up a review of this album at one time, but it was one of those reviews pulverized during that famous FortuneCity muck up. I didn't include this review in my recent collection of lost reviews because, you see, I intended to write it anew presently. And so I am. But why is this album, hardly important to anyone but the most diehard of 1980s-era music revivalists, worthy of not one, but two reviews on this site? I don't know this myself. I do know, however, that on some days I simply do not feel like celebrating the world in its great vastness and variety. Rather, on days like today I simply want to stay confined to my own peculiar, small corner of existence, and grab onto a piece of mediocrity that has no bearing on the world as a whole, something that has no meaning beyond itself, something that hardly anyone cares or thinks about. This album is just such an unimportant, piece of mediocrity. Yet I am very glad it exists...I may hate it, but I'm glad it exists alright. And so I will review it for my audience of ex-patriate Maltans, armed with the knowledge that perhaps no one else alive thinks this album worthy of any serious examination - not even the people who recorded the album in the first place, perhaps!

The English Beat(not to be confused with the American band the Beat, who are not to be confused with the Beats of 1950s American literature, who were more about the 'beatific' anyway than rhythm) were one of many a fine English band in the 1980s who for the first time proffered this peculiar form of happy horn music long popular in Jamaica to the supple ears of the mainstream. Third wave ska, it was called - it was really real ska music watered down with modern pop sounds. These intrepid musicians followed in the footsteps of another great British invasion, that one that took a few American musical forms and combined 'em with 'modern pop' sounds and in so doing created a new style of music. That's right - the Rolling Stones paved the way for...Madness. The English Beat did have one thing going for them that a few of their contemporaries didn't: they had a real Jamaican ska musician playing saxophone! His name was, appropriately enough, Saxa - at the time he joined the group he was in his 70s. He may well be dead now. I haven't a clue. They also had Ranking Roger on the vocals, percussion, and "toasting"(he's actually credited for this on the sleeve of this album!). This dude was pretty talented, I think - he could sound like a rapper, a reggae singer, or a wild animal. Ska and reggae are musical brothers who share more similarities than differences, but reggae singing is far more advanced than ska singing(which, as far as I'm concerned, is not even as advanced as good old scat(skat?) singing.) Unfortunately, Rog didn't sing all the tunes - Dave Wakeling sang most of 'em, and boy was he awful. Typically horrid pseudo-Jamaican-Anglo accent - more annoying than having thirty thousand mosquitoes chewing on your right ear. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Other band members included David Steele on the bass and the banjo, Andy Cox strumming guitar and chicken-pickin' mandolin, drums on the Everett Morton, Wesley Magoogan magooganing on the second saxophone and clarinet, plus Dave Blockhead living up to his name on the keyboard and the piano. Bob Sargeant produced this particular album, so fans of his proto-Albini production technique would be well advised to check this recording out. But enough of this. Look at the track listing!

1. I Confess

2. Jeanette

3. Sorry

4. Sole Salvation

5. Spar Wid Me

6. Rotating Heads

7. Save It For Later

8. She's Going

9. Pato and Roger A Go Talk

10. Sugar and Stress

11. End Of The Party

12. Ackee 1-2-3

If I wasn't feeling well disposed towards mediocrity today, there's a good chance that I might just trash this record utterly. I mean, there's only about three or four songs that I don't consider 'pretty awful.' It's really remarkable how these fellows fail to do anything with their instruments most of the time. It's not that these are all silly, unsubstantiated pop songs - most do have an instrumental interlude of some kind to compliment the vocal melody. But these interludes are so...boring! Honestly, listening to this record for any extended period of time makes me want to go to sleep... But let's talk about some songs.

Following the horrid opening drowsethon "I Confess", "Jeanette" is a nice, pleasant imitation of the French folk song. Honestly, I like them keyboards imitating an accordion(though, erm, a real accordion probably would've sounded even better). It's acceptable entertainment I say, even if Dave Wakeling couldn't sing to save 'is life. "Jeanette" is followed by another rather horrid tune called "Sorry" - even the aggressive horn playing can't save that song. And "Sorry" is followed by this song I rather enjoy for reasons unknown to me: "Sole Salvation." It's got that cool bass opener and that baritone sax playing that familiar opener. Man, I can dig it, daddy-o. Super solo, duo. By the way, this song also features Dave Wakeling's best recorded vocal performance in my opinion, but that's a lot like saying "this song features Yoko Ono's best recorded vocal performance" if you get my drift.

Alas! What have the English Beat done!!!?? Could it be they have followed one half way decent tune with ANOTHER half way decent tune? Unthinkable! Well, it seems like the band finally got a clue and called in Rankin' Roger to help save this album, and Rog don't joke around, let me tell you. "Spar Wid Me" is reggae! Nice against-da-beat bass playin', and Roger brings it down like only he and the various children of Bob Marley can. Not content with reggae singing, he also whistles, laughs, and makes chimpanzee noises. He's a genius! If he were singing all these tunes, this album would have a chance to get a slightly above average rating from me(like, say, 6.)(let me clarify = the instrumentalists would also have to work somewhat harder in order for this album to get a six from me.) Unfortunately, Dave Wakeling is the "lead" singer of this group, and he's not about to let you forget it, for he delivers another truly wretched performance in the appropriately titled "Rotating Heads." Still, I don't hate even this song: the New Wave-ish bass line, exploding saxophone, and infectious ska horn riff are around to balance out Wakeling's risible vocals.

So Side A ends. Side B commences with "Save It For Later", which features some of the first audible guitar playin' on this record. About time, I say. Dave Wakeling's vocals aren't as horrible as usual on this song - he doesn't let his "ah-ah-ah-ahs" screw up everything like they normally do. He's being quiet like a good little boy. It's nice enough, I spose, in a sleepy, alternative sort of way. Still, not exactly my cup a' tea. But "She's Going", on my other left hand, is utterly detestable. Sub-par instrumentation(I think the saxophone is being played by Magoogan - if I'm right, he's nowhere near as good as Saxa) and an annoying melody - that's a killer combo! Shoo...where did I put my Grieg CDs? But, alas, there is light at the end of even the darkest tunnel. When the sun rises, signalling the end of the black and dark night, beams of light penetrate even the most overgrown of evil forests. And when the saints come marching in, they let Rankin' Roger sing all the dern tunes! Okay, okay, "Pato and Roger A Go Talk" is more saccharine and less of a gas than "Spar Wid Me", but it's nice to hear a decent vocalist singing ANYTHING after those three Wakeling tunes in a row(unfortunately, Wakeling IS singing the chorus and some background vocals, too. Groan!). Unfortunately, "Pato and Roger A Go Talk" is the last Rankin' Roger tune - it's all Wakeling from here on out. I can't say I like any these last tunes particularly. For example, "Sugar and Stress" has a decent saxophone line, but that only lasts about fifteen seconds - the rest of the tune is useless to me. "End Of The Party" is even worse. It's slow but not a ballad. The piano opener is endurable, but that saxophone playing...so dull! Shut it off, man, shut it off! It was stuff like this that made the Ramones form a decade ago! That's right! Punk rock is a vicious, anticipative reaction against third wave British ska! Tell all your friends and all the underground critics you can find! You heard me say it in an English Beat review nobody's gonna read, so it's got to be true!

Oh, and the last song, "Ackee 1-2-3" is actually pretty good. Good Saxa saxophone playing! And a children's chorus to sing the melody! Yahoo!

3 stars(out of 10)

Rare Meat by Frank Zappa(1994)

Hi!

I'm nobody! Who are you?

Are you nobody too?

Rare Meat is an overpriced EP of Frank Zappa's earliest known recordings('62-'63) that was released to zero sales and no known critical attention in 1994 by my favorite record company, Del-Fi! There's absolutely no reason why I should start out reviewing Frank Zappa's vast catalogue with this insignificant release. The funny thing is, though, that my opinion concerning this EP is quite similar to my opinion concerning all Frank Zappa: most songs the man recorded sucked. Sheesh, that's harsh criticism of a genius, isn't it? Oh come on, have you listened to much Frank Zappa? I respect the guy. He was a genuinely smart man. I admire his great experimental(and not so experimental) forays into music, which were clearly composed with no concern given whatsoever to taste, genre, or even common sense. But a majority of Mr. Zappa's recordings are crap and I don't believe they genuinely need to be listened to. But he did record some great songs, too! Nobody would listen to him if he didn't. And I suppose even some of his material that I label "crap" could be interesting under certain circumstances. For example, the first time I heard some of Zappa's classical output, I laughed myself silly. It was a pretty cool musical experience, though. I can only describe the music as something akin to fart noises on a tuba. Reminded me that I really ought to check out some Varese one of these days. To be perfectly level with you, if ANY great musician alone recorded 50+ albums over a thirty year period as Zappa did, then a majority of the work included therein would probably not be great, or even good. There's just a limit to what a single man can do...did Dostoyevsky write fifty novels? Could he have? No, he couldn't. Not while he gave a damn about the quality of his own writing. And Dostoyevsky was the greatest writer who ever lived. So just take into account that Frank Zappa decided to release almost every bit of musical material he ever produced, the good right with the bad. If you're willing to wade through the garbage to find the good stuff, then knock yourself out. You could be surprised at what you do come across! It might even change your life, though I have no idea why or how any assorted Zappa gems would do so.

Here's the track listing for this EP:

1. How's Your Bird

2. The World's Greatest Sinner

3. Everytime I See You

4. Letters from Jeepers

5. Dear Jeepers

6. Cradle Rock

This extra play starts out with "How's Your Bird", a song I'm sure you all know by now. It's very early 60s- the guitars twang, the drums softly pound, while our hero Frank Zappa sings some nonsensical lyrics. This is absured, how's yer bird? Nice guitar playing all around, to be honest with ye. Frankie was a good axe player in his time, and he was quite unique in that he usually composed music with the aid of the guitar, even for OTHER instruments! "The World's Greatest Sinner" really sucks. It's got this shuffle thing going on, and some other noise I can't make out, too, in the background. Sounds like some guys mumbling "Dajeemina joppa." The solo isn't bad, but it is kind of formulaic. It's a failed joke obviously, and that's bad news for a joke song. Luckily, this song is followed by "Everytime I See You", one of the greatest doo-wop songs by Frank Zappa that I've ever heard! "Everytime I see you, whenever you walk by, I want to hold you..." Gosh darn it, it sounds so genuine...the horns, the percussion, the bass, it's all perfect! Of course, Zappa's probably making some sort of joke concerning the shallowness of doo-wop songs(though I'm not sure of that...he seemed to honestly like the musical form.) "Letters from Jeepers" and "Dear Jeepers" are jokes and the music is secondary to what's being spoken. Unfortunately, what's being spoken isn't very funny, as far as "jokes" go. I do like the two groovy bass lines, though. I just shake my arse and listen to Count Dracula ramble on...there are some neat sound effect things, too. Cats meowing, wind blowing eerily, water softly flowing, bizarre laughs and burping sounds. You'll dig it, but "music" it's probably not. "Cradle Rock" is another doo-wop song, and it's a great, hip update of the old nursery song "Rock A Bye Baby." Apparently, it's a cover, but I really wouldn't know.

Before I go, I should tell you that I saw this EP for sale at a reputable musical dealer's for ELEVEN bucks! I don't know what's up with that, but I felt like I ought to tell you that you should NOT, repeat NOT spend eleven bucks on this. I sure didn't. In fact, I'd never pay more than five dollars for an E.P. Heck, I basically never pay more than ten bucks for a regular album! If you have to own this, you must be a huge Zappa junkie anyway, but I'd still advise you to shop around first instead of wasting your money. You could probably buy a deck of Albanian playing cards with the moolah you'll save!

5 stars(out of 10)

The Masterpiece Collection by Frederic Chopin(199?)

I really like Chopin, though I have mixed feelings towards French culture as a whole: Debussy seems to be more for the ladies, I respect Hugo but rarely read him, I enjoy Gide and Camus, but think that Voltaire is pretty gruesomely overrated. It's a good thing Chopin wasn't really French; he might've sucked :). No, Chopin was born and raised in Poland, with a French father and a Polish mother. His Polishness is central to his work. He's quite often playing the music of Poland in classical arrangements, and therein lies part of his appeal. Well, here's the track listing for this nice collection:

1. Waltz No. 1 in E Flat Major Op. 18(Grande Valse Brilliante)

2. Prelude Op. 28/15 In D Flat Major(Raindrop)

3. Polonaise Op. 26/1 in C Sharp Minor

4. Etude Op. 10/12 in C Minor(Revolution)

5. Mazurka Op. 63/1 In C Sharp Minor

6. Marche Funebre From Sonata No. 2 In B Minor Op. 35

7. Waltz No. 2 In A Flat Major Op 34/1

8. Nocturne No. 1 Op. 9/1 In B Flat Minor

9. Impromptu Op. 66 in C Sharp Minor(Fantaisie Impromptu)

10. Prelude in A Minor Op. 28/7

11. Waltz No. 6 in D Flat Major Op. 64/1(Minute Waltz)

12. Waltz No. 7 In C Sharp Minor Op. 64/2

13. Rondo in C Major Op 73/27 For Two Pianos

I suppose the main reason I love Chopin so is because all he did was write music for generally solo piano. No overblown orchestras here! I have a hard time following all that is going on when there are thirty harps and a dozen oboes and thirteen violins going on at the same time(talk about your original wall of sound!). Chopin is a joy to listen to for the musician. All piano, all the time, no BS. The piano isn't my favorite instrument in the world to play or listen to, but Chopin is a master. It's delightful to hear the runs he has concocted...the piano IS a lead instrument darn it! The Waltz No. 1 E Flat Major Op. 18 that opens up this collection is simply beautiful, joyous and sympathetic. The next track(take a look at my track listing...it's getting too hard to type all these names out :) ) is, while certainly less cheery, just as good...dark bass key pounding combined with soft melodic tapping. I could go ahead and pretty much describe every track here(actually, I think that someday I will!), but this might bore you. Also, since Chopin is one of my favorite composers, I think that I'll review more of his works in their intended form in the future, and include more description in those future reviews.

I should also say that this CD is part of one of them classical collections. The Masterpiece Collection is a generally recommendable guide to some of the more famous names of classical music. I'll likely review other discs from this collection in the future. Meanwhile, (I apologize for all this rambling...that's the sort of mood I'm in today) I wonder if anyone is bothered by my approach to reviewin' classical music. I'm not qualified to do so at all. I'm a musician, but an utterly non-technical one(what classical types would call a "folk musician", I suppose. They widely consider even jazz to be merely a form of American folk music, though this would be just as widely disputed amongst jazz purists. They think of jazz more as "American classical music.") I apologize if you find my reviewing approach a little flippant. I'm merely listening with my ears and trying to translate what I hear and how the music hits me into plain English. I'm more of the sort who considers all music to be related to each other. Classical, jazz, rock, it's all music. Each genre has its own ideosyncrasies and terminology, but they are all still part of a larger family of music. I try to review a wide variety of music. Maybe that's wrong. As everybody says, "write what you know." Could be. I like to do things my own way, just the same.

Closing thoughts time. I freely admit that every piece of music on this compacted disc does not knock me out. It's sort of an odd collection really, with very little cohesion. However, Chopin was a very odd and original composer to begin with. He can take a light and lively or bombastic tune and turn it into a gentle funeral ode(check out "Marche Funebre". You don't know where that is going when you hear the famous theme. It may even begin to bore you in the middle, but seven or eight minutes into it it all starts to make complete sense, and you think to yourself, "Gosh, this sure is great!") Mr. Chopin is surely worth your listening time, and listening to him is absolutely essential for the recreational or professional pianist. He's one of the greats, no doubt about it. His contributions to solo piano work are priceless. It's a shame that few have satisfactorily continued his vision of the dominant piano. Today, just as before Chopin, the piano is widely viewed as merely suitable for accompaniment(or as a writing tool for composers). But why am I only giving this an eight you might ask quite understandably? Well, while I'd certainly give some of the excerpted works included on this album a '10', it's undeniable that some of Chopin's music doesn't move or even overly impress me at all. I won't name any names(it would be a shame to do so since there is hardly any such thing as a genuinely 'bad' Chopin work.) Okay, I'm going to end this review now. Sheesh, I'm rambling so much today. This review must be terrible. I'm sorry! I'm lost in another world.

8 stars(out of 10)

Twice Shy by Great White(1989)

First off I should say I know next to nothing about this band known as Great White. Actually, this is one of those albums my sister bought as a teenager and then just dumped them. In retrospect, this stuff might actually be better than what she's listening to in her old age(techno/dance crap...). Anyway, here's the track listing if you care:

1. Move It

2. Heart The Hunter

3. Hiway Nights

4. The Angel Song

5. Mista Bone

6. Baby's On Fire

7. House of Broken Love

8. She Only

9. Once Bitten Twice Shy

This band, I understand, is called heavy metal. But that's just hilarious. There's nothing heavy about this music, though clearly at least the singer has a serious Led Zeppelin obsession. It's pretty standard 80s hard rock, without the roll. Program 1, as they title it, starts out with a bang with "Move It." I like that song. Then it degenerates into crap, making you wonder if you should bother listening to side B, erm, excuse me, program 2. Because you're a daring soul you decide to turn this baby over and see what this Great White band has to offer! What do you find? The unclever and unfunny "Mista Bone." Yes, let's see if you can figure that one out. It's followed by three other unimpressive tunes...and then...wow, what's this last song? "Once Bitten Twice Shy"? A huge hit. And wow, I'm a moron, and I love this song! It's not genius or nothin' but it's a lot of fun. Hell, the intro sounds like it's some good old Lynyrd Skynyrd honky tonk. And that's a good thing! You can probably pick this up for about 5 bucks, so why not? You might like it! Okay, there are a couple why nots. You could buy a great blues album for the same price that'll reward you over hundreds of listenings. And this one just won't. I give it a '5' simply because it's a rock album, certainly derivative, but rock and roll is wonderful music, and I'm glad that Great White tried to make good rock music. Of course, for the most part, they failed...but at least they tried. Boring as heck, talentless alternative-pop bands that dominate the white charts these days don't even try to give their fans good music. Why is most alternative music so boring, anyway? Started out boring from the very beginning with the Velvet Underground. And even when it was producing good bands(certainly not talentless) like R.E.M. and Sonic Youth, these bands still put a lot of boredom on their vinyl. If the choice is another Velvet-R.E.M. boring three chord alterna-pop knockoff and this, I'd choose Twice Shy any day.

5 stars (out of 10)

Reader Thoughts

bburks@comp.uark.edu(Brian Burks, webmaster of Creative Noise)

I think you've got a factual error in your Great White review. "Once Bitten, Twice Shy" is not an original, it's a cover of an Ian Hunter (ex-Mott the Hoople) song.

Nothing like another critic proving yer an idiot, is there? Well, thanks Brian!

Ragnorak by GWAR(1995)

With their hate-filled songs of gratuitous violence and perversive behavior, GWAR("God What an Awful Racket") have been inspiring school shootings and headbanger orgies since 1989. If you look beyond the gore of the lyrics and the coldness of the thrash metal music, however, you'll find a sensitive group of art students who are closer in spirit to groups like the Velvet Underground, Wire, and the Gang of Four than they are to Anthrax and Exodus. Didn't that last sentence sound neat? Too bad I was only being sarcastic. I don't listen to 'eavy metal too much, for some very good reasons. For one thing, I can't get metal albums cheap where I live, and I only buy what's cheap(I ain't no fortunate son!). For another thing, I don't have any friends or even casual acquaintances who are metal listeners; thus, there's no way for me to hear a lot of good metal albums for free. For a third thing, I don't necessarily like the stuff, though I haven't heard enough of it to say. Unlike, say, punk, I definitely have not heard a majority of metal bands heralded as classic. In other words, I barely know my Godflesh from my Godsmack. With that said...

I gave this album a listen on a whim, and I must say I found it more enjoyable than I thought I would. Though, as I mentioned in my first paragraph, I'm no expert on this metallic stuff, I was pleasantly surprised that I could spot many non-metal influences of GWAR's, including but not limited to nursery rhymes, Frank Zappa, Spinal Tap, Dread Zeppelin, David Bowie, and The Rocky Horror Picture Show. If the above list tells you anything, you should have figured out by now that this is a pretty freakin' funny little band. Rather than elaborate any further on that topic, I'll simply note that the members of the band claim to be the descendents of ancient alien warriors who were stranded on Antarctica. I wonder if they get together with Killing Joke at all?

Check the track listing:

1. Meat Sandwich

2. The New Plague

3. Whargoul

4. Rag Na Rok

5. Dirty, Filthy

6. Stalin's Organ

7. Knife In Yer Guts

8. Think You Oughta Know This

9. Martyr Dumb

10. Nudged

11. Fire in the Loins

12. Surf of Syn

13. Crush, Kill, Destroy

14. None But the Brave

GWAR is(band pseudonyms listed in parentheses): David Brockie(Oderus Urungus), vocals, Michael Derks(Balsac the Jaws of Death),guitar, Peter Lee(Flattus Maximus), guitar, Michael Bishop(Beefcake the Mighty), bass, and Brad Roberts(Jizmak the Gusher), drums. As you might be able to guess by now, GWAR's main audience consists of fourteen year old boys. This id in itself not a condemnation of the band, but unfortunately, it is quite clear WHY GWAR's primary audience consists fourteen year old boys. The lyrics are honestly horrible, clearly written for no other reason than to incite the listener's laughter with their abysmality(Abysmality is a word I'm pretty sure I invented myself, but I like it and I think I'll keep on using it until Webster wises up and makes it mainstream.) The music is essentially non-descript; as I said earlier, I don't listen to a whole lot of heavy metal, but even I have heard a few of these same riffs'n'tricks that GWAR use often before. One thing GWAR DO have that most, say, alternative bands from the past twenty years lack is a seriously great vocalist. David Brockie has a fantastic low, growl that is surprisingly adaptable and shockingly impressive when it is allowed to shine. He particularly impresses me when he's singing overemotive, operatic like choruses...he's not Bruce Dickinson(vocals, Iron Maiden), he's BETTER! Every now and then, the GWAR guitar boys come up with some good riffage and decent soloing, too, but good music is the exception on the album, not the rule. Ultimately, I'd say the strongest thing GWAR have going for them is their self-parodic humor(alas, their lyrics ONLY become bearable when taken as pure humor). When I stated that Spinal Tap was an influence on these guys, I was being serious: the title track of this record is obviously inspired by the Tap classic "Stonehenge." Both songs are hilarious("Rag Na Rok" even contains the refrain, "It's always one hell of a party/when Ragnarok rolls around" which is something you would never hear Alanis or Jewel singing, just to name two boring artists popular among the youth of today.) My favorite tune on this record is "Meat Sandwich" however, a perfectly acceptable 90s mainstream metal tune that could be "Enter Sandman"'s younger brother. I'll be darned if those speedy riffs don't kick my posterior to and fro for a good three minutes, 90s mainstream metal tune or not. And David Brockie sings all THREE(!) choruses great! "Whargoul" is worth mentioning for its bass-led final part which ultimately segues right into "Rag Na Rok." Excellent singing from Brockie there, again. The album heads to Nowheresville awful fast after "Rag Na Rok", with four kinda boring tunes. "Think You Oughta Know This" is the worst of the lot: it's a rap song. Ugh. "Martyr Dumb" is musically a brief return to form. It boasts a fantastic metal hook which will be sure to incite cranial injury even to the most conservative of headbangers. The lyrics have to be mentioned, though: the song is a sharp attack on Christianity, which makes it as far as I know the only "serious" song on the record. Of course, it's only serious if you can tolerate lines about God riding around in a nuclear sub amidst the shouted cries of "Dead religion! Dead religion!" I know I can't speak for the rest of you, but aren't the lyrics of a band like GWAR about the absolutely last place you'd turn to when searching for answers to your philosophical questions? I can't believe these guys honestly expect anybody to take them seriously for this one song when the rest of the album consists of low-brow humor and downright stupidity. Maybe they don't expect anyone to take them seriously, and they're just taking on blasphemy the way they take on violence and sex in other songs(Or, as in the highly offensive but listenable "The New Plague", AIDS. It would be safe to declare GWAR officially politically incorrect). The album's ultimate low point is "Fire in the Loins", a "song" which consists of a brother and sister hatefully yelling at each other. Side-themes of the tune include S & M, STDs, and incest. Who needs Dr. Ruth? The other tunes don't particularly impress me as either good or bad - just a bit boring. Why don't you just go back and listen to "Meat Sandwich" again?

4 stars(out of 10)

Sanctuary by the J. Geils Band(1978)

If you want to hear a record recorded in 1978 that shows no trace of any punk rock, new wave, disco, or techno influences, well then, this might well be your record. Back in their innocent, pre-80s pop success days, the J. Geils Band were a darn near legendary live bar act. Hailing from Boston, they were a few reasonably gifted musicians who shared a remarkable love for the music of the Rolling Stones and a certain amount of appreciation for 60s soul, blues, and R&B. I haven't heard their first couple of albums nor their legendary Live Full House yet - those are supposed to be among the band's best bar band material....real blues influenced and rough edged. This album marks their first experimentations with pop music...this record sounds so homogenized and sterilized it makes me sick, quite frankly. Not a bad album, though, by any means - I just hate the 'sound' of it. The band included J. Geils himself on electric guitar, Peter Wolf on vocals(probably the best Mick Jagger imitator of all time), Magic Dick on the harmonica, and Seth Justman on piano/keyboards. None of these fellows were overwhelming talents, but they were all "pretty" good and knew how to compliment each other's limitations. Here's the track listing of the cheap 1998 re-release from Razor & Tie:

1. I Could Hurt You

2. One Last Kiss

3. Take It Back

4. Sanctuary

5. Teresa

6. Wild Man

7. I Can't Believe You

8. I Don't Hang Around Anymore

9. Jus' Can't Stop Me

10. I Do(bonus track, live)

11. Land of A Thousand Dances(bonus track, live)

I have to admit...I think this album is a little too poppy for my tastes. It's just too clean! There's no excitement! There's no rock'n'roll! And though most of Peter Wolf's soaring choruses may be considered relatively catchy, you'll also be sure to get sick of 'em before too long(I know I do.) And Magic Dick has to be the poppiest harmonica player I've ever heard. Disgusting! Sure, you can hear a little Sonny Boy Williamson in his playing, but the tone..eyuk. Where did I put my James Cotton albums? What I do like is how the harmonica and the piano are in just about every song on this record - they're accorded equal respect with the guitar. Seth Justman is a good pianist, too! Otay. Let's talk tunes.

This album sure starts out nice. "I Could Hurt You" is my second favorite song on album, and it's a good one! You've got your bouncy, rock'n'roll piano from Justman, some lively upbeat drumming by whoever their drummer was, some electric guitar and harmonica fills, and one of Wolf's best melodies. Man, the guy could imitate Mick Jagger well - much better than that Black Crowes fellow. "One Last Kiss" is alright, too, the jarring, swerving opening guitar line a must hear - sounds like something Mark Knopfler would play. The rhythm section also resembles the Dire Straits beat. But that doesn't mean anything - 1978 was the year of Dire Straits first album, too! You'll probably dig the heck out of the vocal melody, "The good times are the best times, the bad times fade away..." but I've grown to hate it. Good Magic Dick harp playing, though, and you really do need to hear the guitar line. It's groovin' - like Frank Black singing with the Breeders on a sultry summer's day. But "Take It Back" is where everything begins to fall apart. Listen to this song to understand what I mean when I say that "Magic Dick is the poppiest harmonica player I've ever heard." But Wolf sure can imitate that Jagger fellow well...listen to that falsetto! A completely average song, it is, and the harmonica playing is horrible. Believe me - listen to this and you'll enjoy Bob Dylan's musicianship a lot more. "Sanctuary" is VERY Stones-like. Threatening melody, threatening poppy harmonica, great threatening piano playing from Justman(he's actually playing the bass section of the tune with his keyboard, which is something not done near enough in modern music.) But it's too derivative of several much more threatening songs by the Stones - only the piano and Magic Dick's mid-section solo are particularly worth listening to. Then there's "Teresa." A ballad. An overemotive, emotional ballad. The piano intro by Justman now sounds generic...haven't YOU heard it before? Sure, it's dramatic and it's exciting, but it doesn't mean anything cuz it's been used over and over for about fifty years. The melody from this song was later quite obviously ripped off by Eric Carmen in some soppy love song of his. It had to do with angel eyes, I believe. It might have been called that. Quite uncleverly Eric changed the "Where did I..." line in this tune to "How did I..." I can't get over that generic piano intro to praise this song too much, but, truth be told, it's none too bad - Wolf's more than a decent singer, and he can sing ballads with great feeling as well as anybody can. But good news! The next song, "Wild Man", is my favorite song on the album. It's rollicking Stones-influenced rock'n'roll, and that can be a beautiful thing. I'm seriously in love with the funk bass playing in this song. It's so simple, but sounds so incredible... Great guitar and pianer playing, too, and Wolf's singing up a storm. "I got fire in my brain, I got ice in my veins." Here's where it all came together for the Geils band. A classic song for the ages. "I Can't Believe You" is...a major disappointment. Boring and pointless. Makes me yawn. "Woh, woh, I can't believe you're mine"...how many freaking songs on the exact same theme have to be written before the topic is considered "hackneyed"? The collegiate sounding guitar line is decent enough, however, in an anthemic sort of way. I think "I Don't Hang Around Anymore" is a bit better - another ballad. This one has some real pretty guitar playing, and the lyrics aren't bad at all. I personally find it very moving. I play it very often so my neighbors will feel like moving. The live bonus tracks are pretty good, though! The band shows off a ton of energy. The lenghty "I Do" lets Peter Wolf shows off his doo-wop influences while Magic Dick's harmonica playing sounds a hundred times better away from the studio. "Land of A Thousand Dances" may boast to its friends of its catchy "Na, na, nanana" chorus and of the catchy horn playing which accompanies it. Not bad, not bad.

6 stars(out of 10)

Blow By Blow(1975) and Wired(1976) by Jeff Beck

Fusion is one musical genre I really wish lived up to its potential. After all, there have been hundreds of rock bands that claimed to be "jazz-tinged" and many jazz artists who have acknowledged the influence of rock'n'roll on their playing, so why shouldn't an attempt be made to fuse these two disparate musical forms? Unfortunately, though a number of fusion groups(especially in the '70s) produced some pretty enjoyable ear candy, what they didn't do was create particularly good music. The exception to the rule was Miles Davis' group which remained consistent through all of its phases and put out some great fusion albums.

There are those who acknowledge these two Jeff Beck albums as genius, but then I suppose there are also those who acknowledge the Mahavishnu Orchestra as genius, too. For me, this music is pretty far removed from jazz. It sounds instead like a group of musicians purposefully imitating other artists made famous in jazz, rock, and funk music for their own purposes(that is, to create a "fusion" of said genres). I'm frankly left unimpressed. These albums have their moments, but on a song level it fails, and as a jazz album it lacks meaning, structure, and soul.

Here's the big ol' track listing(by the way, I should note this is one of those "two crappy Jeff Beck albums crammed into one crappy disc, tape, or record" offers. You save about three dollars by getting this away as opposed to buying the albums seperately. Three dollars! Wow!):

Blow by Blow:

1. You Know What I Mean

2. She's A Woman

3. Constipated Duck

4. Air Blower

5. Scatterbrain

6. Cause We've Ended As Lovers

7. Thelonius

8. Freeway Jam

9. Diamond Dust

Wired:

1. Led Boots

2. Come Dancing

3. Goodbye Pork Pie

4. Head for Backstage Passs

5. Blue Wind

6. Sophie

7. Play With Me

8. Love is Green

I have nothing against Jeff Beck personally - he's earned his reputation as a great guitarist, and sure enough on a technical level he is great. But I'll be damned if he can be an interesting guitarist for more than a minute or two at a time. As a guitarist myself I can admire his ability, yet it still seems obvious to me that this guy doesn't understand his instrument despite his knowledge of scales and chords. I find the main melodies of these musical excursions(instrumental melodies I'm speaking of, as these records are both instrumental) to be almost always droning and annoying. Every once in a while, Beck'll throw in a really cool guitar line, but this is not the general case. It's Dullsville City, U.S.A. for the most part.

Even when I first began listening to jazz, I could tell whether or not I liked something on first listen, even if I couldn't tell you just why I liked or didn't like something. Something attracted me to John Coltrane, Phil Woods, Miles Davis, Eddie Harris(okay, I'm joking here...but "Live Right Now" is a pretty catchy tune.) Something turned me off of jazz that simply fiddled its bo diddle for thirty minutes(which is exactly what Jeff Beck does here.) To this day, I've yet to connect with the music of the vastly influential Thelonius Monk. He's vastly admired, but I simply find him vastly boring. I'd rather hear a good Louis Armstrong record...ever heard "Big Fat Ma and Skinny Pa"? It's a classic. "Cornet Shop Suey" I'm also rather partial towards.

The primary difference between Blow by Blow and Wired is a matter of funk. Wired is funkier(in both the musical and smellier sense of the word) than its predecessor. If you enjoyed hearing all those jazz cliches on electric instruments on the first record, you'll love this album of jazz AND funk cliches. I'm not in the mood to mention songs at the moment - it's almost a useless effort because all of the good songs drone on too long to be enjoyable. I suppose the world needs derivative guitar virtuosos, but still, Jeff Beck - what were ye thinking?

5 stars(out of 10)

Shady Grove by Jerry Garcia and David Grisman(1996)

Too many people hate folk music these days, I think. I'm not sure where it stems from - possibly it is an after effect of the mass popularization (especially over the past 35 years) of so much music that lacks any genuine feeling or meaning whatsoever. I personally love folk music. That is, as long as it is written by "folk." I haven't much time for Joni Mitchell or Joan Baez(actually, I haven't any time at all for either of those two jokers.) This whole conception of folk as 'protest music' is all wrong. Most of it isn't concerned with politics at all(which isn't to denigrate what Woody Guthrie and others did do, it just doesn't reflect the genre as a whole properly.) Lyrically, what makes folk music folk music is that it tells a story - a story doesn't necessarily have to have a moral. Musically, what makes American folk music American folk music is the excellent use of stringed instruments: guitars, mandolins, banjos, banjo-mandolins, fiddles, dulcimers, etc etc. I dig the folk 'sound' and I can dig the storytelling, too.

Yes, this album was recorded by "that" Jerry Garcia - leader of the Grateful Dead. I'm not much of a Grateful Dead fan, their early psychedelic attempts are terrible even for that genre, and many of their later recordings are just attempts to duplicate their idols. However, some of their bootlegs are terrific - you see, the Dead's only important role in the world of music(in my opinion, that is) was as popularizers. They performed country, bluegrass, blues, jazz, any kind of music they dug, live to impressionable audiences who had never heard these songs before - perhaps they had not even heard the style of music before! They helped preserve an entire legacy of music that many people wouldn't have mind seeing lost forever. For that, I salute them. Oddly enough, however, Jerry Garcia did some of his best folk popularizing towards the end of his career in the early 90s - sans Grateful Dead. Teaming up with longtime friend and popular folk musicain in his own right David Grisman, he recorded many hours of covers of different types of music. Some bluegrass, some country, some blues, some pure old-time folk, some ballads - all sorts of music that Mr. Garcia liked. Following Garcia's death in 1995, Grisman began to release some of these recordings for commercial consumption. This album, which should never under any circumstances be confused with the album of the same name by the Quicksilver Messenger Service, was one of those releases. Here's the track listing:

1. Shady Grove

2. Stealin'

3. Off To Sea Once More

4. The Sweet Sunny South

5. Louis Collins

6. Fair Ellender

7. Jackaroo

8. Casey Jones

9. Dreadful Wind And Rain

10. I Truly Understand

11. The Handsome Cabin Boy

12. Whiskey in the Jar

13. Down in the Valley

Strangely, I don't think I've ever heard Jerry Garcia sound any better than he does covering these old songs. Age was more than kind to him - it made him a better musician than he ever was before. His voice magnificently morphed into a basso rumble that never sounded hoarse or tired - perfect for these old cover tunes. He and Grisman shared guitar duties on the record, and they both did a very good job(Garcia also played banjo, while Grisman played banjo, mandolin, banjo-mandolin, and mandola also!). I'm not going to discuss the songs in depth here because in so doing I would be taking away from the copious liner notes which detail the story behind each song. They do all have stories - some are obscure, some are famous; some are from another century or another land. But I would like to list a few of my favorites. The title track is a great snatch of old Appalachia performed with great skill and vigor, with plenty of room left open for instrument interplay. And man, does that Jerry Garcia sound great. "Off To Sea Once More" is an old, old mournful sea chanty with some mighty heavy lyricis:

I spent a night with Angeline too drunk to roll...in bed

And so on.

"The Sweet Sunny South" is a herky jerky banjo-mandolin led ode to my beloved homeland. It's not a perfect reworking - Garcia's singing strangely lacks any harmony with the lead instrument, but the riff I like! "Louis Collins" and "Casey Jones" are both beautiful, wonderful Mississippi John Hurt-ish folk tunes - fantastic. I like those trickly mandolin solos, too. "Fair Ellender" is a fine story and a good song - listen to that ethereal flute playin', for goodness sakes. It's good, good stuff. Finally, "Whiskey in the Jar" is the perfect light recording of that song for those who want a break from the Thin Lizzy version. It beats the mellow-oh cover-oh version-oh recently-oh recorded-oh by-oh James Hetfield-oh and-oh his-oh other-oh Metallic-oh bandmates-oh.

Good album, no?

8 stars(out of 10)

Are You Experienced? by the Jimi Hendrix Experience(1967)

I don't really disagree too much with my old review of this album, but it just wasn't sufficient. A proper review of Jimi Hendrix needs to evaluate his two sides in equal measure: both his technological and his musical wizardry. Hendrix is a one of a kind musician, really - not only in rock, but in all the kinds of music ever invented. Clapton and Townshend shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as Jimi, because they were not the same sort of musicians at all. Clapton and Townshend were technique players. They each had a guitar playing style peculiar to them that created their "sound." Technique guitar players existed long before rock'n'roll did. There were technique players who played blues, jazz, country, classical, and folk music on acoustic instruments. Jimi Hendrix is unique in that he was the first widely known musician to approach his instrument, the electric guitar, as a truly electric instrument. Electric instruments can be rewired and altered, as can electric amplifiers(and this doesn't even consider 'studio' experimentations, but Hendrix wasn't the first to get into that stuff, as I'm sure you well know). Jimi discovered that the electric guitar could be made to create an almost unlimited number of "sounds" given the proper amount of experimentation, and that the tonal properties of the electric guitar are almost limitless. Hence, Jimi is the true father of effects processing, which has made the electric guitar the long lived instrument it has and will continue to be. Today's players have it easier than he did - they can pick up a Zoom box/compact effect processing unit and have a couple hundred different effects to play with without even having to know a thing about the inner workings of their guitars. Then again, there are a fair number of players out there who do take apart their guitars and their amplifiers apart and "mess around" on a regular basis in hopes of discovering something new and revolutionary - they are the inheritors of Mr. Hendrix's rock'n'roll dream. But we would not have anything like that Zoom box unit without Hendrix's groundbreaking work. We would have quite a few mono-effect pedals(such as Clapton used quite often in the 60s), and the world would be a much more boring place. The whole course of modern music would have been different, and our concept of the 'guitar hero' would almost not exist.

Jimi Hendrix's actual music interests me less than his experimentalism, but it is still remarkably good. I don't necessarily dig Hendrix's noisiest sonic voyages, but his solos are quite often immaculate, and some of his riffs have been known to kick my head in on occasion. I've personally found that the more relaxed I am, the more I enjoy Hendrix's music. Hey, let's admit it - Jimi was a nice, relaxed, hippy kind of guy. Everything's cool. Groovy, if you get me, and I think you do. As for this Are You Experienced? record, it's revolutionary and it's crazy and it's totally psychedelic(which is a nice way for me to tell you that the songs featured on this record are, ahem, "poorly arranged.")

Are you experienced enough to view this track listing? I think you are.

1. Purple Haze

2. Manic Depression

3. Hey Joe

4. Love Or Confusion

5. May This Be Love

6. I Don't Live Today

7. The Wind Cries Mary

8. Fire

9. Third Stone From The Sun

10. Foxey Lady

11. Are You Experienced?

12. Stone Free

13. 51st Anniversary

14. Highway Chile

15. Can You See Me

16. Remember

17. Red House

I sort of wish that this record was completely instrumental. The lyrics and vocal melodies simply don't hold up to the quality of Jimi's guitarwork. Sure, they're okay, but do they make the songs more interesting or entertaining than they are? I hardly think so. I know that one of my favorite tracks on this album is the lone instrumental, "Third Stone From the Sun." In a way, listening to this record is more like listening to a bop album from Charlie Parker or Thelonius Monk than a rock'n'roll album. There is a certain freeform, improvisatory spirit in these tunes that show quite definitely than Jimi wasn't about to follow that good ol' blues scale religiously(I think Jimi probably regretted that he was not a blues player at times - that is, many of his attempts at pure blues tunes are mediocre at best for that genre. But I suppose it's also true that John Coltrane probably wished he was a more 'traditional' saxophone player at times, too.) Were the album instrumental, we could also see longer songs that showed off Hendrix's improvisational abilities more. As it is, I think that seventeen songs(including the tunes originally on the record in '67 plus a few singles tacked onto the 90s re-release) are too many for this album - too many songs don't reach their full potential because of their shortness. But I suppose an instrumental album wasn't much of a commercial possibility in the 60s. Hendrix would've been labeled "jazz" despite his volume, and ignored in the rock world(and he would have been ignored by the pre-fusion jazz world DUE to his volume.) So, we just have to take this album for what it's worth, and recognize that it couldn't have come out in any other format.

Hendrix's band included a couple of English fellows, Noel Redding, a guitarist Hendrix hired to play bass, and Mitch Mitchell, the drummer so nice they named him twice. Redding is barely heard on this record save for his surprising lead role in "Fire" - Mitchell's presence is more defined but no more important. They were Hendrix's backing band in every sense of that term, so we probably need not speak any more of 'em...poor fellows. Of course, they did get the chance to play alongside Jimi Hendrix, so let's not pity them too much.

The album opens with the classic rock radio staple, "Purple Haze." The riff is one of Hendrix's heaviest, so low and fuzzy it predicts the creation of grunge about twenty years before the fact(or, at the very least, it predates the creation of Black Sabbath and the Stooges by a couple of years.) I'm probably a bigger fan of Hendrix's solos than I am of his riffs; this is certainly true for this song as both of Jimi's solos kick soccer balls all over Selhurst Park. "Manic Depression" is in the same heavier-than-Hades vein as the opening track, but it doesn't get good till Hendrix kicks in with the solos(Noel Redding's bass playing dominates the song but not in pleasant ways. He's playing the SAME bass line the whole way through... how boring!) However, the lyrics are somewhat interesting - the shiny happy hippy guitar player is spouting some dark proverbs for a change! "Hey Joe" is the first of several pop tunes performed by the master. A cover, it's a kinda catchy tune about killin' but it's rather musically spare. I love the short melodic solo, though. "Love or Confusion" is kind of a great song, but man, Hendrix's lounge singing really mucks everything up. The guitar playing is intensely creative and original, though(he's got a great, great guitar tone for this song) but what boring singin'. It makes the whole song sound as if it lacks energy when it doesn't! "May This Be Love" is a return to hippy pop. It's real sweet, little Jimi muttering all this stuff about waterfalls and rainbows and love. Nicer than the Nice! Less lice than Spice(Girls)! Yeah, actually, I think this song is the best pop song on this record...the super relaxed solo is awesome! "I Don't Live Today" is a return to rocka'rolla...boy is it ever! You've got that bass riff and feedback noise and whangy bar twangs to open the song, then Jimi's deceptively simple crunchy guitar riff followed by one of my favorite solos by the man... you gots to hear it! It's out of this world. It's better than Out of This World. It's interesting that Jimi unlike so many of his most devoted followers never, ever overdid his guitar solos(on this record, at least. No "wankfests" here.) Less is sometimes more - Jimi makes the listener WANT to hear more than he gives 'em by never overdoing anything. What a great idea, Jimi. By the way, have you ever heard my "A Tribute to Jimi Hendrix" that I recorded when I was fifteen(or sixteen, I don't remember)? Man, that's an awesome ten minute guitar solo jam. Oy, oy, "The Wind Cries Mary" is a return to pop muzak. I've heard this song a little too much on la radio to enjoy it anymore - the lyrics are ridiculous in an unintentionally amusing way, but more importantly the guitar playing in the tune is downright boring and unsubstantial. "Fire" on the other hand is great - it's funk! It's all Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell, and they sound brilliant. Noel's solo is wonderful simplicity, and Mitch's lick is classic(or should I say licks, he's playing all sorts of cool stuff on this song. 1-2-34,12-34-34, 1-2-3-4...this is Mitchell's greatest contribution to Western culture for sure.) And then there's "Third Stone From the Sun." My favorite song on the record, I think. Instrumental, beautiful, mellow...just like Jimi Hendrix, you dig? Totally loose and freeform. The whistling wind noises and undecipherable background voices show that Hendrix could do 70s Pink Floyd as well as anybody in 1967, including Pink Floyd themselves. Okay, maybe Jimi does abuse his whangy bar in cruel and unusual ways throughout this song, but that main guitar line is so wonderful... Thus Side A ends.

"Foxey Lady" is a return to grunge! You can definitely hear Nirvana in there, maybe not any Melvins or TAD... Of course, you can hear Nirvana in "More Than A Feeling" too("Smells Like Teen Spirit" was a third generation ripoff!), so let's just forget the whole thing.) Oh, but the song isn't that great - it's just a riff, and even Wire wrote a few better ones than this 'un. Then there's the title track. I've always been fond of it myself. I love that distinctive Hendrix soloing...does anybody really know where he got that style from??? I mean, it's definitely not Western. It's not really Middle Eastern either - definitely not Persian or Turkish. A variation on South Indian themes perhaps? The main solo is of course recorded backwards, which actually wasn't such a great idea perhaps, but, still, a very good song. Oh yeah, the song's about one of Hendrix's favorite hobbies: drugs, baby! But that's the same thing half of Pink Floyd and Sonic Youth's tunes are about as well, or so I am told. And "Stone Free" is a...60's soul single? Well, yeah, why not? - don't forget Jimi played for the Isley Brothers and Ike Turner back in the day. This song sucks, though. Hendrix's first mediocre solo, too. But we can't hate it too much cuz it wasn't meant to be on the album(it's one of the "bonus" singles included on the Hendrix re-release.) "51st Anniversary" is also not so good - the song appears to be really stupid if you give a listen to the lyrics(Jimi doesn't want to marry this girl because marriage only becomes good after the first twenty years??? Why would you write a song like that? Stupid!). Don't fret, however, my chile, cuz "Highway Chile" is a'comin' up! That's a good 'un! Wonderous, jarring opening guitar line, and a very strong vocal delivery by Hendrix. La, la, la "Can You See Me" is kind of boring - nothing but guitar noise, a boring surf guitar line, and decent vocal chorus. I don't really need it...you? Winding it down is "Remember", our last pop single. It's about birds! Jimi will kiss his girl for his "supper"? Err...

Oh yes, the last track, "Red House" is the bluesiest Herr Hendrix gets on this particular record. Unfortunately, Hendrix wasn't too interesting a bluesman. Hendrix's guitar tone is remarkable for ROCK, but for the blues? That's the genre of B.B. King! Jimi's singing is okay, though.

Yes, I certainly did underrate this album in my original review. I gave it the same rating I'm going to give it now, but I didn't back it up any. This record has meant a good deal to me in my life, even if it's not something I listen to quite every day. I wouldn't term it one of the best albums of all time or anything, because it has some very definite faults and not every song is great or even good(the shorter original release was actually better without the bonus tracks mucking everything up, but this is likely to be the version of this album heard by all future generations.) But Hendrix was a remarkable, very special guitar player. It's a prerequisite for the modern rock player to listen to him in as much as it was a prerequisite for the players starting out in the 60s to listen to Chuck Berry. Of course, you'll knock everybody dead if you listen to both. Finally, let me extend due credit to the producer Chas Chandler and engineer Eddie Kramer: they had more to do with this whole Hendrix sound than Mitchell and Redding, really. It was the collaboration between these three(Kramer, Chandler, Hendrix) which resulted in the varied sound of this record(of course, whatever Hendrix said went at the end of the day, which is why I'm not feeling too bad about crediting pretty much everything good about this record to Jimi.)

8 stars(out of 10)

Priceless Jazz Collection by John Coltrane(1997)

The question one must ask of any greatest hits collection or any other compilation is this: does it live up to its name? Are these the real greatest hits of whoever? Is this-and-this selection worthy of belonging here? In this instance, the question is: how much of this jazz is really priceless? It's kind of a funny question for me to ask myself, since I got this compilation for free. No, not through any of those stupid club deals...I got it, er, through another not necessarily illegal means. Let us leave it at that. Here's the track listing, after which I will commence discussing Mr. John Coltrane and his music with you fine people:

1. Bessie's Blues

2. Dear Lord

3. Big Nick

4. Alabama

5. A Love Supreme(Part I: Acknowledgement)

6. Naima

7. Mile's Mode

8. Crescent

9. After the Rain

John Coltrane was this quiet, mild-mannered intelligent fellow. He happened to be a master of the saxophone, notably but not only the tenor sax. He made numerous, numerous recordings with many great artists(and appears on what might be the greatest jazz album ever made: Kind of Blue) as well as making his own solo recordings with only a few other trusted bandmates helping him. Drugs might've ruined his life, but they didn't. He quit heroin cold turkey, and instead, began to take up practicing the flute in his spare time. He was in many respects a great man. It's appropriate that his music be great also.

John Coltrane has influenced a lot of people, some far outside of jazz. Heck, I even saw that horsey guy Iggy Pop on the ol' MTV paying tribute to our man. Hmm. Guess I ought to listen to those old Stooges records more carefully now. Then again, Coltrane had his share of detractors. He's certainly not the most accessible jazz artist to ever come along. I mean, this is the same genre that produced Armstrong, Ellington, and Goodman, right? Jazz was that intelligent music form that appealed to everybody. It was enjoyable music you could dance to, but it was also good music. But jazz was an ever changing medium. Some people didn't understand that. They wanted to hold on to the early days, but it was impossible(mind you, of course the best early music will live forever). Bop had to happen. Cool jazz had to happen. Fusion was inevitable. And, as much as it pains me to say it, I guess smooth jazz was, too. So what was John Coltrane? It's hard to say! The man himself considered his music to be "classical", not jazz at all. In my mind, I see him as bop, but that might be disagreed with by some jazz historians. Perhaps it's best to say John Coltrane was John Coltrane.

I must also describe the music. He's a "fast" player, but not in our post-punk hardcore or speed metal definition of speed. He's fast in that he can make a million different note changes inside a single song, though the song itself be mid-tempo. His numerous note changes are rather bizarre, too. What kind of chord structure is he using?? He calls this music? Why, he could've made the whole song better if he had played this and this instead of that! Yes, you might think such things while listening to Coltrane. It's easy for you to forget how masterful Coltrane is at his instrument. No, he's not playing like hundreds of other jazz saxophonists, or like you and I would play were we saxophonists. He's playing the way John Coltrane plays. Just listen to his tone. Listen to all those note changes he makes without missing a beat. Not every saxophone player could do that, let me tell you.

As for the music on this thing, well, let me tell you: there's really only one "normal" song here that fits our standard preconceptions of jazz: that's the opening "Bessie's Blues." A superb song, too. You can even dance to it! "Dear Lord" was presumably intended as a prayer through music, and it comes out even sounding like it. It comes out FEELING like it, too! Those high notes soaring up to the sky, man, it gets me every time. Even when the piano and string bass take over, it's still terribly moving. Priceless jazz? Why, yes! "Big Nick" features Coltrane taking a pretty melody and twisting it about for his own purposes to the point where you lose the whole feeling of that pretty melody. It's not as bad as it sounds...it's very impressive! Grandiose piano playing, too. I'll mention more about Coltrane's backup band in future reviews(I've kind of given them the shaft here). "Alabama" is a beautiful funeral ode, so melancholy it sounds as if Coltrane's sax will break into tears at any moment. Then there is "A Love Supreme." The album is one of the best in jazz, and this song doesn't disappoint. It sounds like a jazz classic the minute you hear that bass intro. Still, all this acknowledged, it doesn't satisfy me as much as a couple of the earlier songs on this album. As for the next side, strangely, it doesn't hold my attention as well as the first. "Naima", which I've heard described as a "sigh", seems pretty blase to me. No doubt that "Mile's Mode", "Crescent", and "After the Rain" are good songs also, they just don't grab me. Maybe I just get so burned out after listening to Coltrane on the first side that I fail to appreciate the second. I have only just recently begun to collect the original Coltrane LPs(and thus for the first time I have an idea of the intended running order of the songs). It's true that some pieces of music simply translate a lot better taken in their original context rather than fitted into a radio or compilation format. I'll be writing many more Coltrane reviews in the future, and I'm sure my ideas concerning the man and his music will continue to evolve and change.

All in all, I recommend this collection. I think they ought to have put "My Favorite Things" and a couple other songs, possibly instead of a couple tunes that made it in instead. Considering how many people can't stand Coltrane one bit, I advise a compilation(either this one or one of the many others) as a good way to discover if JC is for you or not. The work featured here is at the very least representative of Coltrane's musical legacy, even if it may not feature his "best."

8 stars(out of 10)

My Favorite Things by John Coltrane(1961)

I'm still working my way through the huge John Coltrane discography, but this is my favorite LP of his that I've listened to so far. I don't doubt that I won't find another album of his that I will like better, but this is a pretty great album regardless. It would be perfect, in fact, if it wasn't for one song that doesn't know when it should stop. Here's the track listing, it's rather short:

1. Summertime

2. But Not For Me

3. My Favorite Things

4. Everytime We Say Goodbye

This album is often described as Coltrane as his most accessible, perhaps because of the inclusion of a Rodgers/Hammerstein cover(actually, all four of the songs are renditions of pop songs.) This cover just happens to be one of jazz's finest moments, but don't worry about it: just enjoy. Certainly, tracks #2, 3, and 4 are beautiful, straight jazz songs that anyone who likes music will enjoy. Only the opening song, "Summertime", is a little suspect. It starts out fine, but ends up jamming a little too long for my tastes(Drum solos have never been a favorite of mine, alas. There's also a piano and bass solo.) I can still enjoy this one track, but only in the proper mood. I guess it's aiming for a raga type feel(Coltrane had become very interested in South Indian music by this time). Say what you will about the Beatles and Kinks incorporating Indian music into Western pop songs; John Coltrane took the concept further(and earlier) by imitating Indian music both modally and stylistically with normal Western musical instruments, rather than just simply tossing in a sitar and tabla drum in a song here and there(it's much harder to make "Indian-influenced" music with a saxophone and string bass than it is on a sitar, an Indian musical instrument, of course.) But with this bit of jazz raga out of the way, I wonder if Coltrane wanted to show everyone on the rest of this album just how well he could also play his instrument without being contrary to the earlier spirit of jazz. There's absolutely nothing "abnormal" about "But Not For Me", for example(it's a Cole Porter song, for goodness sakes!). It's just a beautiful song that bears witness to Coltrane's blowing talent. John Coltrane the mad noiseman on the tenor saxophone? Hardly! McCoy Turner also contributes a sublime piano solo to this song. Then there's "My Favorite Things." The work by Coltrane on the horn here is absolutely STUNNING. Few have ever played the instrument so directly, yet so sensitively, and in the same song no less! It's a milestone in the history of jazz, and perhaps the highpoint of Coltrane's career(and this in a career which included working on Kind of Blue!). The other man who impresses in this song is again McCoy Turner on the piano. He and Coltrane definitely seem to have made a connection during the recording of this album. It's wonderful to hear two musicians working together who share a mutual musical vision and purpose. Powerful. "Evertyime We Say Goodbye" is the only ballad here; it's lovely and strong, like most Coltrane ballads. It's a glorious way to end this great album.

8 stars(out of 10)

The Blue Ridge Rangers by John Fogerty(1973)

Following the breakup of Creedence Clearwater Revival, former leader John Fogerty recorded this collection of country and gospel covers. When the original album was released, Fogerty's name was nowhere to be found(it was instead credited to the "Blue Ridge Rangers"). Due to this intentional lack of name visibility and Fantasy Records' failure to market the product, the album was a bomb. Still - it's in print to this day and is deservedly a critical and hardcore fan favorite. It also inspired what I take as an apology from Rolling Stone for their disgraceful review of Creedence's final studio album, Mardi Gras. The widely distributed excerpt: "...may be the most successful one-man rock album yet....devoted to reinterpretations of personal favorites; mainly country, some spirituals and early rock....not only a talented artist, but an exceptionally mature one." Good review. But not good enough to make me forgive them for that legendary Mardi Gras "worst record by a major rock band" review. As far as I'm concerned, that is the beginning of the end for mainstream rock magazines. Consistently the best of the best of all that followed would remain unnoticed by zealous critics. Instead, these critics went hogwild over albums you'd expect them to go hogwild over, and they hated albums you'd expect them to hate. What the heck good is a review if you know what the critic is gonna say before the say it? Just so you don't experience that same difficulty with me, I'll say floop right now. Doop. Yiggedy yiggedy! Scarlett O'Hara is down by the river with forty four large protozoan alien lifeforms. Dig the track listing:

1. Blue Ridge Mountain Blues

2. Somewhere Listening (For My Name)

3. You're The Reason

4. Jambalaya(On The Bayou)

5. She Thinks I Still Care

6. California Blues(Blue Yodel #4)

7. Workin' On A Building

8. Please Help Me, I'm Falling

9. Have Thine Own Way, Lord

10. I Ain't Never

11. Hearts of Stone

12. Today I Started Loving You Again

It took me a long time to recognize that this is a great record in its own way. I'm from Mississippi, gosh darn it. I've heard mediocre mainstream country music all my life. Whenever you're forced to listen to something you don't want to, you inherit a bias against the music in question. So I have a bias against pure country music - definitely. But it's also a bias that's wrong. There's tons of great country music, especially traditional country-folk. And, hey, let's face it, the "classic country" era of the 1950s-1960s isn't too shabby either. Maybe this record served its purpose: made a close minded rocker realize that he was ignoring a wonderful musical genre because of some modern day nitwits. It's like ignoring all rock cuz of Bush.

However, when you get right down to it, John really does these songs proud. He isn't making "definitive" cover versions of songs, because he's not trying to. He's just competently playing songs he loves. So, no, we don't have a masterwork of an album. Just a really good album showcasing John Fogerty's great taste. All the tunes are pretty great when you get down to it, from the traditional banjo and kick assin' fiddle led "Blue Ridge Mountain Blues" to the brilliant "California Blues(Blue Yodel #4)" by Jimmie Rodgers to the traditional gospel of "Workin' on A Building." "Workin" deserves its own sentence, and this ain't the sentence. The sentence next to this one is the sentence! "Workin' on A Building" is a really chronically underarranged song featuring John's minimalistic guitar playin' and lots of voice overdubs. The spirit of the song just shines through though, and we end up with a brilliant song. The fact that I enjoy all these songs so much makes me want to almost give it a '10', but then I remember the last record I reviewed was Sgt Pepper and I gave that one a 6. Besides, "Today I Started Loving You Again" is kind of dopey. But definitely buy this one if you see it. There are a few possible other complaints I could make(for instance, on some songs John's voice seems to be sufferin') but they're not really very important. The Blue Ridge Rangers is a terrifically underbearing record, which is why I prolly like it so darned much. Well, sue me. I've got my tastes. And my taste tells me that this album should be the first country album you ever pay money for, and if you're metalhead, for instance, quite possibly the only country album you need to own.

9 stars(out of 10)

House of the Blues by John Lee Hooker(1959)

Aw, I love John Lee Hooker. He's like the cool grandfather I never had(both my real grandfathers, alas, died 'fore I got a chance to know 'em.) He's such a cool guy...such a cool guitarist. I grant you that he might not be for everybody; after all, some people might find the addition of such generic tracks as "Love Blues" onto this album quite offensive, but not me. I get all these blues albums awful cheap, what's here is certainly worth my money. Sure, I may have heard a couple of these songs performed by John Lee with different lyrics a couple times before...but I like these songs! How many songs have been written with a Bo Diddley beat, after all? That's a pretty limited "beat", but it still produced some great songs...ever heard "Willie and the Hand Jive"?(Not Clapton's version). Forget it all, here's the track listing:

1. Walkin' the Boogie

2. Love Blues

3. Union Station Blues

4. It's My Own Fault

5. Leave My Wife Alone

6. Ramblin' By Myself

7. Sugar Mama

8. Down At the Landing

9. Louise

10. Ground Hog Blues

11. High Priced Woman

12. Woman and Money

I love it when John Lee goes out and surprises me. When he stretches out. The blues sound great stretched out, you know...the trouble with all these white rock guys is that they stretch it all out too far so it don't sound like the blues anymore. John's stretching out here on "Walkin' the Boogie"...great track! Really neat guitar lines(some dubbed double speed), and strangely studio affected vocals...the King of the Boogie's singing bout how he got started boogie woogie'n. "It's My Own Fault" is an odd song here, too; John's being backed up by some nice blues piano. It feels a bit like a period bar-room piece. I'm not sure if that was the intention or not, though. Maybe they just didn't have any money left to spend on production! Then there's "Leave My Wife Alone." Boy, is there EVER! It's one of my favorite songs by the man of all time...how do I describe it? It boogies on at hyperspeed for some time, then our man turns into some sort of genius or somethin' at the end with some super, god-like riffs. You need to hear this darn song! It's incredible! I could just listen to Mr. Hooker play his six string all day. He ain't playing anything that's too complex, but it just sounds so good. Isn't that what music's all about, huh? There's some tough vocals goin' on in this song, too...you can't sound like a pansy when you're telling some bastard to leave your wife alone, now can ya? The final song of side A, "Ramblin' By Myself", is a good 'un, too. I love that slithery top string(E and A) playing.

Side B is fine, too, but there's nothing too Earth-shattering going on. No proper followup to "Leave My Wife Alone" or "Hey Boogie", you know? I don't really think I can make you understand with words why I like a song like "Sugar Mama" or "Louise" so much. People talk about how great an articulator Billie Holliday was as a singer. Well, that's just what John Lee Hooker does so fine when he's vocalizing...it's all in that articulation. It ain't easy to make words sound so nice. You say "Sugar mama...sugar mama" without sounding like an idiot. I'd like to hear you try. "Ground Hog Blues" may be the best song on this side. It's quiet, threatening, understated. I have no idea what on Mars John's singing about, but this only completes the effect, I say.

All in all, this is a very consistent LP of tunage put together by Chess back in '59 of songs John recorded between 1951-1954. It's surely worth buying just for "Leave My Wife Alone." But you know...it's not as if I'm not going to recommend a John Lee Hooker LP from the 50s, is it? There's not a lot of music I can honestly say that fits my ideal of what music should be all about. The John Lee Hooker sound is perfect; it's the total package for me, music and vocals. Thus, I recognize that I probably will always go easier on John, and CCR too, than I will on most other bands/musicians, even on their admitted worser material. As for my review above, I don't know if you can notice, but I was toying with my writing style a bit. Somehow, I'm just not ready for that high-falootin Jack Kerouac inspired jazz description stuff yet. But maybe someday. Of course, maybe not, too!

8 stars(out of 10)

Plays and Sings the Blues by John Lee Hooker(1961)

You might argue that the blues is a greater form of music than its beloved offspring, rock, and all of rock's derivative forms. The greatest bluesmen proved to be far, far more consistent than the greatest aging rockers have been so far. Listen to B.B. King's new album Blues on the Bayou, then listen to the Stones Bridges to Babylon. Then ponder that B.B. King is about twenty years older than Mick, Keith, Charlie, and Ron. B.B.'s still putting out tight material after all these years, while the Stones have long since degenerated into a money making machine. Aside from the shameful "with friends" albums that have been cropping up far too often(when I want to hear John Lee Hooker & B.B. King I don't want to hear weaker musicians like Bonnie Raitt!), you really can't go wrong with a blues album by one of the greats. Okay, time for this intro paragraph to end, let's jump to the track listing:

1. The Journey

2. I Don't Want Your Money

3. Hey, Baby

4. Mad Man Blues

5. Bluebird

6. Worried Life Blues

7. Apologize

8. Lonely Boy Boogie

9. Please Don't Go

10. Dreamin' Blues

11. Hey Boogie

12. Just Me and My Telephone

This album was put together by Chess in 1961 with tracks John had laid down for the label in the early 50s. In addition, "Mad Man Blues" and "Hey Boogie", tracks John had recorded under the Gone label, were purchased by Chess and put on the album. Kind of interesting, but those two Gone-era songs are the strongest of the LP; they show more willingness to experiment than John shows in some of the other tracks on this album. But even conservative Hooker is pretty good. For those not in the know, John Lee Hooker is one of the slinkiest, sneakiest guitar players in the universe. Does anyone do so much with so little? AC/DC doesn't. Punk rockers don't. I don't know if John uses more than ten different chords on this album, but you wouldn't know it; he does so many things with the chords he does use. That's the mark of a great player(speed and note cramming do not necessarily make great music; don't listen to everything Clapton and bebop fans tell you). John Lee Hooker has a much smoother, more R&Bish voice than a lot of other bluesmen. It's not a voice I'd rank with the likes of Muddy Waters, but it does allow Boom Boom to experiment with a lot of singing styles. You know, blues wailing, sensitive balladeering, funky rhythm & bluesing. Did I just write myself in a circle? Oops. Time for a clever tactical maneuver...

My favorite songs on this album: "The Journey"(a great opening track), "Mad Man Blues", "Worried Life Blues"(John opens it up wailin, "Oh Lawdy Lawwwd". That's some dang good blooze singing!), "Lonely Boy Boogie"(great bass string solo), "Please Don't Go"(a sensitive version of a blues classic. Remarkable in its own right, though Muddy Waters' version still remains the definitive one.), "Hey Boogie"(an absolutely INCREDIBLE early noise classic! When I first heard it I thought it was the worst song on the album. Now I believe it to be the best. How does he make his guitar sound like a bass pipe organ? John Lee Hooker rules!), and "Just Me and My Telephone"(a relaxed shuffle with funny lyrics).

It's a beautiful piece of work. Flawed? Heck yeah; it's not what we would consider an "album" at all, but continuity loss is something one has to accept along with the territory of reviewing pre-mid 1960s material. But it's still beautiful. John Lee Hooker and Mr. Guitar, with John Lee Hooker keeping up the beat with his feet. Eddie Kirkland plays bass on one track, but you can hardly hear him, anyway. Other than that, it's all John Lee. Buy it and cherish it.

8 stars(out of 10)