Tubular.net :: Mike Oldfield Forums Discussion, news, reviews, fan music, and more.
	Search :: Members :: Help :: Guidelines

Pages: (3) < 1 2 [3] > [ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

arron11196 Group: Members Posts: 826 Joined: April 2005 Posted: Mar. 29 2008, 04:49 to Alan D and Dirk Star, I personally feel it may just be the case of Mike having come "full circle" now, and there isn't really much he can produce that will really surprise you. You have heard the way - the methods and the dynamics he normally chooses to compose with - and when this translates to MOTS, perhaps its not really too far from what we expected (or may have expected). The fact that MOTS doesn't challenge you may be down to that, Alan D. I know that when I had just a few Oldfield albums, about 8 I think, I sat down with Platinum... and I was completely unprepared for it! Just like with every other album I'd heard before though. By the time I got to 16 albums, and I heard Tr3s Lunas, it was surprising, slightly... but I got the hang of it very quickly. I just think it may be the case that we've heard enough Oldfield to immediately recognise where he's coming from - and I'd also say that Mike's technique is very transparent, and very emotive - unlike some classical pieces which I have heard which may challenge the average person to formulate an impression of feeling over a number of listens. Having said that, many people experience different emotions from different tracks here, but I suspect that because Oldfields' music is usually so emotive, those seperate ideas (a function of the individuals interpretation) are more easily arrived at than perhaps a lot of classical works. -------------- Arron J Eagling Everyone's interpretation is different, and everyone has a right to that opinion. There is no "right" one, I am adding this post to communicate my thoughts to share them with like-minded souls who will be able to comment in good nature. (insert the last 5 mins of Crises here) Back to top

Dirk Star Group: Members Posts: 1331 Joined: Sep. 2007 Posted: Mar. 29 2008, 09:46 Well I agree with you there arron and that`s really a more rounded version of what I was trying to drive at myself.I don`t want to sound too dismissive of the album though because I do really like it no question.I was just looking for different avenues for myself to maybe find the reasons as to why it was`nt having that big major impact on me as some of Mike`s previous albums have.And to a certain extent still do. I think a big part of it for me may just be the whole orchestral thing anyway which of course there`s no getting away from here.Some of the transistoinal sections of music on MOTS for instance just come accross as a little bit run of the mill to me if I`m being honest.I feel like I`m just going through the motions at times waiting for the next track to come in.I can`t help thinking to myself if Mike had been playing this music himself some of those sections would have been completely different things entirely.I dare say some of them might not have even been there at all.You know when I think of some of Mike`s musical joinery work on Amarok it can come accross a little bit clunking and out of place when you first hear it.But then after a number of listens a lot of those passages kind of take on a life in their own right almost.Sometimes when I think about Amarok I immediately think about that little transistional sequence just before the flamenco section.It`s just such a fantasticlly left field piece of music that only Mike himself could come up with to me. That said the way Mike weaves all those themes together during Harmonia Mundi is absolute perfection to my ears.And Silhoutte is another fine example as well I feel.But then there are other passages of music where I was half expecting it to go into Land Of Hope And Glory sometimes.But then that`s probablly just me and my own naievity concerning a lot of classical music. Despite all of that I`m really pleased Mike has made an orchestral album because it`s something he`s never tried before.And on the whole I do think it works very well as a fully realised work.It`s just for someone like me I can maybe see myself going back to some of Mike`s previous albums a little quicker than I`ve sometimes done before. Back to top

Marky Group: Members Posts: 390 Joined: Sep. 2005 Posted: Mar. 30 2008, 10:04 What an excellent thread this has turned out to be. Full of interesting and well argued/expressed thoughts! Back to top

Inkanta Group: Admins Posts: 1453 Joined: Feb. 2000 Posted: Mar. 30 2008, 12:43 Indeed, Marky, folks have expressed such well-reasoned, insightful thoughts and opinions! Thanks for starting the thread!   I found MotS immediately recognizable, accessible, and calming--not in a sleepy, dozy-type way, but in being able to instantly like it. I am still discovering things about the music, and it has been fun looking for the "twiddly bits" that reflect Tubular Bells I & II, Incantations, "Our Father," and parts of TKF. I instantly liked Incantations, as well, so I'm not too concerned about the "love at first listen" aspect. I had to really work at Amarok and even FMO. I also immediately liked TB3, but don't listen to it very often. I still listen to Incantations more than anything else of Mike's, so we'll see if there are any implications for my having liked  MotS so readily. Possibly not, though it may get connected with this period of my life (moving back east, great new job, but relationship dissolution, etc.) so when all the dust settles, whether I listen to it a year from now may depend on whether from a distance I perceive this period as painful or happily transitional. When I dled MotS initially, I was missing "Animus." I thought there had been something different about the concert, haha (the concert was the first time that I heard the work, though I'd previously dled the tracks). "Harbinger" made a lot more sense followed by "Animus" but I don't really like the transition between  "Animus" and "Silhouette" that much more than when I thought it was between H and S. One aspect that troubles me about MotS is the recording of Hayley's beautiful voice. It sounds a bit shrill and I hear loud gasps of breath no matter what equipment I use. At the concert, her breathing wasn't audible. I am reasonably sure that she, like all trained singers, learned proper breathing techniques. <smiles> Some of the Joanne Shenandoah and Evanescence pieces are a bit like that, too. It must be the way it was processed.  Maybe it's just me, but I remember my choir instructor leading us in breathing techniques. It's been discussed elsewhere that MotS should be performed by local orchestras. I totally agree; in fact, IMHO this work is so accessible that it has the ability to ignite the love of orchestral music in a youth culture that may be moving away from classical music (according to several members of various orchestras I know and local band teachers). Many school bands and orchestras have declining enrollment. Band directors may try to boost interest by including popular music adapted to orchestra--e.g., a friend sent me an MP3 of a California high school band performing Rush's 2112. MotS is different--it was specifically composed for orchestra and it is exciting. I hope that the score will be easily obtainable by orchestras should they want to perform. My next step this morning will be to email the links to the youtube concert bits to my neighbor, who manages the area symphony. -------------- "No such thing as destiny; only choices exist." From:  Moongarden's "Solaris." Back to top

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ] Pages: (3) < 1 2 [3] >

Forums | Links | Instruments | Discography | Tours | Articles | FAQ | Artwork | Wallpapers
Biography | Gallery | Videos | MIDI / Ringtones | Tabs | Lyrics | Books | Sitemap | Contact


Mike Oldfield Tubular.net