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

Pages: (7) < 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... > [ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Holger Group: Members Posts: 1506 Joined: Feb. 2003 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 04:08 Quote (jeremyroberts @ Oct. 18 2005, 21:59) I know that some tracks will NEVER EVER grow on me ("the gate", because I find it very embarassing to listen to, and absolutely ridiculous). We'll talk about that again in five or ten years' time. Back to top

Holger Group: Members Posts: 1506 Joined: Feb. 2003 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 04:13 Quote (MikeAholic @ Oct. 18 2005, 12:40) Quote (Cinos @ Oct. 18 2005, 10:29) Well, not Mike not the Chem Bros make techno. The style we see on Shade is Trance and the Chems mostly make Big Beat. Sorry, just felt like nitpicking. It amases me every day when I read the topics in this forum, that everybody must put this music into some sort of musical corner. I really don't mind wheter it is techno, or trance or whatever. Either I like the tune (and the production), or I don't. That is really all that mathers to me. Basing your decision to like it on a style is wrong, in my humble opinion. Thing is, people keep claiming "Mike is doing Techno these days" and it's simply not the case. He was right in saying Romance is his first "actual" Techno track. His other tracks that are in an electronic dance music vein are mostly Trance-inspired. Claiming Techno and Trance are the same is as ignorant as claiming Rock and Jazz are the same. Despite some obvious similarities, they are different genres with a different history. It just goes to show that many "fans" don't even know what they are talking about when they dismiss Mike's music for being "Techno". Back to top

Trinidad Group: Members Posts: 295 Joined: Mar. 2005 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 04:50 Well, it's true that there's a lot music that you like after some listenings. It has happened to me with Mike with many albums, specially TB, HR, Ommadawn (with a superb 3rd listening), Amarok, etc., but they were albums that, although I didn't like them at first, really attracted my attention, they had something different and notable in them. But I cannot find that in the new album. So far, I can just hear simple melodies, simple instrumentation, many superficial (and yes, banal) adorments, and the sensation of having heard almost all the music before. Maybe I'll not dislike it after some listenings, but... will I like it or will I get used to it? Of course this is very different for others. But I think that I would feel the same sensation if I liked it: I'm sure he can do something much more ellaborated with the same ideas, and probably I would dislike it as well. There are other albums from him that I think are better than L&S and I dislike much more, and others worse that I like. But at least I would have the sensation that he's going in a direction I like, just the opposite as now. But, as I've said, other people have different feelings, and I absolutly respect that (I think it's stupid to rant and rave about other people's tastes), and I want the same respect. Back to top

Trinidad Group: Members Posts: 295 Joined: Mar. 2005 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 04:59 Quote (Holger @ Oct. 19 2005, 10:13) It just goes to show that many "fans" don't even know what they are talking about when they dismiss Mike's music for being "Techno". Yeah, sure it's silly to dismiss his music just for being of a named style, whether it is true or not, but I suposse that most of us just dislike it for being of a style we don't like much, whether it has this or that name. Back to top

Alan D Group: Members Posts: 3670 Joined: Aug. 2004 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 08:41 Quote (Holger @ Oct. 19 2005, 09:13) It just goes to show that many "fans" don't even know what they are talking about when they dismiss Mike's music for being "Techno". I agree with Trinidad. I don't care what the label is. When I'm being beaten painfully over the head, I'm not really bothered whether it's being done by a hammer or a mallet. Back to top

Miguel Group: Members Posts: 35 Joined: Oct. 2005 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 16:03 Quote (Tati The Sentinel @ Oct. 18 2005, 22:28) I'd say that Mike's music needs some time to grow on ya... ... some albums I do love,like Amarok, took me lots of spins on my CD player before my final veredict. Give it a try later on in your life, you'll be not the same person you are today. Take off from ya all the pre-concepts and prejudice regarding L + S and try it on again. Ok, sure i will give it a try. In fact its what i'm doing now, listening to the album again a few more times. And i'm still thinking that he could do better than this...Much better! It's not REALLY a new album with new songs... And i must say that i have all MO albuns (yes i bougth them all) and the things i didn't like at first, no i dislike them more!! For example, for me Amarok,TB, Hergest Ridge or Ommadawn were love at the first sight... Back to top

Miguel Group: Members Posts: 35 Joined: Oct. 2005 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 16:42 Quote (Trinidad @ Oct. 19 2005, 04:50) Well, it's true that there's a lot music that you like after some listenings. It has happened to me with Mike with many albums, specially TB, HR, Ommadawn (with a superb 3rd listening), Amarok, etc., but they were albums that, although I didn't like them at first, really attracted my attention, they had something different and notable in them. But I cannot find that in the new album. So far, I can just hear simple melodies, simple instrumentation, many superficial (and yes, banal) adorments, and the sensation of having heard almost all the music before. Maybe I'll not dislike it after some listenings, but... will I like it or will I get used to it? Of course this is very different for others. But I think that I would feel the same sensation if I liked it: I'm sure he can do something much more ellaborated with the same ideas, and probably I would dislike it as well. There are other albums from him that I think are better than L&S and I dislike much more, and others worse that I like. But at least I would have the sensation that he's going in a direction I like, just the opposite as now. But, as I've said, other people have different feelings, and I absolutly respect that (I think it's stupid to rant and rave about other people's tastes), and I want the same respect. Trinidad, you're a wise man! I totally agree with you.... Back to top

jeremyroberts Group: Members Posts: 139 Joined: June 2005 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 18:42 Quote (Holger @ Oct. 19 2005, 04:08) Quote (jeremyroberts @ Oct. 18 2005, 21:59) I know that some tracks will NEVER EVER grow on me ("the gate", because I find it very embarassing to listen to, and absolutely ridiculous). We'll talk about that again in five or ten years' time. You mean, when it will sound more dated still?   Maybe in 5 years Light+Shade will be considered as the album which started the war between the Human and the Machine.   Anyway I promise you that the Gate won't grow on me. Perhaps some other tracks will. But not that one, I'm sorry. Back to top

jeremyroberts Group: Members Posts: 139 Joined: June 2005 Posted: Oct. 19 2005, 18:45 Quote (Trinidad @ Oct. 19 2005, 04:59) Quote (Holger @ Oct. 19 2005, 10:13) It just goes to show that many "fans" don't even know what they are talking about when they dismiss Mike's music for being "Techno". Yeah, sure it's silly to dismiss his music just for being of a named style, whether it is true or not, but I suposse that most of us just dislike it for being of a style we don't like much, whether it has this or that name. People who say they dislike a track because it's techno are wrong. They dislike the track because they don't like the sound of the track itself, not because it's techno. They just misunderstand their own disliking.   Back to top

Holger Group: Members Posts: 1506 Joined: Feb. 2003 Posted: Oct. 20 2005, 16:23 True. Back to top

Wanderer Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: Aug. 2002 Posted: Oct. 20 2005, 19:59 Quote (Miguel @ Oct. 16 2005, 23:23) I believe that real MO fans should be very unhappy and disapointed these days. Well, i am.......... This is why the criticism of Mike's current music irritates me so... it's comments like this. People who don't like his current music are entitled to their opinion, it's the way they assume some sort of intellectual superiority that irritates me. I have not had the opportunity to listen to "Light + Shade" in full. But I'm a 23 year old fan who was first converted by hearing Oldfield's "Songs Of Distant Earth", I've since gone out and collected all his albums from the good ("Amarok", "Incantations", "Tubular Bells II") to the bad ("Heaven's Open") to the indifferent ("Discovery", "The Millennium Bell"). I wouldn't call "Tres Lunas" or what little I've heard of "Light + Shade" to be masterpieces, but I found them to be quite enjoyable easy listening - which is what they were designed to be in the first place. I'm not adverse to electronic music either, I have albums by Vangelis, Jean Michel Jarre, Robert Miles and Deep Forest in my collection... I don't subscribe to that snobbish notion that music is automatically bad just cause it's played on a synthesizer, and I'm not disappointed that Mike isn't "rocking out" more. I know I'll take "Tres Lunas" over most of his lyrically inept 80s pop-song albums at any rate. So, that makes me less of a fan than you? Huh? Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: Oct. 20 2005, 20:12 Wanderer, if you'd read Miguel's second post, you'll see that he has apologised for that comment. I also agree with Trinidad, Alan and Jeremy, in that I don't need to know whether the electronic tracks on Shade are trance, techno or whatever. I just know that I don't like them. -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

Wanderer Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: Aug. 2002 Posted: Oct. 20 2005, 20:56 Quote (raven4x4x @ Oct. 20 2005, 20:12) Wanderer, if you'd read Miguel's second post, you'll see that he has apologised for that comment. Sorry guys...    I didn't bother to read through the whole thread, I just saw that comment and got defensive, posting on the spur of the moment. So yeah, I apologise for that. Back to top

Miguel Group: Members Posts: 35 Joined: Oct. 2005 Posted: Oct. 21 2005, 00:19 Quote (raven4x4x @ Oct. 20 2005, 20:12) Wanderer, if you'd read Miguel's second post, you'll see that he has apologised for that comment. I also agree with Trinidad, Alan and Jeremy, in that I don't need to know whether the electronic tracks on Shade are trance, techno or whatever. I just know that I don't like them. Thanks for help rave4x4x! Back to top

Miguel Group: Members Posts: 35 Joined: Oct. 2005 Posted: Oct. 21 2005, 00:25 Quote (Wanderer @ Oct. 20 2005, 20:56) Sorry guys...    I didn't bother to read through the whole thread, I just saw that comment and got defensive, posting on the spur of the moment. So yeah, I apologise for that. That's ok wanderer! I was also acting in the heat of the moment. I just realised what i've said after i had posted the mensage.... Back to top

Miguel Group: Members Posts: 35 Joined: Oct. 2005 Posted: Oct. 21 2005, 01:18 It´s being curious to see that there are very different kinds of MO fans. I gess that people who started into Mike's music listening to his earlier records (like me) are dismissing the new ones. Not the whole albuns, but specially the tracks with electronic beats (whatever you wanna call it- it's not the point! ). And in the other hand, there are a new generation of fans that started to listen to his work after The Songs of Distant Earth or TBIII and that means a lot of differences between them (us). Both of us are legitimate MO fans of course but it feels sad for people like me (i gess) to see his music taking this direction... So people, please understand that older fans of MO are the ones who have passed through all his musical changes. Things are not what they used to be anymore so most of the older fans are disapointed, i believe. And that is only my opinion, of course. Please don't get me wrong. This is still a friendly post!   Back to top

Alan D Group: Members Posts: 3670 Joined: Aug. 2004 Posted: Oct. 21 2005, 04:53 I certainly qualify as an old MO fan, and I'm passionate about his music, but the degree to which I enjoy it has always varied. After the early masterpieces, hardly any of the 80s pop songs ever made any impact on me. Mostly I disliked them. Platinum, Discovery, QE2, 5 Miles Out, Crises - there are things on those albums that I enjoy very much, but they also contain a great deal of music that means little to me. I thought Wind Chimes was a masterpiece, but Amarok was and remains a huge disappointment. Yet TB2, TSODE, and Tr3s Lunas are albums that I simply couldn't live without. So right through the years there have been ups and downs, and I'm used to that with Mike. So the fact that I'm lukewarm about L&S (with a few exceptions) isn't surprising. It's normal. What troubles me is the nature of my misgivings about the album. When I listen to most of the tracks, I have a sense of something clinical; sterile; mechanistic; a kind of empty precision. I find the trance/dance tracks almost intolerable in this respect. Even though there are tracks where Mike's fluid and eloquent guitar playing allows me almost to ignore this (Tears of an Angel etc), still the feeling of clinical sterility is there. I thought I might get used to it and see past it (as I quickly did with TSODE, which also initially seemed too 'electronic' ) but it doesn't seem to be happening with L&S no matter how much I listen to it. I've made a CD which retains the (few) tracks I like and discards the rest, which is a partial solution. But even so, I'm left with the feeling that this is an empty, lonely album. Mike talks about sculpting sound, and I love that image. But this album doesn't seem sculpted to me. To be sculpted implies seeing the life in a block of audio stone and then carving the medium to release the life within it. L&S seems not at all like that. It seems more as if it's been built up with a set of surgical instruments, combining synthetic materials in the hope that at some stage a spark of life will somehow ignite the whole. That's a very different approach, and a very different end result, and for me it isn't working very well, really. Back to top

Wanderer Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: Aug. 2002 Posted: Oct. 21 2005, 22:33 Well, I've finally had a chance to listen to "Light + Shade"... Now, normally I hate techno, and normally I hate trance/chill-out music too... but for some reason I can't explain, I like "Light + Shade". Something that has been said a lot on this forum is that Mike's music has lost it's "humanity" the more he has turned to using electronic instruments in his music, that with his latest albums, Mike has been more concerned with technique than in communicating emotion through his music. I guess that is where my opinion differs from the norm. I feel that "Light + Shade" lacks the cold and clinical presicion I find in a lot of techno/trance music... this music touches upon my emotions in a way most works in this genre fail to do. And I can't pinpoint why exactly this is. Maybe it has something to do with Mike's guitar playing, I dunno. I'm not doing a very good job of articulating my feelings towards this album, and I've listend to it three times already... but I really, really like it. To my mind, this is the best thing Mike's done since "Tubular Bells III", and the comments of fans lead me to believe this would be a disaster on the same level as "Heaven's Open". I was  really surprised. Back to top

arron11196 Group: Members Posts: 826 Joined: April 2005 Posted: Oct. 22 2005, 03:17 Quote (Alan D @ Oct. 21 2005, 04:53) I thought I might get used to it and see past it (as I quickly did with TSODE, which also initially seemed too 'electronic' ) but it doesn't seem to be happening with L&S no matter... So Alan, how do you deal with it? Because at the moment, I'm musically seriously stuck between a rock and a hardplace. I used to percieve mike as an asbolute genius, to have created some of the truly beautiful music that I have of his, but now I'm just wondering whether he was lucky. So we've been noticing this 'electronic' shift as of late in his albums - that first began properly for me in TBIII - (not that I don't love every minute of TBIII, even though I hated it at first, because really, it works with the spirit of the music) and thats not necessarily the problem - but this 'adventure' into 'trance' (I'd still like to call it techno but I've been corrected) Is something that is seriously making me doubt his genius. So that's the sad thing about it, one album has completely shifted my opinion of him... and it hasn't settled yet. What's worse is that I find myself not enjoying other Oldfield quite as much for some reason. Oh dear. It has been said elsewhere that the recent output of Mike has been nothing but sentimental guitar work with a bit of beat to it. The horrible notion of that is, that I can almost see where that's coming from...   -------------- 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

kuraaka Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: May 2005 Posted: Oct. 22 2005, 03:19 Well here's just one more reply in this thread. My friends are usually quite friendly towards Oldfield and quite like some of his records, their choice tending to be the older ones, either 70s or 80s, up to Songs of Distant Earth. They regard him as a sort of grandfather of proto-post-rock . Well I just happened to play to one of my friends a track off the Light and Shade and he said, 'Why does it have to sound like some cheap Casio synth?' And that basically nails it. It's largely OK but why, oh why does it have to sound like cheap Casio pre-set backgrounds and arrangements? Back to top

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ] Pages: (7) < 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... >

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


Mike Oldfield Tubular.net