Sweep
Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: Sep. 2011 |
|
Posted: Oct. 03 2011, 06:11 |
|
It's interesting for me to read this topic, having been out of the loop as far as Mike's fans are concerned, and therefore not knowing what anyone else was saying.
When I first played Music of the Spheres I exclaimed - probably out loud - "It's Tubular Bells. It's bloody Tubular Bells. Again." But after a few moments reflection on what I was hearing: "It's bloody good, though. Possibly the best yet."
I like this album very much. A couple of things strike me:
1) Maybe the use of characteristic Tubular Bells ideas is more of a problem for fans like the people here than it is for most people. I wonder how many people here have every version of Tubular Bells Mike has recorded? Maybe not everyone here, but I'd expect the proportion is far higher here than it is generally among people who buy MOTS. The likelihood of feeling a bit jaded with parts of Tubular Bells will therefore be higher here than it is generally, even when the obvious love for Mike's music is taken into account.
Personally, I only have the original Tubular Bells, and none of the later reworkings, so there's less of an issue for me than for many people here.
2) These themes and variations are clearly characteristic of Mike Oldfield. They're evidently part of him. They're what comes out when he composes, much of the time, and he evidently hasn't come to the end of how they can express things. The `spiralling' idea that comes up in MOTS seems to characterise this. I think Mike spirals around certain themes, experiencing them in new ways and bringing new music from them as his experience changes.
This is a characteristic of his style in individual pieces, with blocks of music being varied on different instruments. Why not do the same on the vast scale of his work as a whole?
These themes are Mike Oldfield, to my mind. It isn't that he simply recycles ideas. His music is organic, and grows from the depths of him, and that's what makes his music so authentic and gives it it's value. That being the case there's going to be some repetition, maybe even a lot of repetition, though in new ways, as things that are really deep come up in new ways.
Personally I'd much rather have some repetition, with variations, because the music is coming from really deep, than have totally new music every time because the musician decides to keep being different. I don't think it's entirely about deciding, when you go deep enough into your soul.
I was also very pleased when Mike announced he'd chosen Hayley Westenra to sing in this work. At the time I was beginning to wonder if I was the only person who regarded Hayley as an excellent singer wasted by being pushed into an overly narrow range of material by her record company. I was very pleased to find Mike had also recognised her potential. There are other things she could do in the context of music like Mike's, and I'd like to hear the two of them work together again. A lot could be done with the beauty of her voice if Mike would slowly explore that in context with different sound textures. Actually I did a massive (thirty five minutes or so) reworking of one of Hayley's songs, building up floating layers of orchestral and vocal sound, so I'm sure of what could be done when I say this.
-------------- Website@: http://www.musicbysweep.com Twitter: sweep1
Bradnor Hill (in memory of David Bedford): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKeATjaMCgA
|