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 ]

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4761 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: May 29 2009, 08:59 is that both use orchestral forces. The most effective of Mike's music is that where his personal vision comes through in the least crowded way - that is, where there are comparatively few instruments playing at the same time. Think of the most effective passages in, for example, Amarok: you will seldom find huge numbers of instruments - huge numbers of "voices" - coming through at once. Mike's strength is in chamber music style forces: whether the instruments are electronic or traditional is irrelevant: what counts is their sparsity, the voice of the individual. His vision is swamped in Incantations and even more so in Music of the Spheres. That is why, to my ears, they sound as though they're not by MO at all. I'd love to hear a MO string quartet, but I'd hate to hear a MO symphony. Back to top

The Caveman Group: Members Posts: 2178 Joined: Jan. 2008 Posted: May 29 2009, 10:30 Ok but that's a very subjective thing to say.It depends on what you like.I love Incantations partly because there is so much going on at any one time.Same with a lot of the early stuff and to many that's what makes it so interesting.I agree that some of Oldfields best stuff is when it's very simple and direct but who's going to argue with the Bagpipe bit of TB that has masses of guitar overdubs to create one big sound,or the thunder storm part on HR pt2.Unless that's not the part of his career you personaly enjoy which we know is the case with yourself.  The original idea for TB was for it to be a quasi-symphonic peice played on 'rock' instruments in a more rock oriented setting so this is why so much is going on in the earlier work. The idea of a MO string quartet is interesting though although i'm intrigued to know  why you'd feel this was more 'Oldfield' his more orchestated large scale works.  Horses for courses. -------------- THE COMING OF THE GREAT WHITE HANDKERCHEIF IS NIGH. Back to top

Ugo Group: Members Posts: 5495 Joined: April 2000 Posted: May 29 2009, 17:20 The reason Mike went orchestral on Incantations is, I think, that he wanted to go "prog". Prog (meant as progressive rock, of course) was highly fashionable at that time... and highly successful too (just think of Genesis). So Mike must've thought that one of the key elements of prog was big orchestrations, and, lo and behold, big orchestrations appear in Incantations. What he didn't realize, IMHO, is that he'd already been prog enough with TB, by using lots and lots of conventional 'rock' instruments (I agree with Caveman, here) as a way to build richly 'orchestrated' textures - but without using any actual orchestras at all. On my own side, I like Mike's music when it gets crowded - the multiple layering of stuff was one of the things that actually built his reputation as a master studio craftsman with his first albums, and I'm glad that he never totally abandoned that feature of his music. Amarok has got some crowded parts as well, but they're very harmonic, organized crowds - like soldiers doing a parade, if you excuse me for the very prosaic metaphor. Ah, by the way: Amarok isn't prog at all. Amarok is an attempt to create a New Age, fairytale-like piece, which went totally, utterly and terribly bad. -------------- Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian Back to top

bee Group: Members Posts: 1227 Joined: Jan. 2004 Posted: May 29 2009, 17:52 I don't think of it as a 'problem'. I think the albums are what they are, and it is us with our knowledge of all that has gone before in Mike's musical output that causes us to wonder and suppose with 'what ifs'. He, presumably was happy with the end result or he wouldn't pursued the projects and put them out for people to hear. Listening to Music of the Spheres now, months after it's release, I feel it has it's own life and true expression. It is itself. It's not trying to be anything other than what it is. I love it and listen to it for different reasons to those that I listen to Incantations or Tubular Bells. It is the music of Mike Oldfield and I hear that very much, but there is a huge influence of Karl Jenkins there too in the orchestration, quite astounding at times. And that was why he was asked to take part. Still good though. I think I said when it very first came out, that it would be good to hear MOTS produced and constructed in a similar way to Tubular Bells, because you can hear Mike's ideas so clearly, so cleverly woven into each other. Maybe one day....but what a huge project! Think I kind of want to hear it though. With Incantations, this deserves so much more time than I am able to devote to it at the moment. It is rare for me to get 1 uninterruped hour to myself at home, so I am patiently waiting for the time to come, and it surely will come ..eventually..when I can sink into it's depths again.  I do remember as a teenager listening to it a lot and finding the way it totally involved me very addictive. Someone close to me at the time made a comment saying how repetitive the whole thing was, meaning it was a bit boring, but to me that just showed exactly how much they hadn't listened! I don't think I would describe it as orchestral as a whole, maybe in places, but it's still got that unique Oldfield sound. I still think one of the most original talents Mike has, his own personal way of doing things, of hearing what sounds right, is his ability to make one theme/ idea/ melody flow to the next. He does it with such expertise and apparent effortlessness that you feel it was always meant to be that way. He allows the sound to live. He is like an archtiect with vision, unafraid to try new ways of building sound and coming up with something breathtakingly beautiful and new, yet strangely familiar at the same time. Yes there are a few weird ideas sometimes, but nothing, to my mind, is not worth listening to. -------------- ....second to the right and straight on till morning.... You heard me before Yet you hear me again Then I die Till I call me again Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4761 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: May 29 2009, 19:52 Quote (The Caveman @ May 29 2009, 10:30) Ok but that's a very subjective thing to say. It's pretty much an axiom of music theory that the orchestra stands for society, and the solo instrument the individual. A piano concerto, for example, is a kind of dialogue between the individual and society. My point is that Mike's music usually comes across very much as an expression of his individual personality. So when he tries to write from an orchestral (=society, =other people) point of view the music sounds very un-MO. Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4761 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: May 29 2009, 19:56 Quote (bee @ May 29 2009, 17:52) Listening to Music of the Spheres now, months after it's release, I feel it has it's own life and true expression. It is itself. The trouble with this position, bee, is that if you adopt it you're forced to abandon music criticism (or any kind of criticism). For if everything is praised for simply being itself, how can anything not be itself and therefore criticized? Back to top

Harmono Group: Members Posts: 759 Joined: May 2005 Posted: May 29 2009, 21:36 Quote (nightspore @ May 30 2009, 01:52) Quote (The Caveman @ May 29 2009, 10:30) Ok but that's a very subjective thing to say. It's pretty much an axiom of music theory that the orchestra stands for society, and the solo instrument the individual. A piano concerto, for example, is a kind of dialogue between the individual and society. I'd say that that's quite a narrow view. Of course you make a valid point in a way, but only if you're talking about classical music and more specifically western classical music by certain composers. Quote My point is that Mike's music usually comes across very much as an expression of his individual personality. I remember he has stated that he can't make good music as himself. He said that the music must come from somewhere else. So the way I see it is that even if we think of his solo guitar as an individual - that individual is not Mike, it's more like an entity of some kind or maybe it's the wind, a flame, just sound or a universal emotion. Well maybe not so much when he goes POP. But Incantations, MotS and... It's late and my English is bad, but I hope you get the point. Back to top

Harmono Group: Members Posts: 759 Joined: May 2005 Posted: May 29 2009, 22:22 Quote (nightspore @ May 30 2009, 01:56) For if everything is praised for simply being itself, how can anything not be itself and therefore criticized? Well, Nightspore, we're not talking about "everything" and "anything". Just art. Back to top

Scatterplot Group: Members Posts: 1980 Joined: Dec. 2007 Posted: May 30 2009, 02:51 No problem here. Incantations was a "wall of sound" brilliantly concieved and recorded. Invoking emotion and intense thought, one of MO's best recordings. Jim -------------- We raise our voices in the night Crying to heaven And will our voices be heard Or will they break Like the wind Back to top

wiga Group: Members Posts: 2113 Joined: Sep. 2008 Posted: May 30 2009, 03:44 Mike once said - "I make repetitive piano sequences - I am the the repetitive piano sequence man." I like repetition in music, when it goes over and over and repeats and repeats, repetition after repetition, then layer upon layer of more and more. You didn't get too much of that in the 70s. Incantations had an important impact on me, as far as most satisfying repetitive sequences goes. Also: - and the other main dimension here, is the raw, pure emotion that it communicates pretty direct. Afterwards I feel like I've cleaned out my closet. The emotions are all there, but it's particularly brave, enduring, feisty and spunky... that's what I get. -------------- Barn's burnt down - now I can see the moon. Back to top

bee Group: Members Posts: 1227 Joined: Jan. 2004 Posted: May 30 2009, 04:52 Quote (nightspore @ May 29 2009, 19:56) Quote (bee @ May 29 2009, 17:52) Listening to Music of the Spheres now, months after it's release, I feel it has it's own life and true expression. It is itself. The trouble with this position, bee, is that if you adopt it you're forced to abandon music criticism (or any kind of criticism). For if everything is praised for simply being itself, how can anything not be itself and therefore criticized? well, maybe, Nightspore, I am just not a critical person..I believe in live and let live. There's too much criticism sometimes and too little appreciation for the incredible ability we have as humans to actually do what we do creatively. From nothing...nothing... one man has created these amazing sounds that have got to the very heart of us all posting here ( and many more too I suspect ) or else why bother to say anything.? If all people ever do is split things right down and be totally objective...I think they miss out on the pure joy of it all. Without music life would not be worth living. Music of all kinds, not just Mike OLdfield. -------------- ....second to the right and straight on till morning.... You heard me before Yet you hear me again Then I die Till I call me again Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4761 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: May 30 2009, 21:02 Quote (Harmono @ May 29 2009, 21:36) I'd say that that's quite a narrow view. Of course you make a valid point in a way, but only if you're talking about classical music and more specifically western classical music by certain composers. But when you have an orchestra you can't help but think of classical music. Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4761 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: May 30 2009, 21:06 Quote (bee @ May 30 2009, 04:52) well, maybe, Nightspore, I am just not a critical person..I believe in live and let live. There's too much criticism sometimes and too little appreciation for the incredible ability we have as humans to actually do what we do creatively. Criticism doesn't have to be understood negatively. It's just a process that helps us to make choices. When you, say, pick up a CD of Mike's instead of, for example, one by the Wiggles, you're implicitly taking a critical standpoint. You're implicitly applying a set of criteria. Life would be impossible if we didn't do this; we have to have a set of criteria and make choices according to them. Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4761 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: May 30 2009, 21:07 Quote (wiga @ May 30 2009, 03:44) I like repetition in music, when it goes over and over and repeats and repeats, repetition after repetition, then layer upon layer of more and more. You didn't get too much of that in the 70s. I'd have thought bands like Can did it death! Back to top

Bassman Group: Members Posts: 548 Joined: Feb. 2008 Posted: May 30 2009, 21:12 I love Can. -------------- Turn up the music... Hi as Fi can go. Back to top

bee Group: Members Posts: 1227 Joined: Jan. 2004 Posted: May 30 2009, 21:40 Quote (nightspore @ May 30 2009, 21:06) Life would be impossible if we didn't do this; we have to have a set of criteria and make choices according to them. well, yes, ofcourse this is true...I just feel that criticism can be a little 'cold' sometimes and even if it is described as constructive it can still be assuming too much about the artists initial intentions. After all, it was their idea in the first place, if we think we could do any better, then maybe we should have done so! I think the right hand side of my brain is a little bit    more dominant than the left. It's feelings all the way with me! -------------- ....second to the right and straight on till morning.... You heard me before Yet you hear me again Then I die Till I call me again Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4761 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: May 30 2009, 22:21 Quote (Bassman @ May 30 2009, 21:12) I love Can. I believe they speak very highly of you too, Trent!   Back to top

ex member 419 Group: Members Posts: 1177 Joined: April 2008 Posted: May 31 2009, 04:13 For me the creativity, emotions, musical complexity of mikes various recordings are ethereal yet familiar, comforting yet in some ways elusive in terms of interpretation, it is the experience of discovering new harmonies, deb Back to top

wiga Group: Members Posts: 2113 Joined: Sep. 2008 Posted: May 31 2009, 04:20 Nightspore - you know when you categorize Mike's work in terms of pre-Exegesis and post-Exegesis,(before and after therapy) - I was wondering if your dislike of Incantations had something to do then with the mood and emotions that it arouses, as much as anything. When you talk about the moods that appeal to you like - 'transcendental loss' -'soaring' -'haunting' - 'moving', are you grouping these emotions in the post-Exegesis category? Although I pick up on these moods in Incantations, it is also much edgier - sharp, biting, provocative and daring. Is that what you hear to be pre-Exegesis, and does that have something to do with what doesn't appeal. -------------- Barn's burnt down - now I can see the moon. Back to top

Dirk Star Group: Members Posts: 1331 Joined: Sep. 2007 Posted: May 31 2009, 06:52 What about The Wind Chimes?..That`s surely about as "quasi-symphonic" as you can get imo.Fair enough in that instance Mike didn`t use an orchestra.But if it were to be transposed into some "orchestral form" I suppose.I would suggest that as a piece of work it was more of a "symphony" than a "string quartet".Or maybe a concerto for lots of different instruments I guess.I don`t know,I can`t really "hear" any dazzling examples from Mike`s back catalogue to suggest he would be idealy suited to composing chamber music.I think because a lot of Mike`s melodies tend to be very lyrical or rounded,there just wouldn`t be enough variation in it there for me.If you listen to something like Ommadawn Part One for instance.There are only about 4 or 5 different themes in there throughout the whole twenty minutes.And whilst it`s true to say that Mike explores those main themes in a number of different ways.A major part of that "exploration" if you like is due to the number of different and changing instruments Mike uses in there anyway. What I would say about Music Of The Spheres however is I think sometimes the orchestra is a tad over bearing for me.You know there are sections of it where it all seems a little bit "showey" I would say,and the guitar kind of gets lost in space ..Yeah I apologise for "showey" I don`t even know if that`s a word to be honest.I wont be appearing on any episodes of Countdown in the near future you can bet your life on that. Incantations I don`t agree with at all though,I personaly love all the orchestrations on that album.I think in the case of Incantations though the orchestra is often in the mix there with about three or four other musical voices of equal importance if you like.Where as with MOTS,it is quite often the "loudest" if not the sole voice of the entire proceedings.I would have to agree that for me anyway it does make the music less personal and affecting partly because of that. 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