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 ]

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: July 10 2002, 07:01 I find it very hard to understand that Mike consider Tubular Bells to be his 'best' work ever. Why Mike? Just because it happened to sell very well? Just because people happen to remember it? That isn't necessarily correlated with the quality of the music! Take the Brandenburg Concertos by Bach as an example; this is perhaps the most widely known (and sold) work by Bach, and they are really good. But bach wrote many MANY other composition, many of which are of highest possible quality if you ask me. It would be ridiculous if  we would remember Bach entirely due the B. Concertos! Back to Mike again; you should be proud of TB, it is a great piece of music in many respects. But TB simpy DOES NOT stands out compared with your other works, Mike. What about the very complex themes on the mysterious wondeful Incantations? The very mood on that record ... in what way is this record inferior to TB (apart from the commersial aspect)? In no way, I would say! And what about the two or three main TB themes compared to, say, the two main Ommadawn themes, the main TSODE theme, or the melody on Cochise? Not to mention the graceful guitar melody that slowly develops on Hergest Ridge Part 1, or the woderful oboe/guitar duet that follows... I doubt that there is a single fan out there who  consider the TB themes to be superior to all other MO ideas.  I can see comercial reasons for making new TB albums, but to hear Mike  making such silly statements kind of disturbs me a lot.  Even more strange was it a few years ago when Mike started to say things like 'the Millenium Bell will be the work of my life' ...???? Who are you kidding? Come on! 'All I have done was just  preparations for MB' ... ? Oeehh, OK ? Really? Mike, please be proud of your other works as well, and if you need to label them as TB 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,... to sell them, please go ahead, but don't forget the most important thing: simply make new music (in any form you like), and please do what you are best at, namely, do COMPLICATED music! There are all to many   artists releasing flat one-dimensional songs! If you don't like to do long compositions anymore, and if you want to be more easy to listen to, then at least put some more effort to the details, give your fans more of these great subtile backround structures, let your themes appear many times in many forms, please give us your trademark transitions between parts, please now and then use real drummers, preferably Simon Phillips (I have nothing against drum machines as long as they are elaborately programmed, but some extra hand-played elements lift to music, e.g., like in Pacha Mama)... and most impotantly: don't be that dammed lazy, Mike, give up these cheap sequencing solutions, use other musicians as well! IMHO I welcome any style and form as long as the music is ambitios! Finally, to those of you who doubt Mike's guitar technique. You  have probably not seen a certain live appearence in english TV from about 1980, where he played Ommadawn Part I and TB Part 2. I can't remember the exact details here, but I had this concert on video (before it unfortunately was lost, argggghhgh!!!. Forget the Eddinburgh TB2 performance, the solos on this occasion was superior, CRAZY, PERFECT, INDESCRIBABLE!!! I have no doubts whatsoever concerning his speed abilities (although I was chocked to hear the crap he released on Guitars). We love you Mike, best regards TheMan Back to top

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: July 10 2002, 07:36 ps. When I talk about Hergest Ridge I obviously refer to the superior remixed 'boxed' version. And about Guitars being crap, Cochise and that indian part on FourWinds are the exceptions. Back to top

theweightless Group: Members Posts: 604 Joined: April 2001 Posted: July 10 2002, 10:03 yes...in my opinion TB is not the best mike. it's not even in the top 10 of all mike's albums. -------------- ASMK Back to top

tubularbills Group: Members Posts: 528 Joined: Aug. 2000 Posted: July 10 2002, 15:44 ok, here's the thing. I really appreciate MO's work, and the time and effort he puts into his pieces. If the final product sounds good, i'll be satisfied. now, whether that final product has 24 different instruments all playing different melodies in harmony with each other, or just 2 instruments mixed together if it sounds good i'll appreciate it. Music doesn't have to be so intricate and insanely long for me to like it. One C# chord is gonna have the same affect on me as 5 C# chords at the same time. If the melody is cool, and the sounds are interesting and keep my attention then i'll be happy. Computerized music doesn't make me upset. I can see already about the remake of the original TB is gonna piss people off because some of the stuff is going to sound more high tech and "not oldfield" as some people have quoted before. Tubular Bells is one of my favorite albums, but mainly i think because of THAT theme. the first 6 minutes of part one are the best of the whole part. and those 6 minutes only has like what, 3 -4 instruments? ditto with the beginning of part 2 as well. Tubular Bells 2 has the same effect. And in some aspects i think it's better because the quality of the sound is better. Sentinel is so cool because the beginning 24 seconds are just a simple piano tune, and then BAM! more of the awesome spine-tingling THAT theme. Tubular Bells 3 is cool because there is a lot power with it. He might only play just 1/5 of the amount of instruments as the first 2 bells, but dammit when those bells ring in FATC it's just awesome! It's the coolest sounds i've ever heard...ever! Computer generated bells or not, i don't care because they sound just too cool. Guitars is (to me) another cool album. i'm a huge fan of the distortion guitar in Out Of Sight. and see, that's simple tunes. he's not playing 20 different guitars all at the same time, going so fast his hands are bleeding. it's powerful and intense as it is, the man doesn't need to be giving himself carpel tunnel. the two guitars he plays in No Man's Land Reprise on TL (the sax and the distorted) i think is a cool combo. it's like a duet is going on. So for me, it's not about how many instruments he can play, or how fast he plays them, or how long songs are, it's about the sounds he makes and the emotions, effort, and time he puts into it. while all that stuff can be impressive, and sometimes i wish i could play more than just piano, it's not always necessary for a good album. but that's just my two cents. -------------- Terrible, Wonderful, Crazy, Perfect. Back to top

Lightspeed Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: Mar. 2000 Posted: July 10 2002, 19:06 I feel the same as Tubularbills.... Nevertheless i some times think if...Is the Mike Oldfield of Ommadawn the same of Earth Moving? or Tr3s Lunas? The man is always changing...and poor of us fanzines....we have to keep the pace...the man's style changes each year   Only the strong fans "survive" I admit that in the 80's....his live concerts...that was his rockier side....the man never stopped...specially when he played Ommadawn (...damn Ommadawn...can't play the freakin fast riff  in the middle of Part 1...before the beg inning of the final tune  of Part 1:the flute part....u guys know what solo i am talking about    ) Still TB was awesome...and i believe when he says that TB was his best work...he says it because the way he had to do it...all the problems he had recording it...problems he never had with other albums I am not keen on the idea of another TB...evethough it's the original...it's TB again.... Let's just say that everytime i say to my family i am going to buy a Mike Oldfield album...or that Mike has a new album they simply say " Tubular Bells again right??? it's 5 6 or 7?" Alas.... It's a lot of albuns...maybe...he's tired who knows.... ( i hope not ><) -------------- "Thou Art In Heaven" :D Back to top

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: July 16 2002, 10:33 Hi lightspeed, you are right about his style constantly changing. I think that this actually is his style. In principle I like that... You may be right about M being tired ... although TL sounds more inspired than MB and Guitars, if you ask me. One can never count him out, his has this incredible ability to find novel expressful themes, and there are geniuos moments on all his records. I wish he avoids these kind of hastly produced records like Guitars in the future; it was a great disappointment to me since the title kind of promised quite a lot, in particular if you consider his former guitar performances. The playing on Guitars is really poor and unfocused, and it is difficult to imagine that it is Mike playing. (Ok, now some of you want to hang me, but be honest: imagine that you didn't know that MO was playing... would you consider this as a great record? I don't think so. And I really do not understand some of you fans referring to it as 'cool'.). Also MB sounds kind of tired; there are good intentions on some of the pieces like Pacha Mama (e.g., much feeling in the guitar), but most of it is too 'direct', too 'simple' in some hard-to-define way ... But anyway, I still believe in Mike, and he probably will produce many surprising compositions in the future. Right now I really enjoy Track 2 and 3 on TL ... They kind of are true Mike Oldfield, far above Guitars and MB. The chord sequence on NML... that dirty guitar ... brilliant! The hammond on RTTO ... very very good. More of that Mike! And also, that fat base, ... very nice indeed. Just don't use that sax again. Please. Back to top

tubularbills Group: Members Posts: 528 Joined: Aug. 2000 Posted: July 16 2002, 13:23 What you (The Man) said about the guitars album i think is actually kind of a neat question. In all seriousness, if i didn't know whether it was MO playing that music or not, i'd still be happy with the album. I really like Guitars a lot. It's a bit short, but i think it's a very decent album. The author Stephen King once tested his fans back in the eighties by publishing 4 or 5 books under the name "Richard Bachman". It was a test to see if people really bought his books just for his name or they bought them because they really truly liked his work. And when all was said and done, turns out that people liked those books because of the content, not the name of the author. He then played on that concept in the late 90s when he dual published "desperation" as SK, and "The Regulaters" as RB (both books played off each other...really kick ass) I will admit that if i saw the album Guitars in a music store under someone else's name i probably wouldn't buy it right then and there. but if there was some way to listen to it ahead of time, i probably would buy it (or at least, napster-ize it). Lets say that MO didn't write TB. someone else did. and that's all they did. just a one hit wonder type of deal. and MOs career started with Hergest Ridge. It probably would have been more difficult for me to hear about MO, especially because the only reason why i heard about him in the first place was TB in the movie, The Exorcist. But if i had heard his music (aside from TB2, TB3 because if he didn't write the first, it would be weird for him to do 2 & 3) i still think i'd be satisfied. Incantations, TSODE, Guitars, TMB, TL, are all great pieces of music (i think so at least). -------------- Terrible, Wonderful, Crazy, Perfect. Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: July 20 2002, 06:08 TheMan, you are always entitled to your own opinion, but your overall attitude seems a bit negative. Saying that you don't like Guitars (the album) is one thing, but saying that you can't understand why other poeple do like it is sort of arrogant, as if you think that everyone should only like what you like. If Mike reckons that TB was his best album, they so be it, people will always have other opinions. I do, however, agree with you on some points. I don't think that TB was his best ever album, far from it! I think that it sounds underproduced and a bit unfinished. That's why I am eager to see what the new version sounds like. Guitars was also somewhat of a disapointment to me when I first listened to it, but I have realised that it is a pretty good album. OK, it isn't a classic, but I don't need it to be in order to like it. I really think that we should stop listening to albums and instantly comparing them to previous ones, or placing expectations on them that are unfair. The only expectation that I place on albums is that there be one song that I like, and so far I don't think that I have heard one album that failed to live up to this. When we start expecting albums to be great, then you will be disapointed. (I also have a problem with people expecting albums to be crap, but that's another post.) OK, nearly finished,  now to answer The Man's questions. Yes, if I heard Guitars, and it was by another artist, I would like it. Muse, Out of Sight and Four Winds are all exceptional tracks, and the rest of the album is nice too. And for tubularbills, if TB wasn't by Mike Oldfield, I still would have heard him, because the first few albums we had were TB, Hergest Ridge, Crises and Five Miles Out. Still, it wouldn't be the same becaure Tubular Bells III and II are my two favourite albums (In that order). Wow, that was a long post. OK, till next time, bye... -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: July 25 2002, 06:07 Hi Raven, sorry if I sound arrogant, it was'nt my intention. It is great that you enjoy Guitars, and I don't want to take that away from you. Am I negative? Yes, and no. I do consider Mike a genious, and I am rather open concerning Mike's always changing style and format. But I feel that Mike sometimes releases his records too fast; in my opinion he has the potential to write EVEN more amazing music, but sometimes he choses a too simple path. What do you think? Take tracks 4,5,6,9,10,11,13 on TresLunas. There is a lot of good intentions but the material is not developed. I do sound negative sometimes, but all-in-all I think Mike deserves a LOT MORE credit for all his contributions to music history! TheMan Back to top

Dave Parry Unregistered Posted: Aug. 08 2002, 08:31 Tubular Bells is a very emotional and raw album, I guess the result of Mike's childhood.  It was probably exciting to record the music that represented his situation at that time.  It's my number one favorite, along with Crisis, TB2 and 3. Back to top

bennyboy Unregistered Posted: Aug. 09 2002, 21:12 Truth be told, I don't think that Mike really thinks TB is his best album either. He may have said that to the press. But remember, in 1984 he also claimed that "Discovery" was his best album - EVER. Before the release of "The Millennium Bell" he said something to the effect of - "It is the pinnacle of my career as a musician" Now, before his new TB Redux he's trying to hype up "Tubular Bells" again. It's all marketing, The Man, don't take it so seriously. Incidentally, the news of the new TB Redux only came about the moment he was renewing his recording contract. Methinks that considering the poor commercial performance of his most recent album he wouldn't get a contract without a TB album. Also, I don't agree with the current trend of "Mike has lost it, why doesn't he do something brilliant again". I wonder sometimes how people here can still call themselves fans when they are relentlessly criticizing him. I think the real reason Mike has such a small niche as an artist is because with each different record (the TB sequels being the exception that proves the rule) he has changed his style and done something different..... also he seems to take a long time between albums a lot of the time.... Such non-commercial thinking is a good way to lose and alienate a lot of your audience.  But I think true fans are able to grow with "their" artists...and I have disliked but a few of his albums (I'm one of those arseholes who actually liked the much-maligned "Earth Moving" for instance). Maybe I speak as a relative newcomer to Mike fandom. I am 19, and have only been a fan since 1996. My introductory albums were "Songs Of Distant Earth" and "TB II". I don't mind electronic production techniques, and have pretty eclectic tastes in music and can pretty much stand anything but punk, country, hip-hop or new age (despite what has been said elsewhere I don't consider "Voyager", "TSODE" or "Tres Lunas" new age - real new age is sampled sound effects with random whale mating calls and piano plonking layered on top). "Guitars" is in my top 5. How can you not like the solo on "Cochise"? Air guitar moment no? Oh well, such is the nature of humanity that we don't agree on everything. Still, if this is the state of MO fandom, now wonder he has such trouble finding commercial success... Back to top

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: Aug. 13 2002, 12:38 Is it OK to criticize Mike Oldfield? Or is this a crime?  Reading these forums I get the impression that quite many of you do not tolerate any critism whatsoever. Certainly not all of you, but some of you. And I find this hard to understand. I guess that most of us (if not all) do love some of Mikes music (why do we otherwise contribute to this webpage?). But Mike's production is complex, there is a lot of different styles and trends in his music, and of course the opinions are bound to drastically vary even among die-hard fans (I spelled it right this time). This is not a religious sect, there is no need for 'defending' everything MO does or says. He can surely handle some hard words from time to time, even from his fans, he must have got used to it from the music press. As I have pointed out many times now I do consider Mike to be a great genious, from time-to-time a brilliant composer. But when he tries to get away with cheaper 'fast-food' stuff like Millenium Bells, or when 80 percentage of an album is undeveloped and many brilliant ideas are wasted, he will hear from me. Come on, folks, do we want to hear ToBeFree or Amarok? Do we want to have pieces like TopOfTheMorning or TheWindChimes? A Midi-saxophone sounding as a dog-fart, or the classical guitar on MontStMichael? I can hear the difference. Can you? Be honest now, and let Mike know it. TheMan Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: Aug. 14 2002, 04:30 Yes, I do agree with you that Mike is not above critisism, and I certainly don't like everything he does. But, however, I am perfectly happy with people who do like the stuff I don't. Take the examples above: I quite like Top of the Morning, more than I do The Wind Chimes. These seems to be an attitude amongst people who like the 'older style' that everyone should like it. Like TheMan assuming that everyone agrees with his opinions, or should agree with them. I don't think that's fair. -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: Aug. 19 2002, 06:54 Well, you know, I don't think it is a question of if TopOfTheMorning is 'better' than TheWindChimes or not, to me it is a rather objective question about the degree of complexity we want from Mike. TopOfTheMorning, good or not, is structually a very simple piece, a a very short piano motif being repeated over and over again. TheWindChimes has a lot of ideas interacting with eachother, there is a lot of related themes, and TO ME  (IMHO) ONLY Mike Oldfield could have written this piece. TopOfTheMorning could have been written by many composers, the melody being genious or not, it sounds similar to what you can here in commercial spots on TV. The reason I think Mike stands out is his talent for finding good melodies and THE COMPLEXITY in how he present them. To me there is hardly any difference at all between   'TopOfTheMorning-like' compositions and the music of many other less talent composers. Therefore I strongly feel that Mike should stick harder to his old style. This doesn't mean I don't like the SOUND on e.g., TBIII, and I realize that he is not going to play mandolin, timpany and Bulgarian nose-flute on each of his records. To me he can chose any direction he wants as long as he doesn't abandon the complexity. It doesn't mean that he has to write long instrumentals, but I want some elements of     - separate songs being thematically related     - some kind of development of introduced themes     - the background to the melodies being more than just a synth. (A good example: the background texture of OnlyTimeWillTell. No matter if you like the piece or not, there are things going on in the background.)     - no silly pop-songs in the middle.     - transitions between different parts. (If some of you think this doesn't add anything to the music, I really would like to hear why ... to me, this gives the music an additional dimension.)   I would regard the following point as a bonus:     - as few fading-away endings as possible. I regard fading-away as being an all too simple solution. Mike has proven himself to be a master of finding 'real' endings: IMHO check e.g., Crisis (amazing chords) or  LetThereBeLight. Why do I want this from Mike? Because if he doesn't do it anymore I will not get it at all anymore! What distinguishes Mike from other composers? The anwer is THE STRUCTURE of his pieces more than anything else. The Man. ps. In my opinion (Note: subjective) a comparison of TopOfTheMorning and TheWindChimes is like a comparison of 'Baywatch' and '2001 - A Space Odyssey'. Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: Aug. 20 2002, 05:18 Yeah, You're right, sorry for arguing so much. I do prefer 'complex and deep' over 'simple and catchy' when it comes down to it, no matter how catchy they are. That is why I like albums like Guitars so much, because on most of the songs (except Muse! these is a lot going on in the background: especially Embers, which has has a few guitars in the background, as well as about four that play the actual tune. Even on most of his simples albums there is a bit going in the background, but I do agree that albums such as TBII and Amarok do sound a lot deeper. That is one of the things that makes Mike unique amongst today's composers, and is probably why I like the sound of 70's band Yes so much! But that's another topic. As for your 'guide to albums', which I very much agree with, I would like to add some points for vocal songs.   -good guitar solos. A guitar solo from Mike just adds so much to the song, turning an average song into a good song, and a good song into a great song (just look at Far Country from Earth Moving)   -I very much agree that linking the songs together with a transition is great (the songs on Discovery are linked, and it just adds another dimension to the album)   -No fade-outs. I feel that Mike's endings are one of his strongest elements, so if he can't end the song it probable won't work overall.   -Stick to one or two vocalists for the album. One of the bad points of Earth Moving is that there is far too many vocalists, so the album just feels like it has been stuck together. Yeah, I agree with most of your other points, and sometimes we all want a short, simple piece. That's why I like the format of his 80's albums: simple, short songs/instrumentals on one side, and a huge complex instrumental on the other. Its the best of both worlds, and I would like to see it done again. These, rant over     -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: Aug. 20 2002, 06:23 Hi again raven4x4x, don't be 'sorry about the arguing' ... Now we are doing some serious talking here! I do completely agree with your additional points, and the Discovery and EM examples. Back to top

Wanderer Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: Aug. 2002 Posted: Aug. 21 2002, 14:19 I agree with Bennyboy in one sense. Mike going on about Tubular Bells is probably just marketing hype. Just like when he said "Discovery" (???) was his greatest record ever. It is true that there is a lot of "Mike's lost it" comments on these fan forums but that's personal taste, aint nothin can be done about that. The Man, remember, "Tres Lunas" is not an ordinary album, it's a soundtrack album really. Soundtracks in my opinion should be judged first and foremost on wether they fit with the imagery they were designed for. "Tres Lunas" does that at least as well as anything Mike did in "The Killing Fields". I can't imagine any other music playing for the surfboarding through space sequence except "No Man's Land". Certainly, "Tres Lunas" is a lot less boring than most video game soundtracks I've heard. I guess it all comes down to "I don't know art, but I know what I like". Those "complicated" albums everyone seems to be comparing his latest stuff too...a lot of the time I thought he was just being complicated for the sake of being complicated. "Amarok" and "The Wind Chimes" had some very charming moments, but to me the whole was less than the sum of it's parts. I think Mike's music has actually improved now he's concentrating more on composing solid melodies than simply "showing off" his virtuosity. I won't be very popular if I say this, but I actually don't mind his song based albums, the infamous "Earth Moving" included! I found "To Be Free" very life affirming and uplifting. But that's what discussion groups are for innit? For differently minded people to share their thoughts and feelings, exchange ideas in a friendly manner. There is a place for criticism and a place for praise. Back to top

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: Aug. 22 2002, 09:35 What is this about 'Mike has lost it'-stuff? Who is saying that? I am not. ReturnToTheOrigin proves that Mike is a brilliant composer. I am talking about Mike's current way of presenting the material. I believe he  1. is slightly lazy  2. thinks people don't hear any difference if he develops the themes or not, uses transitions or not, and so on...  3. thinks too much about commercial success. See my recipe in TubularBells2003 for archieving point 3. What is this about 'TresLunas is a lot less boring than many most videogames I have heard' ... ????????????? Are you comparing Mike's music with soundtracks to videogames?!!!??? Is this the level we are talking at? Say no more. TheMan Back to top

Wanderer Unregistered Posted: Aug. 22 2002, 13:00 IN REPLY TO "THE MAN": Well, "The Man", the fact of the matter is "Tres Lunas" IS THE SOUNDTRACK TO A VIDEO GAME. If you are going to critically assess a work of art it's only fair to judge it for what it is. "Tres Lunas" is intended as soundtrack/relaxation music. Can't deny that. Chill man. I agree that another album without electronic instruments would be interesting, I like electronic music but I guess I prefer more organic stuff. Personally I'd love to here another live album - I think if he's gonna do another TB Redux it would be better as a live album. What do you mean by "thinks too much about commercial success". Have you listened to "Tres Lunas"? There isn't that big a market for electronic relaxation music you know, and I don't think Mike had any delusions about knocking Eminem off the top of the charts with "Tres Lunas".  If you're talking about the new TB Redux then I whole heartedly agree with you, no need for it at all except to milk the last drop out of a dying franchise.....oh, well..... Back to top

TheMan Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: July 2002 Posted: Aug. 23 2002, 05:49 Well Wanderer,  it simply does not sound very relieving to hear that Mike's music 'does not sound that boring as many other game soundtracks' ... But I certainly hope that that statement is true!   Even though the music has its origin in Mikes game. I simply  expect Mike to pruduce music that is WAY BEYONE any soundtrack to a game! It would be QUITE depressing to realize that the background music to Microsoft's  massproduced games reaches higher levels than the music of the old master! Not? About commercial success;     - 'Chill out'     - independent 5-minutes catchy melodies without anything else than a melody constantly repeated and backed by a very simple backround. A recipe for selling an instrumental album to a large audience. Compare to Amarok. TheMan 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