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 ]

EeToN Group: Members Posts: 845 Joined: Sep. 2001 Posted: April 06 2004, 18:55 I quoted all the parts I've found about TBII during those years. I left out only this: 1992: "There's no point in writing a sequel if it's completely different," points out Oldfield. "There's certain parts where the two works converge, but then they'll separate and follow two distinct paths again." Other contrasts with regard to 'Tubular Bells' are obvious to Oldfield now: "Apart from the fact that there's a 100 hertz mains hum running through the whole album, it all sounds so serious -- arms pushing down on the keyboard, stern eyebrows frowning -- the new one is a lot more open and expressive, a lot more free." -------------- If I were music, I would be Enigmatism. Back to top

TOBY Group: Members Posts: 1562 Joined: May 2002 Posted: April 06 2004, 18:58 Music Mart magazine also ran a feature about Amarok (which I don't think is in articles section here) in which he talked about doing TB 3+4. Also there was a long since defunct UK rock music magazine which just a few months prior to the release of TB2 claimed that we were all about to hear the continuation of the TB saga. They claimed that Mike had recorded the 2 sequel sections using only the same instruments as the original and that record company execs had heard a 10 min section of the piece (I remember reading this quite clearly) and said that it truely echoed the original album. On top of that I've got a copy of the Airbourne fanzine which has a transcript from a German music mag article about EarthMoving in which Mike talked again about doing parts 3+4 of TB. So he was clearly keen on the idea before the mysterious change of the albums direction. Of course we all know that what Mike says and what Mike does are more often than not no where near being the same thing so in the end perhaps there's not much of a mystery. And just to comment on that quote of Mike's above. There's certainly no point in doing a sequal if you've got nothing new to say. Did TB2 have anything new to say? It's debatable. I would argue not. Is there any point in doing a sequal if it's the only ace card up your sleeve that could resorrect your failing career. Absolutely. And since Mike was keen on using the movie sequel analogy for describing TB2 at the time he should have remembered that all the best movie sequels (and there arn't that many to be fair) continue the story line and develope it out in a sometimes entirely new direction. All the bad sequels (and there are many) just cynicaly use the same basic narrative and plot as the original and invariably try to be 'clever' in some way to hide the fact they have ran out of ideas. Does this ring any BELLS? Back to top

EeToN Group: Members Posts: 845 Joined: Sep. 2001 Posted: April 06 2004, 19:17 Quote (TOBY @ April 07 2004, 01:58) And just to comment on that quote of Mike's above. There's certainly no point in doing a sequal if you've got nothing new to say. Did TB2 have anything new to say? It's debatable. I would argue not. Hm, I heard of course TBII at first and TB only later. When I heard TB, it seemed to be an unimpressive, false version of TBII then. Now I have a much better opinion about it, mainly because of the concert versions. And thanks for the information about the articles. Are they available online somewhere? -------------- If I were music, I would be Enigmatism. Back to top

Holger Group: Members Posts: 1506 Joined: Feb. 2003 Posted: April 07 2004, 14:57 Couldn't it be that he thought the TB part 3+4 thing was a great idea beforehand but then found he just didn't have the inspiration for it, and then went for second best, so to speak? Back to top

Korgscrew Group: Super Admins Posts: 3511 Joined: Dec. 1999 Posted: April 07 2004, 15:43 I think I remember him saying somewhere (don't ask me where, it would probably take me ages to find it! ) that he'd begun thinking about Tubular Bells II after revisiting Tubular Bells in his sessions for the Nicky Campbell show, but that he wanted to do an Ommadawn sequel first as a kind of practise. I think recording Parts 3 and 4 is a brilliant idea, which he could still get away with if he called it something else... Back to top

Holger Group: Members Posts: 1506 Joined: Feb. 2003 Posted: April 07 2004, 16:37 Quote (Korgscrew @ April 07 2004, 15:43) I think I remember him saying somewhere (don't ask me where, it would probably take me ages to find it! ) that he'd begun thinking about Tubular Bells II after revisiting Tubular Bells in his sessions for the Nicky Campbell show, but that he wanted to do an Ommadawn sequel first as a kind of practise. Doesn't that sound funny? Doing an Ommadawn sequel as 'practise' for a Tubular Bells sequel? "Let's try something easy first." Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: April 28 2004, 05:37 Hi. I'm back after quite a while. I too am not sure what to think about TB2003. I certainly prefer the original of Part One, but I think that the new version has improved the second half. Well, I never really liked the second half of the original, but he really has improved it here (I'm saying this even though I haven't listened to either for ages). I am certainly one of the biggest admirers of Ambient Guitars. OK, it is similar to the original, but it just has that extra clarity and emotion. Just beautiful. Remember that when TB2003 came out people were debating whether Mike could still play guitar or not. If it has done nothing else, TB2003 has ended that debate. He is, and always was, one of the greatest guitarists in the world. In a sense, TB2003 was always doomed to failure. Tubular Bells is such a revered album amongst that absolutely anything he did to it would 'ruin' it for some. Overall, he did a pretty good job of it when you think what it could be like, what many fans thought it would be like. I would still pick the original over the new, but the perfect album would have the original Part One and the new Part Two. <This bit added about 5 seconds after I posted> Talking of TB 2 and 3, I first have to say that I like them both. A lot. Especially on the live DVD. But did they have anything new to say? Tubular Bells 2 is just really the same format, so I don't really think it contributed much new in that sense, but I like the music so much I'm prepared to forgive it. Tubular Bells 3, on the other hand, is totally different, so much so that I'm not sure why he called it Tubular Bells at all. To me it is just an album, and a great album at that. So yes, this one did contribute something new, so it makes that better sequel from that point of view. How about this for a game? This is for those who dislike TB2003, but those who enjoy it can still play Pretend that the original Tubular Bells never existed (hard, I know, but bear with me). Would you enjoy listening to TB2003 if you had never heard the original. Would those of you who hate it now like it more, or would they still hate it? I suppose what I'm asking is: is it bad music, or is it just bad compared to the original?  I don't think it's bad at all. What about you? -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: April 28 2004, 07:14 Quote (raven4x4x @ April 28 2004, 05:37) How about this for a game? This is for those who dislike TB2003, but those who enjoy it can still play Pretend that the original Tubular Bells never existed (hard, I know, but bear with me). Would you enjoy listening to TB2003 if you had never heard the original. Would those of you who hate it now like it more, or would they still hate it? I suppose what I'm asking is: is it bad music, or is it just bad compared to the original?  I don't think it's bad at all. What about you? In this case, I guess I would treat it with the same disdain that some people have for the original Tubular Bells. It's not a bad album, it's just very disappointing compared to the original - as well as other albums, like Ommadawn or Crises. It's still miles ahead of TBII and III, though. -------------- Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds. Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com Back to top

ragingbell Unregistered Posted: April 28 2004, 13:46 shut up moaning ! if you don,t like it stop listening Back to top

EeToN Group: Members Posts: 845 Joined: Sep. 2001 Posted: April 28 2004, 20:57 Quote But did they have anything new to say? Tubular Bells 2 is just really the same format, so I don't really think it contributed much new in that sense, but I like the music so much I'm prepared to forgive it. I think TBII is obviously VERY different from TB emotionally. Isn't this element important enough to think that it has new to say? (Anyway, for my part, I don't care much about what new a music "says". I'm just listening and enjoying the music by itself. That's why I can love TB2003 without qualification, to answer the other question.) Quote Tubular Bells 3, on the other hand, is totally different, so much so that I'm not sure why he called it Tubular Bells at all. As Mike said, "I listened a lot to Tubular Bells 1 when I did no.2, and I didn't listen to either of them when I made no.3.". Therewith "I could have called all my albums Tubular Bells. In which case this would be Tubular Bells 18. I wouldn't have done that as they would have to have the same cover and I just love this cover, I don't know why, I love this shape. So, I'm very proud of them, I have ONE, TWO, THREE - it's like having three triplets, three children." -------------- If I were music, I would be Enigmatism. Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: April 29 2004, 07:40 Quote (Guest @ April 28 2004, 13:46) shut up moaning ! if you don,t like it stop listening If all stop "moaning", this board becomes a very, very quiet place. Isn't controversy what sparks conversation alive? Oh, who am I kidding. You stop it! If you like it, go listen to it. Quote Anyway, for my part, I don't care much about what new a music "says". I'm just listening and enjoying the music by itself. That's where you differ from me, I guess. When Mike stops "saying" something - or starts saying what he has said a million times already - his music becomes dull and bland (Taurus II, and almost everything from 1992 on). Come to think of it, Mike is not like Pink Floyd or Brian Eno who can create fantastic soundscapes in their sleep. Mike needs motivation to come up with melodies, textures and soulful playing. If he hasn't any... well, you have Tubular Bells III. -------------- Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds. Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com Back to top

Ambient Fish Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: June 2004 Posted: July 15 2004, 11:25 Jeeze, what a load of whinging cloth eared nincompoops, you miss the point completely. I have heard recordings of Carl Orff's Carmina Buranah rendered by 4 different choral and orchestral combinations, they were all different interpretations of the original composition but the differences did not invalidate the genius of the composer. The fact the Mike choose to revisit TB does not in any way detract from the original album, in many ways it reinforces the genius of the 1973 effort when you realise that it was his first outing and he had no way of knowing how big it would become. Mike also suffers from the fact that the composer of a work is now exposed to the widest possible audience of know it all critics, critics come from the same branch of humanity as teachers in that, those who can do it, do it, those who can't teach, remember it is easy to criticise. The Exorcist was a huge movie when it was released, it helped break Mike to a much wider audience than would otherwise have been the case, I would go as far as to say that without the film Mike's longevity in the music business would have been seriously compromised. I personally think that Mike Oldfield will one day be regarded as a GENIUS, in saying this I also recognise that not all of his back catalogue stands comparison with TB, Amarok, SODE, and Hergest Ridge but then again no artist contemporary or historical had a 100% score over their whole output. So in conclusion, if you like TB 2003 (I Do) then play it often and enjoy it even of it's just on the level of spotting the obvious differences from the original. If you don't like it then don't play it, simple when you think about it with your brain eh! In the kingdom of the blind the one eyed man is King.......[B][I] Back to top

TOBY Group: Members Posts: 1562 Joined: May 2002 Posted: July 15 2004, 16:33 The Exorcist certianly helped Mike break into America on the back of TB although I have read in past articles that some American buyers of the album were confused when they got home to discover an album of music that wasn't the soundtrack to a horror film. As for the ageless TB sequels debate. Absalutely like what you like, obviously TB2, 3 and 2003 helped Mike reach more fans who discovered and liked more of his albums, unquestionably a good thing. However was releasing or rerecording 3 TB albums a good artistic career move? I doubt it and it certainly doesn't look like it. Am I 'whinging cloth eared nincompoop' for thinking so? Quite probably but then again an increasing amount of us seem to be. Mike certainly used to be a genius and was generaly regarded as such, certainly in the 70's. Whether or not he will be in the future depends largely on what he does with future albums and future projects. He does seem increasingly marginalised and sadly forgotten about by the UK music press and record buyers but then again he doesn't do much to remain in anybody, except his loyal fans, conciousness. Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: July 15 2004, 19:34 Well, since I don't like TB2003, I certainly won't play it. But I have the right to express why I don't like it. Firstly, it can spark a good discussion, and secondly, well, the Internet is all (or part) about expressing opinions. And if people can rave and rant about TB2003, I certainly can express my negative opinions for a small counterpoint. Fact is, I don't fancy myself as a critic. A critic listens to music solely to analyse and criticise it, most times for money, while I'm just a fan of music. I know why I like TB, and I know why I think that TB2003 is just not good. To me, it just isn't. I would like it if someone tried to explain to me why they think TB2003 is good, with the same (or higher) level detail that I used. It would be very nice. Think about it: if someone decided to rerecord Sgt. Pepper, replacing all fancy instrumentation, orchestras, tape loops and strangeness with lame synthesizers and in-your-face technologic gimmicks, do you think the fans would receive it very nicely? -------------- Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds. Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com Back to top

FractalNightmare Unregistered Posted: Oct. 05 2004, 15:49 I'm sorry all of you people think Mike is such an idiot that he needs our wise advice on how to play his music to please us. You know, if Mike is truly an artist, it is an act of generosity that he issues albums in the first place. He could just play music for himself and record it, and so on, just like mister J.D. Sallinger has been doing for the past decades. Do you actually think he writes music FOR US? He writes music because he needs to. If you don't like it, don't feel obligated to buy it, just because it helps your self-image to be a "fan" of Mike's. If you're just curios, I can understand that too, but you aren't really be "just curious" if you start commenting about albums from 12 years ago that you didn't like and you go on about "the good old days". It's not about Mike, is it, it's about the icon he is supposed to represent, that he probably doesn't even know he has become, doesn't really care, but gives us the right to whip him for straying from "the path". I just wanted to say I disagree profoundly with the chosen method of criticism adopted here. Reading this post has convinced me that there actually exist people who think they know what Mike's music is supposed to say, even more so than Mike himself. I'm sorry if that's all you could gather from the immense complexity of his musical language. Peace Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: Oct. 05 2004, 16:36 Perhaps I do sound self-righteous at times, but I never claimed to know what Mike's music should sound like. The plain truth is that I know what I like, and I will just express my opinions here because - as I said some times before - that's what the forum's here for. Mike himself has said several times that he writes music primarily for himself, but if he issues it to the public, we will form an opinion about it. That is all I'm doing. I'm sorry if I sound judgemental. I never meant that. That fact that I like the older Mike better than the newer has nothing to do with the icon he's become. It's just that my mind maches his older opinions the best. It's more simple than it appears to be. -------------- Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds. Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com Back to top

Alan D Group: Members Posts: 3670 Joined: Aug. 2004 Posted: Oct. 05 2004, 17:30 I think I can understand why you decided to take the whole album apart in the way you did: the music didn't work for you, and that's a disappointing experience, and so of course you'd try to figure out why. And of course there would be (and were) plenty of reasons you could find. I only bought a copy of TB2003 recently, and I've only listened to it once. I'm not ready to listen again, yet, because I can still feel the impact of the emotional experience of that first listening. Having delayed buying it till now because I was sure I wouldn't be impressed, I was taken completely by surprise. The original TB never had this kind of emotional effect on me; it was never a personal favourite album. The most helpful definition of a work of art I ever encountered was that it offers the observer/reader/listener 'symbols of feeling'. So the artist creates these symbols, and we contemplate them - and if we engage successfully, then we can experience a version of whatever feelings the artist was trying to convey. With TB2003, the trick seemed to work magnificently for me on this occasion. I'd actually be reluctant to dissect it, track by track, detail by detail. The experience seemed too valuable for that. Often, the things we dissect end up dead. Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: Oct. 06 2004, 05:36 I still think that the only way to really like this album is to not be a fan of the original, or to have never heard the original at all. I've often found when I listen to music that I love the version of a song that I hear first. The collection my family has often includes lots of different versions of a song, from the original release to live DVD concerts etc, and the vast majority of the time I find that if I get to know and love a particular version of a song, any other recordings that I hear later will never match up to the original. That's why I think this album was doomed: fans have known and loved the original for 30 years, so any changes Mike made will of course sound 'wrong', even if otherwise they are perfectly good music. The exception is if you were never a fan of the music in the first place, such as you Alan D. I'd bet that there aren't too many people who truly loved the original Tubular Bells, but have found that TB 2003 has totally replaced it for them. -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: Oct. 06 2004, 09:14 That's a valid point. Yes, maybe I don't like TB2003 because I heard the original first. Still, I just can't imagine myself loving TB2003 if it was the first one I heard. I know my tastes, and while I would recognise the music and the melodies, there are things I just wouldn't get over - I mean, Jazz? Really? But I believe that the real fact, for me, is that Mike really looked upon TB with a 100% clinical eye and performed some kind of surgery on it. So, instead of having a living, breathing organism like the original, we have a... I dunno, a stuffed animal. Or a Frankenstein of sorts. So I find myself unable to look at the album with an eye different from the same clinical eye Mike seems to have cast upon it. But I am the crazy fella, so the opposite opinions would be very interesting to hear. So far, all favourable opinions I heard about TB2003 talk about emotions and emotional impact and their whereabouts. So I guess it is subjective, after all. -------------- Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds. Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com Back to top

Alan D Group: Members Posts: 3670 Joined: Aug. 2004 Posted: Oct. 06 2004, 12:44 Nice theory: if you liked the old TB, you won't like TB2003. It might be a good guide, although I did quite like the old TB; and I could see it was a groundbreaking new kind of music. It was just never a personal favourite. And when all is said, Sir Mustapha - when all the discussions and rationalisations and dismemberments of the mix are done: isn't it truly all subjective in the end? It all comes down to one person engaging with this music here and now - and all criticism fades into obscurity in the life-enriching experience of those moments. Or not, of course!! 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