chris@mikeoldfield.org
Unregistered
|
|
Posted: May 01 2003, 07:34 |
|
As fans, we will all get pleasure from listening to it, and comparing it to the original, picking out the differences and enjoying them. As I said in my review, there are differences, and I felt describing them may well have spoiled your first listen. If you agree - don't read on!
I'm afraid I've just not found the album particularly exciting! Most of the album clones the original but with improved sound quality. There are differences, though - many sections have become more positive sounding, reflecting the changes in Mike's personality between then and now. Both "Latin" and "Jazz" for example, bounce along pleasantly in a way which the original didn't and unfortunately don't come close to the passion of the original. I find that John Cleese lacks the presence of Viv Stanshall, or Rick Wakeman - he makes too much of a joke of it all (but without being particularly funny, ie questioning "double speed guitar?"), the caveman section sounds very tame compared to the rawness of the original, and the whole album suffers from the Trevor Horn type precision that removes the character of the much loved classic.
The main point of my review is that anyone outside our relatively small circle of enthusiasts will probably not realise its any different musically, and the benefits of improved sound quality are relatively minor for me.
Sorry to say it, but given the choice of which version to play tomorrow, the original will win hands down. It has far more presence, atmosphere, raw passion and character. It is absolutely unique, and just couldn't be improved.
|