Page 15 of 16

Re: Guns

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 15:15
by snowman
:butthead:

Re: Guns

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 15:23
by drterror666
You'll catch a chill... :twisted:

Re: Guns

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 15:53
by snowman
...that's in the hands of the authorities now. Since when was mooning an arrestable offence??

Re: Guns

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 19:31
by drterror666
I never said it was.

On Land and in the Sea is still the best album, though.

Re: Guns

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 20:49
by snowman
drterror666 wrote:
On Land and in the Sea is still one of the best albums, though.


Never a truer word said. Mwohahahaaaa! :rock:

Re: Guns

Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 23:08
by psparky27
Hes right :) Guns pales compared to Onland !

Re: Guns

Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 10:05
by snowman
psparky27 wrote:Hes right :) Guns is a tad more inventive than Onland !


This feels like a nice, exclusive club :D

Re: Guns

Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 10:30
by drterror666
I think that people are attracted to the different eras of Cardiacs. I was more into the 'classic line up' era, my first ever Cardiacs purchases being the Big Ship mini LP and There's Too Many Irons in the Fire 12". I thought A Little Man... was a really good album, but On Land... was just the ultimate culmination of what they'd been building up.

Of course, a lot of people came in with the 'power quartet' era, of which Guns was the end result. So, everything Heaven Born... and Sing to God led to that album, which really does divide the fanbase. That's my theory, anyway.

It doesn't really matter what era you like, as long as you love Cardiacs.

Re: Guns

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 00:34
by Sterbus
drterror666 wrote:I think that people are attracted to the different eras of Cardiacs. I was more into the 'classic line up' era, my first ever Cardiacs purchases being the Big Ship mini LP and There's Too Many Irons in the Fire 12". I thought A Little Man... was a really good album, but On Land... was just the ultimate culmination of what they'd been building up.

Of course, a lot of people came in with the 'power quartet' era, of which Guns was the end result. So, everything Heaven Born... and Sing to God led to that album, which really does divide the fanbase. That's my theory, anyway.

It doesn't really matter what era you like, as long as you love Cardiacs.


This is true. From my experience I can say that people in their twenties and thirties (like me) mostly prefer the nineties stuff and the garage concerts, older people that were actually there when everything was really happening in real time for them are mostly in love with that first line-up. The nice thing is that they also love the other albums that they're not supposed to!

(Just like me, I absolutely love On land and in the sea, but I'd love to hear it remixed and maybe remastered, with stronger guitars and drums.... but I'm actually not even sure about that, cause I think that the first mix of Heaven Born and ever bright - the one with the guitars not on 11 - is really really really much better!!!)

Re: Guns

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:34
by drterror666
Sterbus wrote:
drterror666 wrote:I think that people are attracted to the different eras of Cardiacs. I was more into the 'classic line up' era, my first ever Cardiacs purchases being the Big Ship mini LP and There's Too Many Irons in the Fire 12". I thought A Little Man... was a really good album, but On Land... was just the ultimate culmination of what they'd been building up.

Of course, a lot of people came in with the 'power quartet' era, of which Guns was the end result. So, everything Heaven Born... and Sing to God led to that album, which really does divide the fanbase. That's my theory, anyway.

It doesn't really matter what era you like, as long as you love Cardiacs.


This is true. From my experience I can say that people in their twenties and thirties (like me) mostly prefer the nineties stuff and the garage concerts, older people that were actually there when everything was really happening in real time for them are mostly in love with that first line-up. The nice thing is that they also love the other albums that they're not supposed to!

(Just like me, I absolutely love On land and in the sea, but I'd love to hear it remixed and maybe remastered, with stronger guitars and drums.... but I'm actually not even sure about that, cause I think that the first mix of Heaven Born and ever bright - the one with the guitars not on 11 - is really really really much better!!!)


I never noticed that the mix on On Land... was lacking. It's always sounded perfect to me. I'll have to give it another listen, not that I need an excuse :wink: As for Heaven Born..., I'm just glad I bought it when it originally came out, before the disastrous remaster!

Posted: Fri May 23, 2014 18:06
by dogsetc.
'Jitterbug (Junior is a)' Live Listen

This is really fascinating. I've only listened/watched a bit, but i suppose the thing is to have it playing along, as if you're in there with him. He's become quite sympathetic, or empathetic... i'm not sure if this is a prevailing genre of YouTubery, but it's new to me, and idiomatically quite delightful...

Re: Guns

Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 00:38
by Snardbafulator
Wow, I never look at this forum anymore ...

I pretty much can see where everyone's coming from on Guns and it's entirely fair that Cardiacs fans have their particular favorite albums. I'm torn between On Land ... and Garage Concerts ... but then I smack my skull because how could I leave out Sing to God ...

Okay okay, StG had got to be my favorite ... but wait! ... D'oh !

I just don't like to see Guns get slagged for anything but the production -- and even there, distinctions should be made between the mix, which is excellent, and the mastering, which appears to be yet another victim (somewhat like the HB&EB remaster) of the Loudness Wars.

Guns, on its own terms, is an extraordinarily good album.

Bob

Re: Guns

Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 00:57
by psparky27
There is no doubt it is a great album but its not the best but lets not get into that it just does have that "feel" yes great tunes , awesome lyrics....i could go on and on !

The thing is i went to gigs from 80-90-00 and the buzz .... the essence of what makes this glorious band special comes from them being a great live show and the time when that stage was briming to the full !

Re:

Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 01:41
by Snardbafulator
dogsetc. wrote:'Jitterbug (Junior is a)' Live Listen

This is really fascinating. I've only listened/watched a bit, but i suppose the thing is to have it playing along, as if you're in there with him. He's become quite sympathetic, or empathetic... i'm not sure if this is a prevailing genre of YouTubery, but it's new to me, and idiomatically quite delightful...

The word he was looking for to describe the final section ... argg ... is "modulatory."

I totally agree with you; it's a great way to share music. Of course it demands that you're familiar with the song which is easy enough if they leave the links they're listening to, but there's a problem with real-time descriptions in that the the describer winds up turning into me ... somebody who talks exclusively about the technical aspects without adding it all up which takes some reflection (I try not to write about music while listening for the first time).

The guy was technically competent as far as it goes ... but a 7???

That tune's at least an 8.5 if it's a 1.

Apparently he doesn't completely get Tim's aesthetic. But for a first-time listener, he was pretty open-minded, much more than I thought he'd be. I still wish he had more evocative language to describe that utterly unearthly final section, which is so gol-dang strange harmonically that it absolutely justifies making a loop out of it for 3+ minutes.

Bob

Re: Re:

Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 02:12
by psparky27
Snardbafulator wrote:
dogsetc. wrote:'Jitterbug (Junior is a)' Live Listen

This is really fascinating. I've only listened/watched a bit, but i suppose the thing is to have it playing along, as if you're in there with him. He's become quite sympathetic, or empathetic... i'm not sure if this is a prevailing genre of YouTubery, but it's new to me, and idiomatically quite delightful...

The word he was looking for to describe the final section ... argg ... is "modulatory."

I totally agree with you; it's a great way to share music. Of course it demands that you're familiar with the song which is easy enough if they leave the links they're listening to, but there's a problem with real-time descriptions in that the the describer winds up turning into me ... somebody who talks exclusively about the technical aspects without adding it all up which takes some reflection (I try not to write about music while listening for the first time).

The guy was technically competent as far as it goes ... but a 7???

That tune's at least an 8.5 if it's a 1.

Apparently he doesn't completely get Tim's aesthetic. But for a first-time listener, he was pretty open-minded, much more than I thought he'd be. I still wish he had more evocative language to describe that utterly unearthly final section, which is so gol-dang strange harmonically that it absolutely justifies making a loop out of it for 3+ minutes.

Bob


Maybe his language was not that evocative because he did not find it unearthly ? I am not saying they are mutually exclusive just that I would find it hard to be evocative if reviewing a new disney film.They may just not be my bag baby !

As is this track to me to be honest. I wish he had been sent a much better track. 8 tops.