BOC: CotHM opinions reprise

[Jonathan Jarrett]

On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 08:55:33PM -0400, Alex S. Garcia wrote:
> >        To pick up a few of other people's points before I go on, I like
> >Theo's point about being a kind of _Flat Out_ 2; there's a lot fo what
> >sounds like Buck-pop kicking about
>
> I don't get that. Well, not completely. I mean, it seems to me that HF had
> _a lot_ more of Buck's poppish sounding material. OTOH, Cult... well, after
> careful consideration, it seems to me like Buck's stuff is simply better
> "integrated" into the BOC sound. What I mean is that up to now, you always
> had all these BOC songs, and then once in a while you'd have a Buck tune
> that would pop up and you would just _know_ it was Buck's right away. Now,
> however... you can still feel it, but it's in the atmosphere. I'm not sure
> how to describe it. It's like it's woven into the fabric of the album
> itself. Granted, not throughout, but it's like it's _finally_ become part of
> the BOC sound, getting mixed in with the rest. Am I making any sense??

        Yes, actually. I hadn't looked at it that way but you're
right. The other way to take that is that the sound of BOC as a whole has
moved towards Buck's, of course, and I might take that view, but I agree
with you about what the result is.

> >Lots of people are saying it's unfair to expect another
> >_Secret Treaties_ and that's fine, the band doesn't work like that any
> >more, you won't get that white-hot stuff all fused together again. I was
> >hoping for another _Cultosaurus Erectus_ personally... (my fourth
> >favourite album easily). At least this isn't actually any of BOC's other
> >albums done again, which would actually be pretty disappointing I suppose.
>
> I agree. Besides, if I'm right on my diagnosis, and if this is an ongoing
> trend, I suspect it'll get less and less likely we'll ever see them attempt
> to re-do one of those old classics. Which is a good thing, IMHO. Repeating
> yourself can kill a band. They're still around. Personally, I'm hoping it
> lasts...

        Oh yeah: if Eric or Buck said to me, well, we can explode the band
trying to squeeze another _Imaginos_ out or we can carry on for years like
that I'd take option b every time. I could just wish for more interesting
material.

> Well, again, I think the band is evolving. And it might be unfair to make
> these kind of arguments. Besides, you can't blame the guys for using modern
> technology and trying to attain a better sounding quality! That's just nuts :-)

        I somehow feel my point isn't getting across here :-) I have no
problem with clear production, in fact although I'll put up with bad
recordings quite easily recordings that should have been good and aren't
(_Spectres_ and _Mirrors_ in the BOC canon, _Xenon Codex_ in Hawkwind) get
right on my nerves. What I'm saying is that this one sounds great in a
soft way, it has no sharpness and no edges. Everything is rounded "for
your safety and comfort".

> Oh, and there's no such thing as "too" perfect. In my book, you can never
> achieve perfection. Only strive for it. And striving for perfection is a
> _good_ thing :-)

        Well, if you wanna get dogmatic on me I'd say that in this case
perfection, however unattainable, is composed of several different things
and that Buck went too far towards only one of them with this
production. But I should stop banging on about it really.

> I guess it's all in tastes. To me, that great one is there, "almost perfect"
> :-) "Out of the darkness," of course... Yeah, I know, I'm repeating myself.
> I just love it. It's even inspired me a story I have yet to write... not
> many songs do that for me.

        Once more an instance that people are different I guess as others
have been listing that among the bad songs... I think the bext thing there
is `The Old Gods Return' and that everything else is second-rate or
worst. `Stone of Love' best of that lot, `Here Comes That Feeling' and
`Eye of the Hurricane' close behind. None of the rest is too memorable and
some is bad. For me. But though there's one first-rate song on there even
_Heaven Forbid_ has one better-than-first-rate one. Although _Club Ninja_
had none and I'm not sure _Revolution by Night_ did either.

> OK, before I say what I'm going to say, a couple of disclaimers:
> 1) I'm not aiming this at you specifically, Jon - I've noticed the following
> in many other posts too.
> 2) I'm not trying to upset anyone, or start an argument, so please don't
> take this the wrong way :-)
>
> Alright. This being said... It seems to me that a lot of people just get too
> attached to some specific aspects of a band that they then try to see in all
> further works, these becoming their sole (or almost) criteria for deciding
> whether an album is good or not. Of course, you can do whatever you want
> *grin* but I find this somewhat sad, as it can prevent the listener from
> appreciating songs that might have, coming from another artist, been
> perceived as very good, maybe even amazingly so in some cases. But just
> because it's BOC (or another band, this can be applied to any) suddenly
> makes the piece poor, sloppy, bad, whatnot. I don't get it.
>
> Myself, I try to detach myself as much as possible from who plays on an
> album and to just listen to the songs and take them for what they are. I
> either like them or I don't, regardless of past achievements and/or offenses.
>
> Mind you, I'm not saying this because I like Spectres or Mirrors (and, in
> fact, I don't like Mirrors at all!) it's just something I've noticed on this
> list, as time & posts went by, and have been wondering about it. So there
> you go.

        Oh I freely admit to being guilty of that. I don't think it's a
sin to consider good music and good BOC as separate if overlapping things
though. There are things I like about BOC particularly which are why I
love the band so. This record hasn't got them. I recognise that for a
country rock band it would be an astounding album. I don't go looking for
excellence in that genre though, because it doesn't float my personal
boat. I like it a lot more than I did. But stack it up against its sisters
in the racks and well, it competes poorly compared to this stuff that I
love. See what I mean? Yours,
                              Jon

ObCD: Porcupine Tree - _The Sky Moves Sideways_
--
Jonathan Jarrett, part-time bookseller's assistant & medieval historian
Pembroke Cambridge   "I flatter myself that we are almost the only people
Birkbeck London       who understand and relish _nonsense_." (Hazlitt)