The Music Banter Members' Journals Monthly Update Thread

[Powerstars]

Wow, those rules certainly are important.

[Isbjørn]

Coming soon to a Poseur Cave near you:

Tom Waits double-review.

[The Batlord]

Originally Posted by Isbjørn

Coming soon to a Poseur Cave near you:

Tom Waits double-review.

More Tom Waits reviews. Goody.

[Trollheart]

Originally Posted by The Batlord

More Tom Waits reviews. Goody.

Shut it, you.

[Trollheart]

Ah, the sun is finally shining and no doubt soon enough those bothersome little flies and bluebottles will be buzzing around, annoying us all, to say nothing of wasps and bees! Yeah, summer is slowly heading our way, and down in Journaltown it's all hands to the pumps, with a decent body of work this week. Let's check it out.

Reclaiming his place at the head of the pack, Anteater returns to bring us more of http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...ravaganza.html, with a feature on Bernard Oattes. No, he was not one half of Hall and Oates! Go check out Ant's journal and educate yourself.

There's more from Tritonal in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...continuum.html

while http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...lks-about.html and this week he's reviewing ten grindcore albums in less than a minute each. And then another ten. That's twenty too many for me!

George Harrison is on the menu (not literally, of course: Black Francis is not a cannibal --- at least, so far as I know!) in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...l-journey.html

while Frownland becomes the latest to take the plunge and open another journal, this time it's featuring his rather excellent photographic skills. Catch him http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...-darkroom.html and see what you think.

Mew, Bloc Party, Boduf Songs, Ugly Duckling and more are all to be found in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...63-2013-a.html

but it's western classical music in China that concerns innerspaceboy, also writing about how to entice mp3-buyers to purchase physical albums in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...nnerspace.html --- not for me to be honest; it's a step backwards. Been there, done all that collecting, cleaning, drawing on the inner sleeves and writing the lyrics on those that had none...

Isbjorn (no I won't) has found himself disappointed with Al Jazeera, sorry Jahzzar down at http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...seur-cave.html --- Hell, all free music can't be great you know!

Ki is taking it easy this week (for once) with just the one entry in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...nal-music.html, on Godspeed You! Black Emperor, but that might be due to the fact that he too has opened another journal, this one concentrating on video games. In http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...is-arcade.html you'll find Zelda, Torchlight II and Pokemon, so indulge your inner gamer and take him on!

Kendrick Lamaar and some of Machine's poetry/lyrics in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...-its-dumb.html (but do, its not)

Oriphiel has chapter nine of http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...rgy-story.html

on http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...crap-heap.html you'll find Steely Dan, The Doors and The Cars (cars have doors, dont they?)

and there's an update on Guiseppe Torrisi in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...listening.html

We have a new journal, from a new member, as http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...-robbe264.html gets underway with Chance the Rapper (didn't DJ Chameleon mention him? Or was it someone else? Anyone seen DJ recently?)

and Soulflower is still praising the http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...dness-art.html, with Stone Temple Pilots and an article on The Jacksons.

And so to me. There are two more Tom Waits reviews in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...d-journal.html, leaving us with just two more to go before we finish his entire studio discography, while Star Trek Month continues unabated in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...-emporium.html with Deep Space 9, the third Trek movie and a whole lot more. Quite a lot happening down athttp://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...i-reviews.html, with reviews of albums from Antalio, Sawmail, Emissary Echo and Care of Night.

Meanwhile we're preparing to move into 1968 in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...ive-metal.html, with a list of the albums I'l be covering from that year, and there's something of a change of pace coming for http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...d-2000-ad.html as I prepare to take on Alan Moore's masterpiece, Watchmen.

Into the top ten for 1984 we go in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...y-history.html, and at ten it's Metal Church while Mercyful Fate take the number nine spot. In the other journal Unknown Soldier shares with Anteater, http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...78-2015-a.html there's a joint review of the second Toto album, “Hydra”.

Finally, poor old Wpnfire is struggling In the embrace of evil, but he doesn't seem to mind in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...s-journal.html.

It's not very often I award my

to a relatively new journal, but this one was pretty good so I think it deserves it. Certainly shows that she has a lot of passion for her subject, and is prepared to write rather than just throw down video after video, which is after all the hallmark of a decent journal.

Originally Posted by Soulflower

The Creation of "The Jacksons" 1976


By: Soul Flower
By 1976 the cute Jackson boys from Gary Indiana were now young men. After seven years under contract with Motown, the Jackson's decided to move to CBS. Joe Jackson thought this venture would be beneficial for his sons because he felt they would have more artistic control. He wanted his sons to grow as artists and musicians instead of being manipulated by a label. Michael (in particular) had a very difficult time with this at first because he loved Motown, Berry Gordy and the life changing experience it made for the family. However, like with most ventures within the family, he eventually gave in and agreed. The Jackson 5 soon became known as "The Jacksons" once they moved to CBS for their 13th studio album..."The Jacksons."


Fun Fact: Jermaine Jackson decided to stay with Motown despite the family's persistance that he come with them to CBS because during this period he had just married Berry Gordy's (Motown Records Founder) daughter Hazel Gordy. Randy Jackson, the youngest brother replaced Jermaine. In this photo he is in the far left sitting under Tito.

The album was released in 1976 for Epic Records and Philadelphia International Records as a joint venture.

Why does this album matter?

This album was a milestone for the Jacksons and in my opinion Joe Jackson made a clever genius move. While I don't think all his business decisions were savy ones, he hit it out the park with this one. Why? Once the Jacksons moved to CBS/Epic Records it allowed them to grow as artists. No more singing bubble gum pop tunes or singing songs the label would spit out. The Jacksons NOW were in control of their own sound, image and the songs they wanted to sing and perform. Overall, this was a good move and in my opinion really helped Michael grow not only as a performer but also as an artist. Here is another fun fact: Michael Jackson wrote his first ever published song on this album "Blues Away." He was 19.

Stay tuned....

while this week's

goes to Ki, for http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...is-arcade.html, which certainly seems to have everyone talking about their favourite games. And Pokemon.


Where were we, young polar bear? Oh yeah. June broke and he was back to “Essential emo albums I have never heard”, with the self-titled debut from Rites of Spring, but he couldn't stay away from metal for long, and so it was back to Mercyful Fate with Finntroll and Mayhem on the side, and that was more or less it for June, taking us into July as he tried to kick off Pierce the Veil Week, also talking about The Descendants and Kiss, decided to ditch PtV Week as he got bored, and so ended July.

And so ends our update. Back with more same time next week.
Till then,
Toodles!

[Trollheart]

Boot up system ... system running ... initiate generic introduction .... insert witty comment ... run pithy comic routine ... insert reference to the weather ... load standard complaint subroutine ... prepare to install Update Thread Post ... program running ... Don't forget to register this software for help, free upgrades and next week's lottery numbers sent to you by email.... Disclaimer: next week's lottery numbers will not be sent to you by email.

Program successfully installed! Run now y/n? Upgrade to full paid version y/n? Register online y/n? Preparing to run program for first time. This may take some moments. Upgrade to full paid version y/n? Installing codecs ... Your computer needs to restart. Restart now y/n? Loading program. Upgrade to full paid version y/n? Create desktop icon? Loading ... preparing to run progra --- oh, we did that didn't we? Upgrade to full paid version y/n? Loading ... Welcome!

Bah! Last time I try to computerise the intro! Now that we're up and running, let's see what's shakin' down at Journaltown...

Looks like it's Black Francis who gets us underway with more George Harrison in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...l-journey.html

while taking a break from the darkroom, Frownland goes back to being http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...wnapilago.html where he's writing a story he “wrote in outer space”? Um, yeah...

innerspaceboy is getting back to basics with some “modern music” in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...nnerspace.html

and http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...is-arcade.html continues to gather momentum and create debate, as he speaks of the wonders of Bajo Kazooie and Banjo Tooie as well as, um, Goat Simulator, and a lot more. Not neglecting his other journal though, in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...nal-music.html he's wrapping up Post Rock Month, talking about the new collaboration between Franz Ferdinand and Sparks, asking if Megaedeth are “Worth the hype?” and still has time to listen to some Alesana.

Oriphiel has chapter ten of http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...rgy-story.html this week (aliens, assassins, pizza?) and is also back http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...ck-garage.html going through Hell thanks to Clive Barker as he reviews Hellraiser. Ugh. Love Barker's written work, but man is it gory onscreen!


and Pet_Sounds is listing off his favourite bands as he climbs around http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...crap-heap.html

As I near the end of the discography of Tom Waits, there's a review of Real gone in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...d-journal.html while Star Trek Month is beginning to wind down in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...-emporium.html, with a few more best and worst episodes, more “Women of Star Trek”, the pilot for Voyager reviewed, as well as the last few before we find out what is my top Trek theme. Oh I'm so excited! Bah. Other journals getting a good kicking back into life this week include http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...gy-legend.html, where there's information on Beowulf, Bellerophon and the Sirens among others, while http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...ive-metal.html jumps off into 1968 with albums from The Mothers of Invention, The United States of America, Floyd and Family, and there's a short return for http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...ver-heard.html, with the debut from The Cars. Finally, reviewed in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...i-reviews.html this week are albums from Plastic Violins of Darkness and The Divine Comedy.

There's glam metal in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...y-history.html as Icon's s/t takes the number eight spot, and more Toto in http://www.musicbanter.com/members-j...78-2015-a.html from Anteater and Unknown Soldier (Unknown Anteater?) with a review of Turn Back.


goes to Oriphiel this week for his deeply disturbing but extremely in-depth, some might almost say Trollheartesque (!), review of Hellraiser, below.

Originally Posted by Oriphiel

I decided to do something different for a change, and look at a movie rather than an album. Of course, being a fan of weird music, it's no surprise that i'm also a fan of weird flicks! Specifically, I've always had an affinity for the genres of horror, science fiction, and comedy, with some of my favorite movies having a mix of all three. I'll start off with a movie that truly is the perfect incarnation of the phrase "Love it or hate it"...





From the introduction to the very last scene, Hellraiser is an incredibly odd and at times non-traditional horror movie. Rather than focus on the standard battle between "good" and "evil", where young twenty-somethings with a deus ex machina defeat some ancient and wicked force, Hellraiser is at it's heart a story about the role of pleasure and pain in the human psyche. Of course, while one of the characters is eventually pegged as the "hero" whom the audience is supposed to root for, the movie actually spends most of it's run time examining the relationship between the two characters who become "the villains". In fact, you get the feeling that Clive Barker (the director, and author of the novel from which the movie was based) was constantly pressured by the studio and producers to make the film more simple and clear-cut then he wanted it to be. Everything from the scenes (which were edited to appease the MPAA) to the title of the movie became issues. Originally named "The Hellbound Heart" (after the novel), the studio asked for a change, citing that it was too "romantic" sounding. They asked for new ideas; Clive jokingly came up with the overly-literal "Sadomasochists From Beyond the Grave", and an elderly woman in the film crew apparently offered the joke suggestion "What a Woman Will Do For a Good ****". Needless to say, the studio rejected the titles, and eventually everyone settled on "Hellraiser".


Hellraiser is mostly the story of these two characters: a middle-aged woman who no longer loves her husband, and the living corpse of her husband's brother (who, in life, had an affair with her)

The difficulties of the movie didn't end with the road-bumps during it's creation. After it was released, viewers and critics alike had no idea what to make of what they had just seen. It isn't hard to see why people were confused and in disdain; the movie constantly tries to accomplish too many things in it's run-time, and this creates odd inconsistencies. For example, the first half of the movie relies mostly on suspense (and the dialogue between the characters) to affect the audience, however the second half features many cheap jump scares and the "cat and mouse" cliche that audiences were fairly tired of. The movie was at times a very tasteful and suspenseful work of horror, which many people thought didn't mesh well with the heavy scenes of (what they claimed was "tasteless") gore. Also, most of the movie centers around the idea that humans are always driven to do what brings them pleasure, forming morality after the fact to try and justify their inclinations, while also examining our odd fascination with danger and pain, trying to find the blurry (or maybe non-existent) line where the sensation of pleasure becomes pain. The first two thirds of the movie shy away from the labels of "good" and "evil", portraying the humans and demons without clearly defining any heroes or villains (making it hard to truly hate any character, since they're all mostly given motives for their actions). However, the final part of the movie throws the moral neutrality out the window, and becomes a generic battle between a human and demons. These odd dualities left a bad impression on audiences, causing half of the audience to absolutely hate the movie, and the other half to love it to the point of making it a cult classic. The critics were just as divided: while some praised the movie for it's merits, others were not at all impressed. As Roger Ebert himself put it: "This is a movie without wit, style or reason, and the true horror is that actors were made to portray, and technicians to realize, its bankruptcy of imagination."


The Cenobites, demons who care only for exploring the limits of pleasure and pain.

Part two follows...

[Trollheart]

The plot of Hellraiser isn't quite clear when it first begins, opening with a scene of intense gore that goes unexplained until later in the movie. It begins with a man purchasing a strange cube from a mysterious merchant, and later tinkering with the cube in an empty room. As he later explains, his goal was to experience everything the world had to offer, to come to an understanding of pleasure and pain. Normal pleasures (including having an affair with his brother's wife) had grown to bore him ("It's not enough. It's never enough"), and so he sought down an artifact that would supposedly grant him otherworldly experiences. He opens the cube, and it brings forth a cadre of demons that torture him until he is literally in shambles (). Of course, their powers prevent him from actually dying, and they eventually bring him back to their home dimension. He becomes their slave, presumably for all eternity, or so the demons thought. His brother and sister in law move into his old home (which was left by the brothers' parents as inheritance to the both of them), and he uses the common blood between him and his living brother to anchor him back into reality. However, he comes back without any definite form, being a jumble of bones and tissue, and the only way for him to completely regain a body is to drain the essence of other living beings (or possibly just rip off their muscles/skin/etc. to use as his own, the movie never quite reveals which it is). After using a puddle of blood to give himself a basic form (in a fantastically eerie display of practical effects), his brother's wife finds him in the attic, and reluctantly agrees to help him.


The daughter, who eventually becomes the hero of the movie, trying to protect her father while evading his brother and the demons that are chasing him.

What impressed me most as the movie played out was, surprisingly enough (in a cult horror movie), the acting. Julia, played by Clare Higgins, does a fantastic job of conveying exactly what the character is thinking without ever having say more than a few words at a time. There's a specific scene where she's saying goodnight to various guests at a dinner party, and when she reaches her husband, you can instantly see that she simultaneously loves him (deep down, anyway) and hates him. Andrew Robinson plays the part of the aloof and somewhat benign husband, and he plays it very convincingly and while his acting can seem a bit odd here and there, it actually fits his character pretty well. Later on, (serious spoilers from this point on) he plays the role of his reanimated sibling, after his brother kills him and steals his skin/face. As the "villain" of the end of the movie, Robinson does an incredible job, especially with his parting lines of the movie (which I'll probably address later on). The daughter, Kirsty, is played by Ashley Laurence, who does a good job of conveying a sense of shock at what the character is witnessing. However, I found some of her lines to be written and delivered a bit awkwardly, being too stiff, and it unfairly sets her character up to deliver some of the worst and most cheesy/overracted lines of the movie. Lastly, there's the resurrected brother, Frank, played predominantly by Oliver Smith (Sean Chapman plays his during flashbacks, when he still has his original body). In the flashbacks, he really doesn't pop up that much, making it hard to really critique Chapman's performance (I thought he did alright, though). Smith's time as Frank, however, when the character is a skinless body of exposed muscles and bone, is very memorable. Beyond these characters (who, to be fair, all have the occasional moment of cheesiness), everyone else was pretty forgettable. The movie introduces a love interest for the daughter (*groan*), but luckily for us he basically shows up only three or four times. I'm also glad that they didn't have him fulfill the cliche of popping up at the last second to rescue the girl, and in fact she's the one who ends up doing everything and saving the day (while he just stays in the background, trying not to get killed). Another thing that the film does right is that, quite frankly, the physical effects are stunning. However, Barker and the film crew ran out of money near the end of filming, which resulted in some very crude and dated effects as well. Below are two examples:


Here, you can see that they put a lot of effort into the designs of the demons.


And here is a goofy blob of rubber that never fails to make audiences laugh uncontrollably.

The movie also has some interesting scenes, as well as metaphors and symbolism, that add depth to the characters in a way that you might miss during the first viewing. Kirsty gets most of the weird symbolism that never gets explained. The baby crying in the distance during her nightmare, the sound of pigeons flapping their wings that she continually hears throughout the movie and the homeless man that usually appears not long after or before the sound (who stares at her with strangely clear and young eyes). Although later, the homeless man turns into a demon and saves the cube from being destroyed, but that doesn't quite make sense when looked at literally; at that point, the portal between worlds had closed, and all of the demons had disappeared. Not only that, but he had first appeared before the cube had even been opened by Kirsty. It seems more logical that he (and the pigeons) are a symbol, something about the alluring and yet disgusting nature of the strange and mysterious, and his saving the cube is a way of saying that humanity can never be free from our curiosity; someone will always come along, eventually, to give in to their curiosity and "open the box". In terms of the other characters, they also have their symbols and telling moments. The most obvious (yet also strangely easy to miss) is when Julia kisses Larry so that he doesn't notice skinless Frank lurking about. Larry takes that as an invitation to have sex with her, and Julia goes along with it, until Frank enters the room with a knife. Julia starts shouting "No! Please don't!", and she yells it quite a few times, and yet Larry (who has no reason to believe that she's not yelling at him) keeps on as if nothing's wrong. She pretty much has to toss him off, and he gets offended, asking "What's wrong with you?". At first, this just seems like lazy writing; Larry obviously had to have heard her, so it's idiotic to think that he waited for so long before stopping. But then you think about it, about his delay and response, and if it was actually intentional. The movie hints that the two are having marriage problems, and that Julia is "unsatisfied" with him as opposed to Frank, despite her husband trying to please her, and Larry's reaction to her screaming makes it seem like it's something normal for them (especially considering that the movie makes Larry out to be too sheepish to take advantage of anyone). Either way, the movie just implied that either Larry was approaching the point of rape without giving a care (which would give quite a dark side to his otherwise happy and goofy persona), or that doing so was something that Julia normally expected him to do. It's freaky, no matter how you look at it, because it makes the relationship between them that much darker. And then there's the matter of the scene preceding the ending. It's become somewhat of an iconic moment, popping up in many "Best Last Words" compilations and lists, and is completely open to interpretation. If you've never seen it before, here it is...

(Sorry: YouTube removed as per yadda yadda ...)

"Jesus Wept". Not exactly what you'd expect a murderer to say before being torn to pieces by dimension-traveling demons. At the time, critics brushed it off as being just a meaningless bible quote, added purely to sound interesting. In a way, they're right; when the scene was being filmed, the original line was supposed to be "**** you", but Robinson (the actor in the scene) asked Barker to change it to something more meaningful, memorable and mysterious. Specifically, he asked for that quote from the bible, and Barker immediately saw the potential in it, and reworked the scene. It's actually an ingenious line, when you look at the context of the phrase: In the bible, Jesus (depending on interpretations) is either crying for his friend Lazarus, or he's crying because of the faithlessness of Lazarus' family. In the first interpretation, it would mean that Frank is admitting that his actions were in vain (as Jesus wept for a dead man, despite know that he can bring him back to life with little effort, which he does, making the tears pointless). In this case, it seems like Frank is saying that there was no point trying to fight the demons, as he was always destined (because of his curiosity and passions) to be their slave. In the second interpretation, where Jesus cries because Lazarus' family is upset despite knowing that he can and will bring Lazarus back, Frank would be making more of a commentary on humanity, and how we're ruled by fear and doubt. We'll always be repelled by (and attracted to) the unknown, to death and pain, and ruled by fear. Jesus weeping, in this case, is almost as if he's sad because of this flawed and unchanging nature of humanity, and it gives Frank's words a kind of edge (as if he's saying "**** it, we're all screwed no matter what we do."). Another way to look at his words is by taking "Jesus Wept" as it is used as a phrase. People say it as a way of expressing frustration and mounting troubles (i.e. someone steals your car, and then you find out that your spouse is leaving you). In this case, Frank might simply be saying that he knows everything is about to go to hell (literally). There are many interpretations of just what Robinson had in mind when he chose that specific line, and when you take his strangely genuine smile into account, the possibilities only grow. This is the most highly discussed part of the movie, and everyone has their own idea of what was going through Frank's head. Was he giving up, smiling in despair? Was he actually enjoying the moment, knowing that his pain was simply the price of the curiosity he loved so much? You decide.


Even demons need to chill every now and then.

I consider Hellraiser to be a great and ambitious movie, definitely one of the classics of the horror genre, but also one that has far too many flaws and inconsistencies to be a true masterpiece. However, despite it's problems, you can really see that Clive Barker tried as hard as he could to bring his novel to life, and his hard work really shows in all of the movie's successes and strong points. There's a legitimate sense of intrigue and charm that seperates this movie from it's peers, and it actually makes you feel somewhat sympathetic for the "villains". With Frank, you can feel his sense of urgency and fear as he knows that the demons are coming for him, even as he takes monstrous actions to try and reclaim a physical body and escape from them. With Julia, you can see her sense of boredom with her husband (and life in general), almost feeling bad for her despite her infidelity and the actions she takes on behalf of Frank. There's also Larry, who legitimately tries to be a good husband and father, trusting his wife until the very end. And of course, you can't help but feel bad for Kirsty, who gets dragged into everything because of the actions of others, and is simply trying to keep her family together. When the acting works, it works very well, and the same can be said of the (now somewhat dated) effects. There are layers to the action (albeit not as much as in more intellectual films) which may serve as good food for thought. All in all, I'd definitely recommend Hellraiser, even though I already know that half of you will hate it. It seems like this movie will always be destined to walk the line between being great and horrible in the eyes of the viewers; which will it end up as for you?

Something a little different for this week's

I'd like to award this to Anteater and Unknown Soldier, for the amount of work they've put in to their collaborative journal. They certainly seem to have hit on a winning formula, but I can see it's taking a lot of their time and effort. Certainly worth it, I feel.

And so we go back to The Poseur Cave, another of the

Into August we went, and Isbjorn decided to take on Quorthon's solo album, then “I see fire” followed by (deep breath) Empire! Empire! (I was a lonely estate) --- what is it with these bands who have to have forty words in their name? Doesn't even make sense. Imagine all the time wasted saying their name, all the other things you could be doing instead: “Who you going to see tonight then?” “Oh this band called Empire! Empire! (I was a --- oh no! The gig's already started!” Any-way, it was Exhorder next and then on we went into September, which opened with Jets to Brazil, then Myrkur, after which he ranted “Death to false indie!” (Just doesn't have the same ring to it though, does it?) and we were done for another two months.

And we are done here too. But not for two months. Just a week.
See you all next Sunday.
Toodl --- ERROR! ERROR! ABNORMAL PROGRAM TERMINATION! FATAL ERROR! ALL DATA WILL BE WIPED FROM HARD DRIVE! PRESS ANY KEY TO CONTINUE....

[Black Francis]

Appreciate the mention Trollheart.

But seriously, any harrison fan out there leave my a comment, it's frickin lonely there, am i really the only dude here that digs Harrison?

Ive been Following Frown's picture journal and Ki's arcade, good stuff, keep it up guys.

[Key]

Originally Posted by Black Francis

Ive been Following Frown's picture journal and Ki's arcade, good stuff, keep it up guys.

Thanks man. When I started the journal, I had in mind a few things I wanted to talk about, and i'm happy people are discussing those things along with me. It's turned out to be a better journal than I could have expected.

[The Batlord]

Originally Posted by Trollheart

Into August we went, and Isbjorn decided to take on Quorthon's solo album

Where was this? I missed that one. I dig that album.