The Album Club: "Famous Places" by Goldmund
 

Please post all reviews of the second album chosen by OccultHawk, to begin reviewing Monday July 24, here. Thanks. Any further discussion on/abuse of Casanova should be placed in its own sub-thread, not here.

Goldmund - Famous Places

This one hit me like an audio sedative. I kept imagining this being the film score to a boring PBS documentary, with a camera slowly panning across and slowly zooming in and out of old B&W photos while this was playing.
Not bad, but... zzzz.

5/10

Goldmund - Famous Places
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....sL._SX466_.jpg

Right away, this album made me think of the album 'Postcards From' by Fiona Brice. A bit later, I realized that they have very much the same concept going on: Minimalist piano arrangements; each named after a place in the world (Although only the Brice album sticks to the idea 100% of the way).

I can probably best describe my feelings about this Goldmund album by comparing it with the Fiona Brice album.

Where Brice's album spans an interesting range of expressions, this Goldmund album quickly starts feeling like it all blends together in my mind. The former is also much more emotionally poignant to me, whereas the latter feels more like some kind of TV commercial half the time. These melodies are simply too banal and obvious and there's just no hint of any sort of nuanced approach to harmonic construction. I don't know much about musical theory, but I can still hear that the Goldmund album has a very limited approach to key signatures and chords. It just all feels so obvious and so lacking in matured songwriting sensibilities. This artist knows of only one mood: Twinkly prettiness. The Brice album actually very sucessfully instills each piece with a unique character of it's own, giving the sense that each piece was written at a different place in the world, with a different mindset and I believe she actually did travel to all of those places. The Goldmund album seems to suggest that all places in the world feel the same to him/her.
Based on my impression of this album, Goldmund feels like a very young artist who is still new at this sort of thing. Brice, comparatively, feels like a seasoned pro with a strong command of composition and harmonic structure.

The sound quality and musicianship on the Goldmund album is, as such, flawless. It isn't bad music by any means, but I can't imagine ever wanting to go back to this either. It severaly lacks personality and memorable musical ideas. There's a very strong sense of banality to the album, which makes the PBS documentery muzak comparison of the above poster depressingly accurate.

Listened to: 1 time, plus a few returns to earlier tracks for a reminder/double check.

Rating: 4/10, which on my scale, isn't so bad. It's just profoundly unremarkable, but didn't actively turn me off.
I would have rated it lower were it not for a few brief moments where everything came together a bit better. Mostly, it's pretty bland, so that kind of kills it for me.

---

I would love to like something for a change. Otherwise, The Album Club should be renamed The Torture Dungeon.
Oh well... there's always next week...

We already had that

http://www.musicbanter.com/general-m...orture+chamber

;)

https://e.snmc.io/lk/o/l/d1adb4abf6c...7b/3250686.jpg

Well, if you're a fan of ambient piano music this is for you. It's forty five minutes piano music... This is a good album but it suffers from a lack of variety. Each song is good in its own right, but doesn't really stand out. They all just meld together and feel like a long piano piece.

I'm bored by this... great sleeping music though.

☆☆1/2

Oh, I should also point out: now that we have separate threads for each album there's no need to quote it in your review if you don't want to. You can if you want, but it's superfluous now.

And on we go...

From the man who brought you Old Lady Drivers? I must admit, I was quite taken aback, given that I had (probably mistakenly) expected all Occult's picks to be harsh, abrasive, noisy things. I can, after reading some of the reviews here, find a lot to agree with. Let's enter the matrix...

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?
Wow! This is really relaxing! Did not expect this.

2. What did you think of the opening track?
Lovely, very soft and acoustic and laidback, very relaxing.

3. What did you think of the next track?
Kind of the same (problem ahead)

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions? (see note 1)
n/a

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not? (see note 2)
Yes, it was all really nice and there was nothing I didn't enjoy

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?
Better, with a caveat, that being that although it improved, for me, in that it didn't suddenly become anything unexpected, it also stayed basically the same all the way through, to the point where on my second listen I had wandered five tracks into another album of his before I realised. It's all very similar.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?
n/a

8. Did you like the instrumental parts? (see note 3)
n/a

9. What did you think of the production?
Insert answer here

10. Did you know of this artiste prior to listening to the album, and if so, did that foreknowledge colour your perception of this album?
No and no

11. Is this, generally, the kind of music you listen to or not?
I certainly would, though I'd prefer there to be a little more variety, perhaps some energy. Much of it could be described, I think, as quite lethargic, even boring? Good music to fall asleep to, certainly.

12. Assuming you listened to the album more than once, on repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

Oddly, I kind of liked it less, as I realised that it all sound so much the same.

13. What would you class as your favourite track(s), if you have any?
I couldn't pick out one track; it all kind of blended together for me into one long composition. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it isn't really a good thing either.

14. And the one(s) you liked least?
n/a

15. If the album in question is a debut, did that fact allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated? (see note 4)
n/a

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing more from this artiste, if you have not heard any of their other material?
I thought so, but on listening to the other album (well, part of it) – The Malady of Elegance – I realise that all his music seems to sound basically the same, so I'm not sure it's worth it. Would keep for a night-time/go-to-bed album for sure.

17. Were you surprised by your reaction - positive or negative - to the album?
Yes, initially, but I was more surprised by how bored I quickly became.

18. Did the album end well?
The closer sounded pretty much like every other track, so, well, I don't know. Probably not, on balance, as it was nothing particularly memorable.


19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?
A bit (a lot) more variety. Something to break up the monotony of the piano – some strings, bit of acoustic guitar, a flute even?

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?
Considering the music was supposed to represent places, I didn't get this at all, since every track sounded much alike, and so I think, for me anyway, it failed in its mission. Therefore not as cohesive as it should have been.

Had intended to rate this quite highly, but I feel now all I can manage is a 7/10, based on the fact that the music is lovely, even if it is all pretty much the same.

Just so you know: I can count, and I see five votes and only four reviews. I'm thinking of making all future polls show the usernames of who voted (Frown, can this one be amended to show that? No? Too late?) so I want to again warn against anyone voting but not bothering to post their review. I know it's early, and there's plenty of time left, but Number Five, (what a pity it wasn't Number Six, eh?) you know who you are: make sure you post as well as vote please.

Too late.

And is this really a necessary thing to care about? Votes sans reviews won't count for club credit, but they're certainly not hurting anything.

If there ends up being many more votes than reviews, then at least that can be used to show if the average reviewer opinion fits with a slightly
broader consensus or not.

Oh joy, that sounds like a lot of self hating fun. It's been dead since at least February though. February 2016.

No secret ballots!

Yeah but I don't want people to say "Oh I voted" and not post anything. I just don't want members to get into the habit of thinking they can click a vote for every album and that's them done; it doesn't work that way. Also, you were the one who put the warning up on the original poll.
It can, but I'd like everyone to put just a little more work into saying what they thought than one mouse click. Think about it: when your album comes up would you be pissed off if there were three reviews and eleven votes?
Yeah, people soon got tired of listening to music they hated. Weird huh?

And is that really an issue that matters in the slightest? Those people won't get credit. It's that simple.

Yes, if they get into the habit of just voting and not writing anything. And again, I point out: you were the one who put the original warning up. But it's very early days for this album anyway, so no need to panic. The all-seeing eye of Trollheart is watching though.... :)
https://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net...20140427122513

:soccer:

People who fall into that habit get kicked off the list. Why does it need to be more complex than that?

What's the point of that icon? I've often wondered. I mean, I know it's a football, but what's it meant to convey? It's like the afro one: don't know what someone is trying to say when they use that.

This is a fair point and I'll adopt that idea. But the next poll will have usernames on it. Wish I'd thought of it for this one...

The soccer ball represents my retarded kid kicking the ball and running around at random analogy.

I thought you were American. No wonder you care about helping strangers.

I'm Irish. We believe a stranger is just a friend who has yet to buy you a drink.

God that is the ****ing cheesiest thing I've ever read. Do you have that on a poster?

No. Made it up.

Make a poster. Rich Americans who pretend to be Irish love that kind of ****.

A friend who has yet to buy you a drink is a pretty ****ty friend.

Not if he's got some weed.

****ing moochers.

I'd never smoke a dude's weed without ****ing his girlfriend for him.

Not if I was an alcoholic....

That actually triples their ****tiness.

Not if I'm a mean drunk.

Quit with your temperance talk and get someone on the street to buy you some whiskey.

in the jar?

I was really pleased to see Goldmund surface in The Album Club, and while I'm a bit late I definitely wanted to add my two cents.

I'm well-acquainted with Keith Kenniff's electronic ambient releases under the Helios moniker and his post-classical work as Goldmund, and Famous Places is certainly an excellent highlight from his catalog.

Don't approach this record looking for something cerebrally-engaging, terrifically novel, or demonstrative of musical proficiency. Instead, Kenniff's intent is to create a warm and intimate soundscape to color a room for awhile. The focus is not on individual tracks or variation, but instead to maintain a consistent scheme of comfort and relaxation. And that effort finds great success with Famous Places.

To criticize Max Richter's Sleep as being too "samey" and lacking in explorative value would be to miss the point of the work, which is music for the subconscious and the unconscious state. In the sphere of much ambient music, unobtrusive melodies which slip in and out of conscious attention really achieve what the artist is going for.

Famous Places is a blissful experience as music for meditation, study, or just something to adorn the room while you pad around on a sleepy Sunday afternoon. Thoroughly enjoyable.

8/10

I think most of us agreed it is a good album to have on in the background or to fall asleep to. It's just that if you're going to actually review it, there's not a lot of scope there. Lovely, but ultimately quite boring, I think was the general consensus. So far. Mostly.

Great review

If elavator music is the world's most disrespected genre it's a hell of a thing to basically make great elevator music. But that's what this is. It's great music that doesn't disturb. It actually took musicians this long to achieve. It hasn't been done in the past. Or maybe not since Gregorian chant. It's not bland or boring. It's not dissonant. It's not catchy. It's like it's not meant to be observed. This album or that one. It doesn't matter and that's the point. 4/5 stars.

I think everything said about it is very right on. It is boring if you approach it that way. I think that goes to show how the artist has removed his ego from it.

I get and respect those perspectives, but to me, muzak doesn't have any place in my record collection or on my playlists. A good album of more involving music can easily work well as background music, given that the genre is right, so I don't need any dull ass elevator muzak. Just my feelings about it.

My argument is that it's much more than that but alrighty

The music seems almost deliberately devoid of hooks, as the composer gives his impression of various places without judgement - probably some of these places are beautiful, some ugly, and while almost every other composer or musician would show their emotional reaction to these places, he takes his reactions (and ultimately himself) out of the picture. I think this is a rare thing to achieve, however I still dont like it enough to want to go back to this album after the couple of listens I had.

6/10

I'm on board with that, I just don't know in what way. What you described in your previous posts is pretty much my definition of muzak, sans quality modifiers. Basically, I get that you see something worthwhile and admirable in it in some way. To me 'music that doesn't disturb', 'It's not catchy', 'It's like it's not meant to be observed' - are not postitive qualities, so that's probably where I don't get how to see it as ' much more than that'.

It's an abstract, ethereal aesthetic.

I guess you could say that about any music but it feels more true here. Still, like all music it's going to boil down to you either like it or not and the deeper we dig the more ambiguous our language becomes. A part of me wants to say you don't get it but I think that's a cop-out. With music, there's never really anything to "get" outside of if you like it or not. I'm being a little non-commital here, but for me, part of what's engaging here is the artist challenges those traditional parameters. However, I can totally get your point if you respond with but he doesn't, that's impossible! lol I like this music but even I'm not sure if I'm pretending it's more than it is. But then again, for me personally, that's what's evoked. So there you go. A long-winded way of saying I like it.