The Prog Rock Album Club

Big Ears · 03-07-2013, 01:14 PM

I've been busily writing notes in my little black book and I want to do the album justice.

Trollheart · 03-07-2013, 01:31 PM

I'm the same. I've listened to it about seven times now. I'll also be doing a full review in my journal soon. I effing love this album!

Thanks Ant!

Anteater · 03-07-2013, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

I'm the same. I've listened to it about seven times now. I'll also be doing a full review in my journal soon. I effing love this album!

Thanks Ant!

You all be a'welcome! I'm surprised nobody here had heard it before now, but for those of you digging The Tall Ships....yay!

Electrophonic Tonic · 03-07-2013, 09:45 PM

I'm listening to this again tonight. I want to find out why you guys like it so much and maybe I'll enjoy it more myself. I won't use the full format, but I'll have a re-review up later tonight.

Unknown Soldier · 03-08-2013, 05:05 PM

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

A poppy version of Peter Gabriel era Genesis (hell Genesis again!) but then I have to say the poppy hooks on "Ghosts" really grabbed me and kind of reminded me of Raised on Radio era Journey.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

Ghosts a great track and I also enjoyed Playground.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

A lot of the songs in the middle part of the album, I thought had a tendency to drag and nothing is worse than pop songs that drag, they remind of those singers on those talent contest shows! The title track was a perfect example of this trait.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

I thought the vocalist a competant all round singer, whose style carried off most of the songs.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

As ET said it was mostly poppy prog which to be fair does have limited appeal to me. It was an album that I enjoyed due to its poppy edge but it's probably not something I'd put on again in a hurry, but certain songs did really stand out.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

I did appreciate some of the songs more on a second listen.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

They seemed to have clarity and were easy to understand, but I didn't follow them enough to judge them properly.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

Can't fault the instruments on the album and the band seemed very precise in what they were trying to achieve.

9. What did you think of the production?

Sounded very polished.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I knew the name and also knew they were a band that had been around in the late 1980s, when their sound would've fallen into the AOR category......possibly.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Progressive pop if such a thing exists.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

I think this is an album for moods and you really need to be in the mood for this album (just my opinion of course)

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

Ghosts.

14. And the one you liked least?

The slower stuff I wasn't overly keen on, no one song stood worse than the others on the album.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Don't know the rest of their discography to comment on this.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

I'm keen on hearing their first, which gets high ratings on some sites.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

The theme didn't register with me.

18. Did the album end well?

Hate to say it but was kind of glad when it ended, it seemed long at 64 mins.....but that's a normal length today.

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

Given the poppy style of the band, it's hard to change the core of the band, but I guess they did what they set out to do.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

It was consistent.

Overall Album Rating: 6 out of 10 A decent album but just not my style.

Anteater · 03-08-2013, 08:50 PM

I'm the one who suggested this record obviously, but I'll throw in my two cents just for the record too.

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Very poppy: To anyone who isn't familiar with It Bites' style to begin with, it would probably come across as 80's Genesis/Yes meets a late 90's power-pop act like Vertical Horizon....but yeah, poppy!

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

Excellent! I loved 'Oh My God' and 'Ghosts' almost instantaneously back when I first got ahold of this record. Lots of energy all around!

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

As poppy as this album is, you can't exactly say it doesn't demonstrate diversity. The title track and 'Playground' are certainly somewhat stereotypical as ballads (albeit very very GOOD ones), but the proggy side of the group comes out wonderfully in cuts like 'Memory Of Water' and 'The Wind That Shakes The Barley', plus there's some nice AOR touches on 'Fahrenheit' and 'Lights'. Overall, both side A and B are pretty strong.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

John Mitchell (who is also the lead guitarist here) had big shoes to fill going into this album, since It Bites' original guitarist/singer Francis Dunnery was quite a charismatic frontman....but he really carries this record!

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

It Bites is one of those bands you either fall in love with pretty quickly or dismiss due to getting bored with their sugary aesthetic. Their 80's output is considered to be some of the best crossover progressive pop-rock of that decade, but their songwriting approach is certainly quite divisive and almost schizophrenic in a way...but in my case, they hit just the right spot when my mood is right.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

Fell in love at first listen, and over time I've only grown to appreciate their unique style even more.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

Above average actually, for the most part. John Mitchell is such a fundamentally different sort of songwriter and performer than Francis Dunnery (other than the fact they're both gods on guitar), and yet he manages to replace the quirkiness that defined the group originally with a more down-to-earth, relatable pathos successfully. Quite a feat....

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

John Beck and John Mitchell pretty much ruled this album on keyboards and guitar respectively: on the longer songs where they get to show off a bit, the results stunned me back when I first got this album.

9. What did you think of the production?

Slick like an AOR record, but mixed in such a way that the emotional content comes through nicely.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I was a huge fan of the 80's incarnation of the group before I ran across The Tall Ships, so I'd say I was fairly familiar with them overall.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Progressive pop-rock. This particular album has a lot of power pop and alternative rock influences, so those tags might apply too.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

For a long time, I had to listen to this album through atleast once a week or I wasn't happy. I don't do that anymore, but its still a great album to revisit every so often.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

Either 'The Wind That Shakes The Barley' or 'Memory Of Water'.

14. And the one you liked least?

Probably 'Great Disasters'. That's not to say its a bad song, but out of all the poppy numbers on the album, its probably the weakest in actual construction.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Any album that comes out over a decade after the band's original era has come and gone is going to have it's work cut out for it. That being said, if you aren't familiar with any of It Bites' classic 80's output...you probably need to go rectify that immediately. Its harder to appreciate just how cool The Tall Ships works as a comeback record otherwise.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

Always.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

Spoiler Alert: The big theme behind this record is communication. We have trouble talking to people in our lives, misunderstandings happen, etc. etc....and yet when people close to us die, there's nothing more we wish for then the ability to communicate with them again. Most of the songs on The Tall Ships touch upon these themes in some manner, with a few in particular ('Oh My God', the title track, 'Fahrenheit') being more obvious about it.

18. Did the album end well?

This Is Englannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.....d

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

John Beck's keyboard work could have been given a bit more room to breathe, but otherwise nah.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

This record was a seamless joy to listen to, and obviously put together with much care and ado.

Overall Album Rating: 9 out of 10!!!

Trollheart · 03-09-2013, 07:26 AM

Okay, after finally digesting this album what I think is enough I'm ready to make my thoughts known. I have to say, beyond the albums I suggested for the club this is the first time this hasn't seemed like work, something I have to do, get through. Which is not to denigrate any of the other albums reviewed, just that I loved reviewing this one. (For those interested I'll definitely be running a full in-depth review of this in my journal soon).

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

Can I say OMG? I LOVE this! Who called this pop? Okay, I'm just talking about the first track here admittedly but this is not pop. Don't mistake those bright bouncing synths for pop music. This sounds like a continuation of my favourite, "Once around the world"! I'm settling in here! Catchy, memorable, upbeat, with great keys and fine guitar with --- with -- OMG! John MItchell! Of Arena? I just died and went to prog rock Heaven!!!

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

Loved "Oh my God" with a passion! "Ghosts" was even better! Someone give me some vallium! Best so far was the title track. This album has the energy and passion that some previous It Bites albums have lacked, to me. It's almost like a comback album in many ways.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

I loved "Playground", with its dramatic, almost cinema-soundtrack keybaord arrangements, "Memory of water" (despite their robbing the title from Marillion!) barrels along at a frenetic pace, then the title track slows everything down beautifully. Great pacing throughout the album. "The wind that shakes the barley" --- another Marillion title? Okay I know they didn't coin the phrase, but still, you'd wonder if there isn't some influence in there somehow --- is a great song, very epic but I find that the tagline/chorus is sung almost the same as a-ha's "The blood that moves the body". I also love "Safe keeping", lovely ballad. "Lights" is "Calling all the heroes" for the 21st century: about time they wrote something similar. Love the bouncy upbeat-ness.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?
I loved John Mitchell's guitar work with Arena, but had no idea he could sing. And he can! He's a powerful, emotional singer that almost -- almost --- compensates for the loss of the great Francis Dunnery. He also reminds me on occasion of Bryan Adams. He has that sort of growly, rough sound to his voice that is a little hard to get used to after Dunnery's mostly higher, lilting one, but I have already grown to love it.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

Oh I loved the music. Powerful, upbeat, almost pomp-rock at times. Energetic, passionate, mostly uptempo. Some totally gorgeous soft piano passages, such as in "Safekeeping" and "Playground", and parts of "This is England"...

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

Loved it from the first minute and it just got better as it went on. Kind of hit a high point with the title track but despite that it did not, as I often expect these albums to do at that point, fall back in quality at all.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

It Bites' lyrics are often quite obscure and hard to decipher. Although it's surely an allegory for something, I loved the image "The tall ships" drew in my mind of someone, maybe a prince or king, living their life in exile in a foreign country, waiting for the day when their homeland will send ships to bring him home in triumph. Could even refer to aliens I guess. Generally though most of the lyrics are obscure but there appears to be a common theme of loss, yearning for the past, missed chances and memories running through the album. I think. Also the power words have over people, when sometimes you want to take them back or wish you hadn't said them, other times you wish you had spoken your heart when it's too late and the chance is gone.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

Yes, I love and have loved John Michell's guitar work with every band he's been with, particularly Arena. I like the way there's a guitar riff taken right out of "Plastic dreamer" from "Once". The kyeboards have always been an integral part of It Bites' appeal, and here they certainly drive most of the album.

9. What did you think of the production?

To me the production seemed very sharp. See my previous comments as to production, but this sounded produced very well.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

Intimately. I loved "Once around the world", but came to It Bites first through "Calling all the heroes". Having heard that I knew it was going to be a hit, and it was. Sadly, the debut album was not as good as I had hoped, though "Once" redressed that disappointment. The next one had good moments but up until now I've never thought they came anywhere close to "Once".

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

I have to admit, It Bites on their website call themselves "the progressive pop rock band", so who am I to disagree?

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

Much more

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

The title track, followed by "Ghosts" and then "Oh my God", but it's a tough choice as I like almost every track on this.

14. And the one you liked least?

I can understand ET's hatred of "Great disaster", but don't share it. You have to know this band. They use that odd phrasing, like vocalise, weird disjointed sounds like "OOH WOO YEAH -- YUP YUP YUP YUP --- OH AY!" a lot, and it's kind of their trademark. If you look past that, or even embrace it, this song, though certainly one of the weakest on the album, comes alive. I'm not saying it was the one I liked least, because there wasn't one.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Again, this question should be ignored if the album is NOT a debut, only. This isn't, so I'm passing over it.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

I'm now planning to go back and give the other albums that I found a little disappointing another chance, and I also want to listen to their latest, which didn't impress me first time out.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

I'm not sure there was one, beyond the linked concepts of past, memories, missed chances, old loves and regrets. Also the power words can have over people comes through solidly as a binding concept throughout most if not all of the album.

18. Did the album end well?

"This is England", while not in my opinion as powerful or epic a closer as "Once around the world", was a great example of how It Bites can write an epic track that goes through several changes, in mood, tempo, structure and feeling, and kind of arrive back at the beginning, bringing the song full circle. I would have preferred a little more emphasis on the chorus "This is England and you love me!" which I thought worked well, but then they moved away from that for the midsection. I think it was however a powerful, emotional song and a fine way to close an album that, had it been released this year, would already be jumping to the top of my favourites list for 2013!

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

No es possible!

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

Every track was great, so I'd say that consitutes holding together well.

Rating: 9.85 out of 10

A final point: this is what this club is all about! This album seems to have been one of the most polarising we've done so far. Some people love it, some hate it and some are meh about it. While I respect everyone's opinion, the rest of you are of course all wrong!

But it's great to see an album where we're not all just agreeing, where there are such widely held and disparate views, all making good points and making for a great discussion. Let's hope the next one is as interesting!

Unknown Soldier · 03-09-2013, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

Rating: 9.85 out of 10

Only a true spectacles wearing geek could come up with such a score.

Big Ears · 03-09-2013, 12:01 PM

It looks like I am the white rabbit.

1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?

I liked it immediately and found it similar, although not identical, to the original lineup, with high voices, sparkling guitar and bright keyboards.

2. What did you think of the opening tracks?

With Oh My God, It Bites! start as they intend to continue with sharp Yes-like harmonies, bright keyboards and tasteful guitar playing. The vocals are inclined to be high and the pace is continually fast. Previously, John Mitchell had been employed by bands like Arena as a guitarist first and singer second, but he has been a hidden vocal talent. Like his famous predecessor, Francis Dunnery, he sings in a high register and has an excellent voice - you never hear him sing out of tune. Also like Dunnery he is an outstanding, but slightly understated, guitar player. The pace does not slow for Ghosts, with John Mitchell sounding like Ray Wilson of Stiltskin on Scared of Ghosts and even uses the phrase, 'Walking in Your Footsteps,' from the latter's second single. Ghosts has a catchy synthesizer melody and an adept guitar solo. The third track, Playground, is a marginally slower ballad, with symphonic keyboards and pounding drums from Bob Dalton. He is a fine drummer, never too showy nor shuffling, but always appropriate to Beck's keyboards and Mitchell's guitar.

3. What did you think of the later tracks?

The band does seem to run out of steam in the second half of the album with slower and more sparse arrangements. It is still full of ideas and John Mitchell is a revelation.

4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions?

John Mitchell was known more as a guitarist with Arena and took on lead vocals for It Bites! He is, however, an excellent singer and never sings out of tune. His guitar playing is nimble throughout.

5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not?

Both the music and vocals are exemplary.

6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?

The album keeps improving, the more I listen. My feeling though, is that, in keeping with many modern bands, The Tall Ships album is too long and there is some repetition of the slow voice/ piano/ synth passages in the latter part of the album. Tony McPhee of the Groundhogs said that he felt compelled to fill the 75 minutes of a CD, but admitted that he could not come up with the material. It Bites!, like many others, seem to have soldiered on regardless.

7. What did you think of the lyrical content?

Rather curious. Lights is a catchy song carried along with a particularly high voice, sparring guitar and keyboards, and chorus in a stirring manner akin to Big Country, but it has the line, 'So let’s go out tonight, I feel the space between us.' Great Disasters is an upbeat song, but has a downbeat lyric. It follows the title track, which I understand is about death.

8. Did you like the instrumental parts?

Yes. The middle instrumental section of Memory of Water is quite heavy with a characteristically speedy guitar solo. The title track, opens with soaring harmonised guitar and keyboards, reminiscent of Dave Flett-era Manfred Mann's Earth Band.

9. What did you think of the production?

Very clear and sharp, just like the original albums.

10. How well do you already know the band/artist?

I know the first three albums pretty well, although I don't own Eat Me in St. Louis. I remember it being in Woolworths' sale bins not long after it was released. Now it is as rare as hens' teeth.

11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to?

Neo-progressive, although there are elements of seventies progressive rock, grunge and modern progressive. It Bites! also take in the high voiced bands of the seventies, like Pilot, 10cc and City Boy.

12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?

More.

13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one?

Great Disasters is a small masterpiece. It has a scat-***-nonsense vocal motif, along the lines of, 'Dumbri umbri ayoh, dumbri umbri ayoh, ee oh ho ayoh o-oh oh oh, oh ayoh o-oh oh oh,' reminiscent of The Police, while the arrangement is similar to other seventies high vocal/ bright guitar groups like 10cc, Pilot and City Boy. There is even a touch of Billy Joel in the lyrics and it ends on synth like an A-ha song produced by Alan Tarney. This is the track to which I keep returning . . . and returning. I need not bother, as it has taken permanent residency in my head! I have read there is a radio edit, but have not been able to track it down.

14. And the one you liked least?

There isn't one particular track, although I prefer the earlier fast tracks to the later slow ones.

15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated?

Although there have been a number of reunions with different frontmen, this feels like a comeback. All credit to John Mitchell for taking on lead vocals and playing guitar to the extent that I did not really miss Dunnery. Having said this, I wish he (Dunner) would sort himself out.

16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist?

Yes, I would like to hear the single edit of Great Disasters as well as a good quality version of the Japanese bonus track, These Words.

17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one?

There is a thread of death and longing, but some of the strange paradoxes do not make much sense to me.

18. Did the album end well?

This is England, the longest piece at over thirten minutes, is intended as the magnum opus. It is another song in the second half of the album with a sparse intro, this time a quiet glockenspiel-sounding synthesizer and voice. The first part brings to mind Prefab Sprout, particularly in the voice, yet the pulsing keyboards, spiky guitar and punchy drums are all It Bites! At around the five minute mark, Beatles harmonies and cello sound introduce the 'This is England and you love me,' line, followed by psychedelic wurlitzer-style keyboards and a surreal spoken word passage. The final third (at about ten minutes) has almost a hymn in, 'There once was a vicar who walked in this garden . . . ,' Linking all the parts of This is England are the lyrics, but, otherwise it sounds like three distinct songs, and serves as a prototype of the band's next studio record, a concept album, Map of the Past (2012).

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?

I feel it needed editting, especially in the latter stages.

20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?

Yes, the album is cohesive, although This is England should have been three separate tracks (imo).

Overall Album Rating: 8.5 out of 10.

Electrophonic Tonic · 03-09-2013, 02:52 PM

I wanted to come back and say I found something new to enjoy with this album and hopefully grasp onto something other than the few tracks I enjoyed the first time... but I can't say I have.

I still adore 'This is England' and think it's one of the best progressive rock songs I've heard in a long time. Everything about it is what I love about prog, and those flashes of mellotron are always a positive for me.

I still think 'The Wind that Shakes the Barley' is a solid track with a great organ riff and the rest of the tracks I'm mostly indifferent to.

And yes, Great Disasters is still a sore spot for me. Maybe outside the context of the album I would like it more, but I'm not looking forward to hearing "De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da" on a progressive rock album, or actually any album at all.

I still stand by my 7/10 score and my rationale behind it.

My final take away is this is a very competent album and I cannot find anything technically wrong with it. It's just not my taste and that is what truly prevents me from really liking it or loving it.

03-07-2013, 01:14 PM	#271 (permalink)
Big Ears Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Hampshire, England Posts: 434	I've been busily writing notes in my little black book and I want to do the album justice. __________________ My Journal: Rabbiting On

03-07-2013, 01:31 PM	#272 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,994	I'm the same. I've listened to it about seven times now. I'll also be doing a full review in my journal soon. I effing love this album! Thanks Ant! __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

03-09-2013, 07:26 AM	#277 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,994	Okay, after finally digesting this album what I think is enough I'm ready to make my thoughts known. I have to say, beyond the albums I suggested for the club this is the first time this hasn't seemed like work, something I have to do, get through. Which is not to denigrate any of the other albums reviewed, just that I loved reviewing this one. (For those interested I'll definitely be running a full in-depth review of this in my journal soon). 1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in? Can I say OMG? I LOVE this! Who called this pop? Okay, I'm just talking about the first track here admittedly but this is not pop. Don't mistake those bright bouncing synths for pop music. This sounds like a continuation of my favourite, "Once around the world"! I'm settling in here! Catchy, memorable, upbeat, with great keys and fine guitar with --- with -- OMG! John MItchell! Of Arena? I just died and went to prog rock Heaven!!! 2. What did you think of the opening tracks? Loved "Oh my God" with a passion! "Ghosts" was even better! Someone give me some vallium! Best so far was the title track. This album has the energy and passion that some previous It Bites albums have lacked, to me. It's almost like a comback album in many ways. 3. What did you think of the later tracks? I loved "Playground", with its dramatic, almost cinema-soundtrack keybaord arrangements, "Memory of water" (despite their robbing the title from Marillion!) barrels along at a frenetic pace, then the title track slows everything down beautifully. Great pacing throughout the album. "The wind that shakes the barley" --- another Marillion title? Okay I know they didn't coin the phrase, but still, you'd wonder if there isn't some influence in there somehow --- is a great song, very epic but I find that the tagline/chorus is sung almost the same as a-ha's "The blood that moves the body". I also love "Safe keeping", lovely ballad. "Lights" is "Calling all the heroes" for the 21st century: about time they wrote something similar. Love the bouncy upbeat-ness. 4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions? I loved John Mitchell's guitar work with Arena, but had no idea he could sing. And he can! He's a powerful, emotional singer that almost -- almost --- compensates for the loss of the great Francis Dunnery. He also reminds me on occasion of Bryan Adams. He has that sort of growly, rough sound to his voice that is a little hard to get used to after Dunnery's mostly higher, lilting one, but I have already grown to love it. 5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not? Oh I loved the music. Powerful, upbeat, almost pomp-rock at times. Energetic, passionate, mostly uptempo. Some totally gorgeous soft piano passages, such as in "Safekeeping" and "Playground", and parts of "This is England"... 6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)? Loved it from the first minute and it just got better as it went on. Kind of hit a high point with the title track but despite that it did not, as I often expect these albums to do at that point, fall back in quality at all. 7. What did you think of the lyrical content? It Bites' lyrics are often quite obscure and hard to decipher. Although it's surely an allegory for something, I loved the image "The tall ships" drew in my mind of someone, maybe a prince or king, living their life in exile in a foreign country, waiting for the day when their homeland will send ships to bring him home in triumph. Could even refer to aliens I guess. Generally though most of the lyrics are obscure but there appears to be a common theme of loss, yearning for the past, missed chances and memories running through the album. I think. Also the power words have over people, when sometimes you want to take them back or wish you hadn't said them, other times you wish you had spoken your heart when it's too late and the chance is gone. 8. Did you like the instrumental parts? Yes, I love and have loved John Michell's guitar work with every band he's been with, particularly Arena. I like the way there's a guitar riff taken right out of "Plastic dreamer" from "Once". The kyeboards have always been an integral part of It Bites' appeal, and here they certainly drive most of the album. 9. What did you think of the production? To me the production seemed very sharp. See my previous comments as to production, but this sounded produced very well. 10. How well do you already know the band/artist? Intimately. I loved "Once around the world", but came to It Bites first through "Calling all the heroes". Having heard that I knew it was going to be a hit, and it was. Sadly, the debut album was not as good as I had hoped, though "Once" redressed that disappointment. The next one had good moments but up until now I've never thought they came anywhere close to "Once". 11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to? I have to admit, It Bites on their website call themselves "the progressive pop rock band", so who am I to disagree? 12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less? Much more 13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one? The title track, followed by "Ghosts" and then "Oh my God", but it's a tough choice as I like almost every track on this. 14. And the one you liked least? I can understand ET's hatred of "Great disaster", but don't share it. You have to know this band. They use that odd phrasing, like vocalise, weird disjointed sounds like "OOH WOO YEAH -- YUP YUP YUP YUP --- OH AY!" a lot, and it's kind of their trademark. If you look past that, or even embrace it, this song, though certainly one of the weakest on the album, comes alive. I'm not saying it was the one I liked least, because there wasn't one. 15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated? Again, this question should be ignored if the album is NOT a debut, only. This isn't, so I'm passing over it. 16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist? I'm now planning to go back and give the other albums that I found a little disappointing another chance, and I also want to listen to their latest, which didn't impress me first time out. 17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one? I'm not sure there was one, beyond the linked concepts of past, memories, missed chances, old loves and regrets. Also the power words can have over people comes through solidly as a binding concept throughout most if not all of the album. 18. Did the album end well? "This is England", while not in my opinion as powerful or epic a closer as "Once around the world", was a great example of how It Bites can write an epic track that goes through several changes, in mood, tempo, structure and feeling, and kind of arrive back at the beginning, bringing the song full circle. I would have preferred a little more emphasis on the chorus "This is England and you love me!" which I thought worked well, but then they moved away from that for the midsection. I think it was however a powerful, emotional song and a fine way to close an album that, had it been released this year, would already be jumping to the top of my favourites list for 2013! 19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved? No es possible! 20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss? Every track was great, so I'd say that consitutes holding together well. Rating: 9.85 out of 10 A final point: this is what this club is all about! This album seems to have been one of the most polarising we've done so far. Some people love it, some hate it and some are meh about it. While I respect everyone's opinion, the rest of you are of course all wrong! But it's great to see an album where we're not all just agreeing, where there are such widely held and disparate views, all making good points and making for a great discussion. Let's hope the next one is as interesting! __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

03-09-2013, 12:01 PM	#279 (permalink)
Big Ears Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Hampshire, England Posts: 434	It looks like I am the white rabbit. 1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in? I liked it immediately and found it similar, although not identical, to the original lineup, with high voices, sparkling guitar and bright keyboards. 2. What did you think of the opening tracks? With Oh My God, It Bites! start as they intend to continue with sharp Yes-like harmonies, bright keyboards and tasteful guitar playing. The vocals are inclined to be high and the pace is continually fast. Previously, John Mitchell had been employed by bands like Arena as a guitarist first and singer second, but he has been a hidden vocal talent. Like his famous predecessor, Francis Dunnery, he sings in a high register and has an excellent voice - you never hear him sing out of tune. Also like Dunnery he is an outstanding, but slightly understated, guitar player. The pace does not slow for Ghosts, with John Mitchell sounding like Ray Wilson of Stiltskin on Scared of Ghosts and even uses the phrase, 'Walking in Your Footsteps,' from the latter's second single. Ghosts has a catchy synthesizer melody and an adept guitar solo. The third track, Playground, is a marginally slower ballad, with symphonic keyboards and pounding drums from Bob Dalton. He is a fine drummer, never too showy nor shuffling, but always appropriate to Beck's keyboards and Mitchell's guitar. 3. What did you think of the later tracks? The band does seem to run out of steam in the second half of the album with slower and more sparse arrangements. It is still full of ideas and John Mitchell is a revelation. 4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions? John Mitchell was known more as a guitarist with Arena and took on lead vocals for It Bites! He is, however, an excellent singer and never sings out of tune. His guitar playing is nimble throughout. 5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not? Both the music and vocals are exemplary. 6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)? The album keeps improving, the more I listen. My feeling though, is that, in keeping with many modern bands, The Tall Ships album is too long and there is some repetition of the slow voice/ piano/ synth passages in the latter part of the album. Tony McPhee of the Groundhogs said that he felt compelled to fill the 75 minutes of a CD, but admitted that he could not come up with the material. It Bites!, like many others, seem to have soldiered on regardless. 7. What did you think of the lyrical content? Rather curious. Lights is a catchy song carried along with a particularly high voice, sparring guitar and keyboards, and chorus in a stirring manner akin to Big Country, but it has the line, 'So let’s go out tonight, I feel the space between us.' Great Disasters is an upbeat song, but has a downbeat lyric. It follows the title track, which I understand is about death. 8. Did you like the instrumental parts? Yes. The middle instrumental section of Memory of Water is quite heavy with a characteristically speedy guitar solo. The title track, opens with soaring harmonised guitar and keyboards, reminiscent of Dave Flett-era Manfred Mann's Earth Band. 9. What did you think of the production? Very clear and sharp, just like the original albums. 10. How well do you already know the band/artist? I know the first three albums pretty well, although I don't own Eat Me in St. Louis. I remember it being in Woolworths' sale bins not long after it was released. Now it is as rare as hens' teeth. 11. What sub-genre, if any, would you assign this music to? Neo-progressive, although there are elements of seventies progressive rock, grunge and modern progressive. It Bites! also take in the high voiced bands of the seventies, like Pilot, 10cc and City Boy. 12. On repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less? More. 13. What would you class as your favourite track, if you have one? Great Disasters is a small masterpiece. It has a scat-*-nonsense vocal motif, along the lines of, 'Dumbri umbri ayoh, dumbri umbri ayoh, ee oh ho ayoh o-oh oh oh, oh ayoh o-oh oh oh,' reminiscent of The Police, while the arrangement is similar to other seventies high vocal/ bright guitar groups like 10cc, Pilot and City Boy. There is even a touch of Billy Joel in the lyrics and it ends on synth like an A-ha song produced by Alan Tarney. This is the track to which I keep returning . . . and returning. I need not bother, as it has taken permanent residency in my head! I have read there is a radio edit, but have not been able to track it down. 14. And the one you liked least? There isn't one particular track, although I prefer the earlier fast tracks to the later slow ones. 15. Did the fact that this album is a debut/sophomore/middle period or later period allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated? Although there have been a number of reunions with different frontmen, this feels like a comeback. All credit to John Mitchell for taking on lead vocals and playing guitar to the extent that I did not really miss Dunnery. Having said this, I wish he (Dunner) would sort himself out. 16. Are you now looking forward to hearing other albums by the band/artist? Yes, I would like to hear the single edit of Great Disasters as well as a good quality version of the Japanese bonus track, These Words. 17. Did you get, thematically, the idea behind the album if there was one? There is a thread of death and longing, but some of the strange paradoxes do not make much sense to me. 18. Did the album end well? This is England, the longest piece at over thirten minutes, is intended as the magnum opus. It is another song in the second half of the album with a sparse intro, this time a quiet glockenspiel-sounding synthesizer and voice. The first part brings to mind Prefab Sprout, particularly in the voice, yet the pulsing keyboards, spiky guitar and punchy drums are all It Bites! At around the five minute mark, Beatles harmonies and cello sound introduce the 'This is England and you love me,' line, followed by psychedelic wurlitzer-style keyboards and a surreal spoken word passage. The final third (at about ten minutes) has almost a hymn in, 'There once was a vicar who walked in this garden . . . ,' Linking all the parts of This is England are the lyrics, but, otherwise it sounds like three distinct songs, and serves as a prototype of the band's next studio record, a concept album, Map of the Past (2012). 19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved? I feel it needed editting, especially in the latter stages. 20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?** Yes, the album is cohesive, although This is England should have been three separate tracks (imo). Overall Album Rating: 8.5 out of 10. __________________ My Journal: Rabbiting On Last edited by Big Ears; 03-09-2013 at 01:06 PM.

03-07-2013, 09:45 PM	#274 (permalink)
Electrophonic Tonic Your Ad Here Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: The Twilight Zone Posts: 876	I'm listening to this again tonight. I want to find out why you guys like it so much and maybe I'll enjoy it more myself. I won't use the full format, but I'll have a re-review up later tonight.

03-09-2013, 02:52 PM	#280 (permalink)
Electrophonic Tonic Your Ad Here Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: The Twilight Zone Posts: 876	I wanted to come back and say I found something new to enjoy with this album and hopefully grasp onto something other than the few tracks I enjoyed the first time... but I can't say I have. I still adore 'This is England' and think it's one of the best progressive rock songs I've heard in a long time. Everything about it is what I love about prog, and those flashes of mellotron are always a positive for me. I still think 'The Wind that Shakes the Barley' is a solid track with a great organ riff and the rest of the tracks I'm mostly indifferent to. And yes, Great Disasters is still a sore spot for me. Maybe outside the context of the album I would like it more, but I'm not looking forward to hearing "De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da" on a progressive rock album, or actually any album at all. I still stand by my 7/10 score and my rationale behind it. My final take away is this is a very competent album and I cannot find anything technically wrong with it. It's just not my taste and that is what truly prevents me from really liking it or loving it.