Customer Review

15 of 17 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Only ten new songs, unfortunately, not sixteen as listed, 4 Sept. 2011
This review is from: Ghost on the Canvas (Audio CD)
I overall agree with the good reviews but I was somewhat dissapointed to find six short instrumental numbers spread over this CD. So, out of the sixteen listed tracks, only ten are left to showcase Glenn's latest (and final?) release. And the closing track 16, which clocks at 6:17, seems to have been artificially extended. Anyway, any GC fan will want to own this CD and let's concentrate on the quality rather than the quantity.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in


Tracked by 1 customer

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-6 of 6 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 8 Sep 2011 14:04:55 BDT
Last edited by the author on 8 Sep 2011 16:40:00 BDT
Your comments are understandable on the surface, Alain, but would you always put quantity before quality? Before I heard the album, I was a bit concerned that there were TOO MANY tracks, as is too often the case with albums nowadays, and that there may be weak songs that would spoil the shape and flow of the album. So I was actually RELIEVED of the album's respectable 42 minute running time, and the 6 short instrumentals form a nice flow to the album that make it much greater than the sum of its parts. The same goes for Brian Wilson's "Lucky Old Sun", which has a worrying 17 tracks, but actually runs for just 38 minutes, which is a nice running time, and it totally involves you, contains no filler, and never gets boring. Just like Ghost On The Canvas!

Also, I take it you don't like 1970s-style guitar solos, or perhaps you've never heard one in your life? The 3 minute solo that concludes this album is absolutely magnificent, and helps you blissfully drift away with the album at the end - especially on a warm and sunny evening. It's totally intentional, and there's no artificiality about it - this is the real deal that was commonplace in the 1970s, a sunny decade which this album makes frequent small references to, but is regrettably hardly ever done nowadays. Ghost On The Canvas stands as a rare modern day example of "as good as it gets", which contains all killer and no filler, in my opinion. It's also how I wish so many "almost classic" albums from the past - especially the recent past - could have been!

Posted on 9 Sep 2011 09:25:00 BDT
Mr. D. Bain says:
I take your point that you may feel a little short changed on finding six of the album's tracks to be instrumentals. However many fans of GC, myself included are fascinated with his guitar playing. It's probably not an understatement to call him a guitar virtuoso. However I expect that the majority of his fans buy his albums primarily because they like his singing. For this reason it may have been helpful if the record company had indicated instrumental tracks in the tracklisting. I agree with D Thomson's comments that the album has been thoughtfully sequenced as an album, rather than as a disparate set of songs and instrumentals.

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Sep 2011 14:37:47 BDT
Alain says:
MM. Bain and Thomson, your points are very well taken and, again, I will absolutely not challenge the quality of the recording and GC's virtuosity as a guitarist or, of course, as a great performer ! This being said, yes, I do feel short-changed and that is why I wanted to bring this matter to the potential buyers' attention. And if these were indeed GC's final recording sessions, I would not be surprised to find later, as bonuses to yet another best of, a few additional songs that he probably recorded during these sessions and that could have easily fitted on this CD. Now, let us hope that GC's failing health will not deteriorate further too quickly.

In reply to an earlier post on 10 Sep 2011 20:24:18 BDT
Last edited by the author on 10 Sep 2011 20:34:24 BDT
Ok, having read the above comments, I understand the situation. As you say, Mr Bain, the majority of GC's fans would likely be most interested in his singing, and therefore would probably want a standard collection of 3 minute pop songs to support that, like any of his other albums. As it happened, with the help of younger musicians, he's gone and made an artistically impressive set, which is possibly best listened to as one piece of music, in the way that, say, Radiohead or Coldplay might construct an album. So I agree that the record company should have avoided including proper names for the instrumentals, to avoid misleading GC's likely market.

On the plus side, having done some calculations, the total running time of the 10 proper songs on the album, without the 3 minute guitar solo at the end, comes to around 33m 40s - which is almost exactly the same length as his last 10 song set - the wonderful "Meet Glen Campbell" from 2008. So in that sense, short as that is, there's still at least as much to enjoy of GC here as before, with the remaining material being a nice additional bonus. If however you're unable to enjoy it in that way, then the 6 instrumentals are very easy to programme out...though not the wonderful 3 minute guitar solo at the end!!

Posted on 26 Oct 2011 17:14:05 BDT
Chris Treece says:
" let's concentrate on the quality rather than the quantity" Why bring it up then? No problem with the album's length and there's no disguising the short instrumentals. I've never particularly been a fan of GC, but this is absolutely sublime - my album of the year to date. The ebb and flow through the 16 tracks is paced beautifully and there is not a single moment where it feels lacking. If you genuinely feel short-changed after listening to this album, I genuinely feel sorry for you!

In reply to an earlier post on 7 Dec 2011 16:50:39 GMT
daveberry66 says:
The album is stunning and a true classic - Glen is still on top form as I can verify as I had the priviledge of seeing him live in the past few weeks.

Some of my favourite albums have only seven or eight tracks and I don't feel short-changed by them at all. Similarly, some of my favourite albums have running times of under 40 minutes and I don't feel short-changed either. As a general rule, I would rather have a snappy 40-minute album than an 80 minute one that is carrying too much "flab".
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details



Location: Paris, France

Top Reviewer Ranking: 1,973,629