7 of 9 people found the following review helpful
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Kaleidoscope (Audio CD)
Look, it was always going to be an impossible task following the sheer brilliance of The Whirlwind, an album I consider to be in my all time top 10. Maybe if they had tried some different ideas the outcome would have been better. But to go down the well trodden path with material that isn`t up to it just wasn`t going to work. Consequently Kaleidoscope fares very badly in comparison.
There are some very nice parts on the album, but not enough to outweigh the substandard majority so I am left with a feeling of extreme disappointment. Even the Morse ballad, Beyond The Sun, is a dirge. Bridge Across Forever, it ain`t. I found myself playing a game of "Heard this before" or "this sounds like" so many times. It really pains me to say these negative things, as I consider Neal Morse to be one of the best songwriters around.
So are the reviewers giving this album 5 stars really saying this is as good as the Whirlwind? Really? Oh, and one more thing. Please don`t let Pete Trewavas sing again. Ever.
Tracked by 2 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-8 of 8 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 6 Feb 2014 18:16:21 GMT
andrew stapleton says:
Totally agree. I was really waiting for this cd with great interest but very unsure that Whirlwind could ever be bettered. I don't think it will.
I did enjoy some of the covers and I thought that Nights in White Satin was well thought out and respectful.
I would recommend to anyone who liked The Whirlwind, get Banks of Eden and Desolation Rose by the Flower Kings instead.
In reply to an earlier post on 7 Feb 2014 12:18:44 GMT
tim telford says:
Agree. I bought this on a whim having not listened to this band before, Beyond the Sun is dire. They really need an external producer to give some objectivity. Bits are good and bits are awful, I actually love the title track except for the appalling Walking the Road section, and an objective producer may just have pointed that out to them. I shall buy the Whirlwind now, though. Covers cd was good
In reply to an earlier post on 7 Feb 2014 17:47:35 GMT
Tim, please let me know what you think as I`m sure you will like this a lot more than Kaleidoscope. But give a few listens first....
Posted on 12 Feb 2014 01:16:45 GMT
Last edited by the author on 15 Feb 2014 12:18:00 GMT
Nicholas Green says:
I agree with you about not being able to top Whirldwind. That is one fantastic album.
However, I still like this album...just not Pete's vocals.
In reply to an earlier post on 15 Feb 2014 09:50:07 GMT
David R. Walters says:
Albums can still be good, even if they are not as good as their 'best ever'. For example I am very glad that Deep Purple make new albums even they may not be Machine Head nor Burn......new stuff is essential, even if not quite as good as the 'best'......
In reply to an earlier post on 15 Feb 2014 10:54:10 GMT
But what if the newer stuff is not very good? Where`s the point in blindly churning out album after album only for listeners to be disappointed each time? An analogy has to be drawn here with Fawlty Towers. Cleese refused to churn out substandard material in case it diluted or fared badly with previous classics. I love to hear new stuff, but it has to be worth it.
In reply to an earlier post on 15 Feb 2014 16:23:27 GMT
David R. Walters says:
Absolutely agree....except that new stuff does not have to be as good as their best ever, otherwise our record collections would be very small (yours!). They just have to be good. Many classic rock bands fared badly from the late 70's to mid/late 80's then seemed to do well again. Magnum are the band of old producing remarkably good new albums, year after year...
In reply to an earlier post on 15 Feb 2014 17:17:05 GMT
Let`s continue this outside of Amazon comments, otherwise it will be self indulgent. However, I agree good albums should not be ignored just because they`re not the best. Thing is, Kaleidescope isn`t very good in the first place.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›