Crippled by a lack of originality and overplaying
352225
I tried very hard to enjoy this 1998 album by California based neo-prog outfit Cairo but could not get past the contrived approach.  Indeed, the keyboardist seems to take an almost school-boyish delight in trying to sound just like Keith Emerson and has copied his style right down to the dirty "clicky" tone on the Hammond organ.  Unfortunately, no matter how accurately his style is copied by others (be it Cairo or Triumvirat), I would much rather listen to Keith Emerson.

The tracks range in length from 1:25 to 17:08 and reflect stadium rock influences (especially Styx) along with the Emerson, Lake & Powell album (1986) and some classic progressive rock influences.  While tuneful enough, the tracks are overly busy, which is exacerbated by an (admittedly) average rock drummer that overplays to the point of distraction.  It seems to me that Cairo tries far too hard to sound "progressive" and the guys treat technique as an end in of itself.  Unfortunately, this has resulted in the music being very forced sounding and good ideas either being buried or not being developed enough.  The lead singer sounds like Dennis DeYoung (of Styx).  While a good vocalist, he did strain a bit to reach the upper registers and at times got obscured by an overly zealous guitarist and keyboardist.

Credit really must be given to keyboardist Mark Robertson however; although not quite as adventurous as Keith was (I do not hear any bitonality for example), Mark can really play well.  I just wish that he had channeled his talents and those of his bandmates into creating something original.  Speaking of original however, there is one shining moment (albeit brief at 1:25) where the "real" Cairo shines through.  The excellent instrumental "Image", which features a duet on acoustic piano and acoustic guitar, is a wonderful track and remains the real highlight of the record for me.

Overall, while I can not deny the excellent technique of the players, the tunefulness of the material, and the hard work they put into each piece, I could not get past the contrived approach and the forced over-playing.  Following the release of Conflict and Dreams, the group put out Time of Legends (2001).  To the best of my knowledge, Cairo has not released a new studio album since 2001.
806165
I feel like this album could have been good. It had some good parts, and I liked the atmosphere that it was trying to bring. I really did try to like this. But it sounded like they were focused way too much on adding way too many layers complexity to all of the songs. And I don't mean musical complexity. There really isn't any of that here. I just mean a mess of different synth loops all layered on top of each other.

Now I appreciate that they're trying to make something different, and I really love all kinds of bizarre music, but a lot of this album was downright obnoxious. They'll play the same damn synth over and over again, even though it doesn't even mesh with anything else in the song at all in the first place. I get that they're trying to be psychedelic, but that's not how you do it. More sounds doesn't necessarily mean better. The sounds need to work with each other, otherwise it's just random noise.

So all and all I'm pretty disappointed. I was pretty psyched when I saw a bunch of positive reviews popping up for this, hoping they might have produced something amazing again. But I felt like it was a chore to listen to and I was glad it was over by the time it was done. I'll admit the last song wasn't terrible, and many songs had good parts to them. It's just that they were few and far between, and often stuff that could have been decent was masked by an excessive amount of obnoxious sound effects.
1907658
This album has achieved cult status, although if the truth be told, I'm not quite sure why. It is not a great album. Let's make this clear: Taylor's skills as a guitarist are not under review here - I think it has been determined by universal consensus that he is a fine and original artist. However, some listeners might also like to hear actual songs, and the songs here, as complete compositions, not just as guitar showpieces, range from mediocre to dreadful, with only a few exceptions.

The first song, "Leather Jacket," is so lousy with ordinariness that it's hard to comprehend how a rational crew of producers and friends let Taylor place it at the beginning of the album. Perhaps it was thought at the time that it would titillate those who were avidly following the gossip about Taylor and his erstwhile employers, since it seems to be about them, or at least one of them - the other Mick. Unfortunately, the song is boring and unimaginative, and sounds like a beginner's attempt at composition by a would-be rock band.

Many other songs, such as "S.W.5" also sound like filler by other bands; ironically, many riffs sound like note-for-note imitations of the Stones, which, presumably, is the last thing Taylor wanted to achieve. "Broken Hands" falls into that category. Taylor is neither a gifted composer nor a distinctive vocalist or lyricist.

There is, of course, that guitar, and when Taylor does what he does best, things are illuminated. The instrumentals are excellent: "Slow Blues" and "Giddy Up" have a drive and a purpose to them; Taylor's brilliant playing on electric, acoustic, and slide guitars is unmistakable in its beautifully melodic sweep. It saves the otherwise maudlin "Baby I Want You" from being relegated to the worst-of-Clapton bin.

"Spanish/A Minor" is in itself worth the price of admission and is the only thing that secured three stars for this review. The sprawling, 12-minute piece doesn't sound particularly Spanish to my ear, except by way of Santana, but it navigates the inimitable mood of the seventies with perfection: fusion, touches of psychedelia, improvisation. Throughout, highlighted by keyboards, Taylor's guitars sing. The tune confirms that Taylor would have been wise to look to Jeff Beck for inspiration: he should have either asked a few talented friends - at the time, he must have been surrounded by a plethora of them - for help on vocals and lyrics, or he should have made an all-instrumental album. By all accounts, it would have been a masterpiece.

An interesting point: during the last seconds of "A Minor," you can distinctly hear the secondary guitar play the exact notes, slowly rising up the scale, that Taylor played as part of one of his last solos for the Rolling Stones, on "Time Waits for No one." A moment of regret? Or rather a kiss-off, as if to say, "This is what you're losing, boys."
2900966
With this album, Muse has finally become what all their detractors have said they were from the beginning; a bloated, bombastic parody.  The orchestrations are so thoroughly over-the-top with synth and cheesy strings that I was floored.  I mean, how can anyone actually like Guiding Light?  It sounds like the misbegotten child of an eighties power ballad and an Andrew Lloyd Weber show tune.
While they've always had the potential to be a little silly, on The Resistance the lyrics are often downright embarrassing.  Uprising is the most popular song and the one that stands out most for me.  "It's time the fat-cats had a heart attack"?  Really?  I share the politics, but the song is every bad protest poem I've ever heard set to music.  It doesn't help that the music is so cold and mechanical that it doesn't leave you feeling anything at all, let alone outrage.  (The high-pitched "so come on!" repeated ad nauseam between the verses are just ridiculous as well.)
It's an easy target, but Undisclosed Desires reminds me of that Scream album Chris Cornell released awhile back.  Enough said.
And we always knew that Muse was the new Queen, but did they really have to outright ape them in United States of Eurasia?
I Belong to You starts out with a lame "Woo!" and some awful mock-soul humming then proceeds with an overabundance of chimes and piano glisses.

I could go on, but I won't.  Muse was one of my favorites, but here it seems like they took everything too far just for novelty's sake.  I get wanting to stretch your legs and try new things, but when all of your new things are slick, hokey, overwrought songs like these, you're trying just a bit to hard.
2244204
Okay, I was all prepared to like this, even love it--being a session guy with a background in soul, pop, roots rock, and country, and also one of the few steel guitarists in Los Angeles, I figured that it would strike some sparks--not destined to happen, baby. Though I have to give Randolph props for technical speed and passion, the material is a grave disappointment--juvenile, repetitive, shallow, and uninteresting. And no, it can't be revived by the infusion of the abovementioned energy--it just don't work. The tunes are decent funk-rock, in the vein of Sly, but the playing is at times overbearing, scalar and unpleasant, with occasional flashes of brilliance...more puzzling than interesting, more annoying in the constancy of the riffing than fun. Sorry, Robert, but this bird don't fly. And it definitely don't sing...
3132552
I have been in love with Kate Bush's music since the mid 1980's.  She can be odd, eccentric, enigmatic, and exciting. This album strips most of that from her. It feels like a bad experiment or a pressing to meet the demands of a recording contract. How in the world does anyone justify a remake of "This Woman's Work?" The result is pleasant but devoid of the original emotional punch of raw passion. So are the rest of the songs on this album. Its sad to think this is a tad of a wink toward making KB dentist office friendly under the guile of artistic reinvention. Kate Bush is better than this, fans know it, newcomer please take this advice and listen to her original recordings, of most import "The Hounds of Love"
4023781
I was looking forward to the "new" version of "Mattress", a wonderfully funny and sophisticated show that is too often dumbed down or produced with sophomoric shtick in schools and community theatres across the country.  This made-for-TV version had echoes of the botched "Music Man" of last season- miscast, chopped, over-produced, and lacking the sweetness and simplicity of the play.  When you read the original script, you find that, with the right actors, the play plays itself.  It is witty, more adult that one would think, with charming music that defines the characters, forwards the plot, and keeps the audience in on the joke.  The TV version cut songs, including the opening number that sets the stage for the entire production by casting it against a more traditional telling of the Princess and the Pea.  (That the music itself is valuable was evident in the use of the omitted song in the underscore of the show.)  The removal of other numbers, the downplaying of secondary characters, the reassigning of songs, and the addition of a "new" number (a reworking of one of Princess Fred's songs) for the Queen, all pointed to the sense that this was a vehicle for Carol Burnett, cast now as the Queen because she is too old to reprise the role that started her career.  I love Tracy Ullman, but felt that she had neither the vocal power nor the eccentricity in this performance to play Fred in a way that would carry the plot.  Denis O'Hare's Prince Dauntless lacked the boyish simplicity and charm to make him likeable and sympathetic.  The other members of the company, all talented in their own right, missed the mark, with lackluster, bland performances.  What a pity.  These actors could do better, if allowed.  Matthew Morrison gave a beautiful performance in "A Light in the Piazza".  True, this is a very different show, but there's got to be more to his comedic skills than were evident in this prodution.  I kept thinking that Zooey Deschanel, with her wacky Lady Larkin, would have made a better Winifred than Ullman.  And what a waste of Tom Smothers' talents.  Why use a singer, with verbal comedic talent, to play a role that, until the last minute, is silent?  Why not use Bill Irwin or David Shiner or Geoff Hoyle, comedic actors with a background in physical theatre and clowning?  Please, let this not go down in some archive as the "definitive version" of this show.  It needs to be redone, using the reliable and eminently playable original script, as it appeared on stage, with cast members selected for their abilities and a director who can successfully translate a stage play to film- Sam Mendes or Rob Marshall perhaps.
1903841
I recently discovered Rubalcaba through Blessings, which is a five star recording without question.  I was therefore hugely disappointed to discover that Antiguo is mostly a rehash of Fusionist ideas that I, at least, associate with the music of Joe Zawinal and Jan Hammer from the early seventies.  There seemed nothing new, and a great deal that was merely silly, overblown, and vapid in this recording.  If you feel like buying it, get in touch with me -- I'll gladly sell you mine.
2396686
"Witching Hour" is one of the best albums I've heard and you very well may be interested in buying this for the additional mixes. Unfortunately they're mediocre and don't expand on the songs' original structure, instead muddying them up, ruining what makes them great to begin with. As for the dvd, there are two excellent clips for "Destroy Everything You Touch" and "Sugar"(which was shot in an EXTREMELY wide aspect ratio, at about 2.85:1). The footage of their travels in China is mostly uninteresting, just some cobbled footage of press junkets interspersed with intentionally, choppily edited "behind-the-scenes" nonsense. It's all rather dull and uninvolving. Except for the videos, you're likely to be disappointed with this release.
2902223
At first listen, the "New Generation" of Jeff Wayne's Musical Version of War of the Worlds sounds a lot like the original on a heavy dose of steroids -- it's louder, bolder in its use of sound effects (which were mostly absent -- apart from the ubiquitous "U - La!" -- from the original), most of which are a distraction from the music and the drama, rather than enhancing either. And that goes on repeated plays. But where this production fails is on larger dramatic terms -- Liam Neeson is fine, if a bit rushed at times, as the narrator (I guess this generation of actors has to re-learn the value of pauses, and silence, in dramatic presentation), and Gary Barlow is a somewhat pallid successor to Justin Hayward on "Forever Autumn," in both musical and dramatic terms (the song is about profound, life-shattering LOSS!); but the real failure comes with Maverick Sabre and Joss Stone as Parson Nathaniel and his wife Beth -- their performance, when compared with that of Phil Lynott and Julie Covington, is like taking in a polished high school production, versus something closer to the Royal Shakespeare Company. In my shop, when I play the original, I've seen people stop what they're doing to take in the original version of this sequence, while this new one, played in the same music store, is just ignored (except by people who remember the original and ask what's "wrong" with this rendition). I'm glad Wayne still has an interest in this work, but people should stick with the original.
3707241
I wanted to like this CD, but after listening to it several times I have to conclude that both the arrangements and the singing are not especially inspired. There is nothing NEW one gets from hearing these interpretations  of the songs, and if you have heard them sung by others with a better feel  for the words and music (e.g. Liz Callaway's or Patti LuPone's  "Meadowlark", Lena Horne's "Bewitched", Streisand's "I Have A Love" and  "Some Enchanted Evening"), then the set seems particularly uninventive and  emotionally uninvolving. It's vaguely pleasant, but I don't find myself  wanting to listen to it again.
3675164
Most of the songs are overstylized and modernized as if they were thinking they would get top 40 hits off of this compilation.  The very slow tempos of on most of the tracks seem contrived for dramatic effect.  I would rather have heard them sung in a traditional style with period instruments.  Also, there is kind of a mishmash of styles, as if the artists did not understand the concept of the album, if there was one.  It seems rudderless.  I did like the songs by actor John C. Reilly, who is not a professional singer, but I think he "got it".  Sting's "Shallow Brown" on the second disc is fantastic.  I only wish they had recorded all the verses.  Unfortunately, the few good tracks on this compilation are not worth the price of admission.  There are MUCH better versions of these songs out there and I'm not talking about the "coffeehouse folk guy" that someone else alluded to, because I have heard that stuff and it's equally annoying.  The Sex Pistols' "Good Ship Venus" and the Pogues' "Greenland Whale Fisheries" top anything on this album.
2971821
I'm definitely a Beatles fan, and I like most of George Harrison's Beatles songs, as well as some of his solo work - the end credits music on Time Bandits (Dream Away) in particular. So when I saw that my favorite band, They Might Be Giants had a cover of Savoy Truffle, a song I quite like, on this album I had to buy it - unfortunately I was quite disappointed with the TMBG track and somewhat disappointed with many of the others. The cover of Savoy Truffle is downbeat, the vocals sound depressed - I guess I was hoping for a raucous, fast paced version with some TMBG style but this... Oh well, the original on the Beatles white album is still great.

Many of the other tracks are competently done, but they mostly just ape Harrison's original, and I've never seen the point of doing a cover song that's as close to the original as possible. Give it some of your own style - if we want to hear the original we can listen to it.

All in all rather bland and disappointing, not horrible but no where close to great.
3471435
The singing's great, the production values are great, and every detail of the carefully-assembled set and stage props glows.  So why the TWO stars?  Because of the overacting, and because these characters are portrayed as so disagreeable that you won't even want to spend 20 minutes with them.

I have to admit I have a soft spot for Pergolesi, and some of these arias just make you feel good-- if you close your eyes, that is.  All three main characters act to the back of the theater.  In brief, you have the obnoxious, big-headed maid, the rough and disagreeable master who has raised her and has a thing for her, and the mute servant (a portrayal, complete with buck teeth, sure to offend modern sensibilities).  There's lots of grimacing, pouting, and threatening to beat each other crammed into the short story.  Oh, did I mention there's a prelude to each act that gives away the entire plot?

Not worth tracking down.  I'll be keeping this to listen to audio-only, but if I had it to do again, I'd look for a CD at the library.
2182321
Many here berate Vampire Weekend for being derivative.  I take exception to this.  At the end of the day, what pop act isn't?

Each of the influences cited repeatedly in these reviews--Paul Simon, Peter Gabriel and David Byrne--has plenty of predecessors from whom they've borrowed plenty.  So, bumming a chord progression here and a measure there is hardly a crime.  It's called inspiration.

Vampire Weekend's problem is not that it borrows, but that it fails to compliment its application with a truly distinguishing signature.  There's simply too little depth and it comes across more as a cover band than anything else.

On the first pass, I missed this, thinking that "Mansard Roof" was unique lyrically and that the rhythmic structure of "Oxford Comma" was interesting.  Still, there was something missing.  The second time through, "unique" and "interesting" yielded to "cute (in the college freshman sense)" and "gimmicky." By the third run, I no longer cared.  It was already stale.

Then I stumbled upon "One (Blake's Got a New Face,)" which I found to be flat-out lame.  Minimalist synth, strained vocals, Talking Heads' "This Must Be the Place (Naive Melody)" wrapped in a Noughties New York foil and re-served.  They even went so far as to place a sub-title in parentheses.  That did it for me.

So, if you're throwing a frat party and need some peppy background noise, pick-up a copy.  For anyone else, listen to the Amazon streams, catch a few YouTube clips and claim with voguish pride that you've heard them.
767203
Horrible rendition.  This is NOT how a musical group takes a song and puts their own spin on it.  Nothing of the original musical score is to be found in this pop-like, hip hop drivel.  The poignancy and uplifting feeling that this song has invoked for the past 150+ years has been cast aside by the mass-produced steam engine that is today's music industry.  Even at the price of FREE, this song is too costly.  If only there were a way to give negative stars...
1000153
I must begin this review by stating that I love this band immensely. The Bends and OK Computer were absolutely phenomenal albums, musically and lyrically, and they deserved all the critical acclaim they received. That being said, the new album, Kid A, is disastrously pathetic. It is monotonous and droning, with sparse and unfulfilling vocals, excruciatingly dissonant chord progressions, and forced irregular rhythyms. Gone is the experimental yet accessible beauty of the last two studio albums. Gone is the subtlety, the complexity and the variety that make this band so rewarding to listen to. Kid A picks up where Blur's 13 left off: too many effects, noises, and lengthy awkward grooves, and not enough substance.  This album is all form and no content. It begins with three forgettable songs that each ramble 4 minutes too long. Next comes "How to Disappear Completely," the first sign of life---unfortunately, the monotony and poor vocal phrasing keep this song from being anything other than decent. Then there is "Optimistic," one of only two stand-out songs on Kid A, the other being the closer, "Motion Picture Soundtrack." The only other song that is mildly interesting is "Idioteque," if only for the inventive accapella harmonies. Every song seems like it should have been an intro, an outro, or a short bridge. Instead, they take these unimaginitive progressions/rhythyms/musical phrases and build musical landscapes out of them. And I don't care who the producer is, no amount of effects, samples or interesting noises can turn bad music into good music---you have to start with something substantial and let the experimental nuances be the window dressing. You cannot become so absorbed in experimentalism that you neglect the aspects of music that caused you to fall in love it. I know this album will be labeled as genius, as a litmus test for "true" radiohead fans, but this album is neither---it is boring and sloppy, full of musical ideas that should have been left on the cutting room floor. Anyone who heralds it as brilliant is either (1) such a blind fan that they would heap praise upon anything the band released, (2) one who enjoys atonality, dissonance, and monotony, and accept them as criteria for brilliance, or (3) lying. I still love this band, I still belive in this band, and I will still buy every album this band produces, but I cannot praise this album. I do not want to hear OK Computer sequels for the rest of my life, but I do want to hear a talented band reach their potential once more. Years from now, this album will be looked at as the lone disappointment in a string of beautiful, imaginitive works preceding and following it. I know their next major work will be evrything it can and should be.