Tubular.net :: Mike Oldfield Forums Discussion, news, reviews, fan music, and more.
	Search :: Members :: Help :: Guidelines

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Archangel Foster Group: Members Posts: 215 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: Nov. 15 2000, 05:04 In case you don't want to hear anything about new MO albums being inferior to old ones, or in case you're not interested in this topic at all, don't read this. All the discussion going on on these pages has awakened my curiosity again concerning those albums I've always felt uneasy about. So I took some time to have a thorough listen at them again (that's probably not proper English). And I've come to a conclusion. The pop songs on Islands, HO and Discovery are fine pop songs but I'm not interested in them. (That doesn't count for all MO's pop songs, though! For example, Family Man and Foreign Affair are great!) But with the instrumental albums it's a different thing. Some of them are positively annoying to me, and I'll explain why after having stated that the last one which I find thouroughly enjoyable is Amarok (although, IMHO, it's far from being his best as has been stated many times on these pages). All the albums he's put out since TBII, and that means all the stuff on WEA, is, as far as I am concerned, a far cry from what his instrumentals used to be. Sometimes the basic musical ideas are good or even brilliant, but I just can't stand the way these albums are made. Too many samples, way too much sequencer, too smoothly produced, no edges... they just slip down your ear, this is the real easy listening stuff IMO. Much of it would make good film or computer game music, but as just music I do not find them satisfying at all. I even downloaded to MP3s from TMB, which was the first ever MO album I didn't buy (I even bought Earth Moving, knowing full well it contained nothing that would interest me!) and found my opinion confirmed there, too. Mike himself gave us the explaination as to why his new albums are worse than his old ones: "Your way of seeing music changes with the years. I do not try to make the best anymore, but to enjoy what I do, and to improvise the composing." (Interview 'I think that I've got bored with Tubular bells' with Estrella Digital, to be found somewhere on these pages). That's it! He isn't even trying anymore! I'm sure that he still could, but he doesn't want to anymore! This is also confirmed by Tom Newman: "The great argument that Michael and I have constantly nowadays (the only argument really) is that I just don't like sequencers. He's too bloody lazy to get off his daft butt and play the thing all the way through." ('Tom Newman Interview' by David Porter '97). If Tom Newman can't convince him, who can? So I made up my mind never again to buy a new Mike Oldfield album unless I see all the people on these pages raving about it. Instead, I'll try to complete my collection of rarities, albums by related artists (David Bedford, Tom Newman!) and concentrate on finding 'other music as perfect as Mike's' . There is not much but there is some. And by the way, YOU've voted for the next MO album to be called 'Millennium Bell' in a past poll! I couldn't believe it when I saw it - IMO it's by far the silliest title he ever could choose. If you've read this far, please feel free to reply. Back to top

bennyboy Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: July 2000 Posted: Nov. 15 2000, 08:11 I'm sorry Archangel Foster but I do not agree with what you are saying. Please do not take this as a slur against you personally (as others have on this forum, you guys know who you are) and please do not send me any hate mail either, I have the greatest respect for your opinions, what follows is just an expression of my views. It was "Tubular Bells II" and "The Songs Of Distant Earth" that turned me into a true Oldfield fan. I think the nineties have seen a return to form for Mike Oldfield. He is no longer under the constant control of Virgin and is free to explore new styles and extend his range as an artist (look at most of his eighties albums, they are all in the same style mostly, one long instrumental and a bunch of listless pop songs, whereas no two albums of Mikes in the nineties are alike in style). That I think is what Mike means when he says that he now does only what he wants to do. When he says he just tries to make good records not great records I think what he means is that he isn't always trying to top himself. He has said elsewhere that during the seventies he always felt he had to top his masterpiece "Tubular Bells". I think Mikes current attitude is more realistic. Think of David O. Selznick the producer of that film masterpiece "Gone With The Wind". He spent the whole rest of his life obsessed with trying to top his masterpiece and every time he failed he became more bitter and disillusioned. Mike is not like that. To quote a line from Star Trek: "It is best not to try to be a great man. Just try to be a good man and let history make the call" That is what Mike is doing now and good on him. Another thing, I don't believe that electronic music has to automatically lack soul just because its electronic. Why is that exactly? Just because Mike is using sequencers does not mean his music is any less complex or any less passionate. This prejudice against electronics really gets on my nerves sometimes. Mikes most recent work lacks passion does it? What about the sad, yearning guitar solos on "The Songs Of Distant Earth"? What about the thundering finale of "Tubular Bells III" replete with african drumming, clanging bells and one of Mikes greatest guitar solos EVER? What about "B. Blues" which manages to convey both melancholy and fury? What about the heartwrenching cries of joy in "Amber Light"? I'm sorry but Mikes work in the nineties is not unpassionate. Plus its not like Mike just uses synthesizers, he really did go back to basics with "Guitars". And Tom Newman's comments are a bit rich when you consider that he worked with Mike on "Tubular Bells II" and effectively introduced Mike to sequencers. I've said elsewhere that perhaps people expect too much from Mike because of his glorious past. Poor Mike. Hes a classic case of an artist who comes out with a truly groundbreaking debut, which has the effect of eclipsing his whole career after that. I feel particularly that Mikes nineties work doesn't get its due. Maybe his music isn't as good then as it was now but so what? Shouldn't each of his albums be judged individually as works of art in their own right instead of being constantly compared to his glory days? Isn't that only fair? Also given that he is now making music in a different style than he was before shouldn't it be judged in a different context to his earlier albums. Compare "Millennium Bell" to "Incantations" is like comparing apples to oranges, it hust doesn't make sense. And just finally I should point out that I'm 18 and younger than most of the fans on this forum. Perhaps thats why I tend to like his new albums more (my top 5 Oldfield albums are Amarok, Incantations, Islands, The Songs Of Distant Earth and Tubular Bells III) still, I do like his earlier work too and I've only really disliked two of his albums ("Heaven's Open" and "The Orchestral Tubular Bells"). I must apologise for the length of this post, it just puzzles me to go on a fan forum and hear so called fans say that they don't like Mike thats all. Give the guy a break is what I say, no one can be absolutely perfect all the time. Back to top

Archangel Foster Group: Members Posts: 215 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: Nov. 15 2000, 09:57 First of all, I would never ever send hate mail to anyone, and I have the greatest respect for your opinion and that of any other human being, too. I do NOT! want to state that anyone who likes MO's new stuff is wrong! How could I say something like that! I said I don't like it, and it was a hard conclusion for me to make, because I wanted so much to like it, and I've really spent some time listening now to figure it out, and I wanted to tell you to which conclusion I came and why. That's all. If you read my post again you will find that at no point I compare any of Mike's later albums to any of his earlier ones, nor do I state anywhere that Mike's new music lacks passion. If I may quote myself: "Sometimes the basic musical ideas are good or even brilliant, but I just can't stand the way these albums are made." - THAT's what I'm talking about: I do not think Mike has lost it or anything. I am convinced he could still do it, but I'm talking about the sound of it! That's what I do not like! It's not like I'm against electronic music. Far from it. I play the keys myself, and I like all the old garde of electronics (Jarre, Vangelis, Kraftwerk, Tangerine, Schulze and so on). I liked when Mike used the synth as he did on those great albums from the late 70's and early 80's. And don't get me wrong here. I do NOT want Mike to do Ommadawn II or anything like that. Of course he won't do that. I think the synthesizer, at least the analogue synthesizer, is a musical instrument like any other, and a very beautiful one, too, if used correctly (as is the case with the electric guitar). But I think the sequencer - not the synth, the sequencer is a dangerous toy because, well you know why, no need to repeat it. I just liked so, so much the sound of his early stuff and it's just not there in his new stuff. "Shouldn't each of his albums be judged individually as works of art in their own right instead of being constantly compared to his glory days?" That's exactly what I'm doing, and my judgement is that they are not the kind of music I am really fond of. I'm sure it was not Tom Newman who introduced Mike to sequencers, at least not in this way. Read the interview I've quoted, it's here on Tubular Web somewhere. "It just puzzles me to go on a fan forum and hear so called fans say that they don't like Mike" - Well, I never described myself as a fan of anybody really. I am a lover of music, and among the pieces of music which I particularly love are all of Mike's instrumentals till Amarok, and not the ones after it. I don't know why they are so clearly divided but that's the way it is - to me! I have no intent whatsoever of forcing my opinion upon anybody! I just wanted to share my feelings. I think maybe I've done that too often on these pages already (see: 'Is there any other...') Good for you if you like the new stuff, too! I honestly wish I could! But it's an emotional thing, and these pieces don't arouse the emotions in me that the old stuff did. And knowing that Mike is the only one who can do it that way, and that in all probability he's never going to do it again, makes me a bit sad. That's all. That's what I was trying to share with other people who also like Mike (as I've said elsewhere, I don't know any of this species personally). I hear those new albums, and the thing about them is that I DO HEAR THE PASSION! Only he's expressing it now in a way that does not move me, and I wish that was otherwise. And that is why I am not going to buy his new albums anymore. One last thing, I want to correct what I've said above: "...unless I see all the people on these pages raving about it". Of course, that is not the point really. It should be: "...unless I have reason to think something has changed as far as that (which I've been talking about) is concerned." Now, enough said. I hope the misunderstanding between us is sorted out wíth this. I'm afraid it's not the first time the two of us have a misunderstanding. Please be assured again of my deepest respect for your feelings and opinions, and those of anybody else. All right, that's it. Back to top

bennyboy Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: July 2000 Posted: Nov. 15 2000, 10:38 Archangel Foster, my apologies. Allow me to explain... When I was talking about the way that people say Mike lacks passion, that electronic music is bad, that his new work isn't like his glory days etc. I was not referring specifically to you, I was referring more to the opinions raised in these forums in a general sense. I'm sorry if you misinterpreted what I was saying.... Also another thing, the note about hate mail and stuff was just a precaution, it has happened to me before for saying lesser things... There was a forum I started once called "Do fans expect too much..." which gradually degenerated into a cyberfight with most of the mud being flung at me. I just didn't want that to happen again thats all. I am sorry if I have offended you in any way with my post. Back to top

bennyboy Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: July 2000 Posted: Nov. 15 2000, 11:00 Oh, and another thing, what "other misunderstanding" are you referring to? My apologies there too. Back to top

Archangel Foster Group: Members Posts: 215 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: Nov. 15 2000, 16:01 I was referring to our (what I felt to be) little misunderstanding in my pet topic, 'Is there any other...'. See there if you want to know exactly what I'm talking about. No need to apologize though, it wasn't such a bad misunderstanding after all! Back to top

Archangel Foster Group: Members Posts: 215 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: Nov. 17 2000, 06:07 Alright, I've been thinking it over once again, and I must admit that I've exaggerated on a few points. I stated that I do not like these albums; that was too strong really. I do like them; the point is that I do not love them, that I could well live without them. And they're not annoying me at all really - that came out of the heat of the moment, so to speak. But as there is so much more great music do discover, I really don't see the point in buying his future albums. But I can come to terms with that really; I've realized that there is really quite a lot of rare stuff which I've never heard and a good lot of stuff that I've got but haven't listened to very often yet (partly due to an irrational fear of accidentally destroying a rare record! - I'll make MP3s of those, now that at last I've got a comp!). OK, enough said for now. Back to top

Archangel Foster Group: Members Posts: 215 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: Dec. 21 2000, 07:41 I'm converted. 'Far Above The Clouds' has made me cry! Amazing... Back to top

Pacha Daddy Group: Members Posts: 85 Joined: Sep. 2000 Posted: Dec. 21 2000, 08:45 I feel like I'm walking in on a private conversation... As much as I love the old Oldfield, I also find a lot of soul and power in the new stuff. I think we can all agree that "Far Above the Clouds" can bring the strongest man to his knees, between the bells and that wailing guitar (which, I agree with Bennyboy, is about the greatest solo in the MO repertoire). I also really get lost in "Doge's Palace" on the sadly-named MB, and "Pacha Mama" sends me trancing every time. And as far as TB2 goes, the cut right after "Altered State" (I can never remember the name) is sweet and soulful and soothing. I'm a big electronic music fan, and have been since the 70s. I agree with Bennyboy that e-music does NOT lack passion, soul, or feeling. Go to netradio.com and listen to some of the stuff on the Starstreams channel--all electronic, all fabulous. And let us not forget the body of work given by T-Dream, Jarre, Kraftwerk, Isao Tomita, et ux. The test of an Oldfield album is in whether or not it MOVES you. I get off these days on listening to the layers of sound, the tiny nuances MO puts into the work. It's in the old stuff, it's in the new stuff. When you get right down to it, it's in Mike. Back to top

Archangel Foster Group: Members Posts: 215 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: Dec. 22 2000, 21:05 I see now that I was wrong. You can see the process I went through when you read my posts from 12-21. First I posted the forum 'Mike's first time'. Then I had that afterthought about Guilty, and I posted the PS. So then I turned on TBIII and I found that, hearing it that way for the first time, I actually liked it. And I REALly liked 'Outcast'. So I posted the PPS. Now look at the post on this forum, two posts above this one. I see now what prevented me from taking the latest albums for what they are: there are things on it I really don't like very much or even don't like at all. But that by no means is to say the whole albums are bad. Far from it, as I discovered! There are these great moments everywhere that let you feel 'it' just as well as some of the 'old' stuff. Right now, for example, I am listening to Guitars, and although I don't understand why he had to put in synthetic drumsounds here, apart from that it is a wonderful album, maybe the one I like the most as a whole album. Then there are things like 'Far Above The Clouds' - I mean that's the MO we all know and love, only he, like all of us, lives at the turn of the millennium now, and his music sounds like it. It did back in '79, listen to the Exposed version of TB, to Guilty, to Platinum, thats absolutely up-to-date for the time. So now, I hope you understand I usually don't change my opinion every two minutes, but I really made a discovery here (BTW, Discovery is a great album, too...) I'm not ashamed of my former opinion, but I'm happy I've been able to relax as far as this is concerned. All this pain I'm going through where it's about Mike's music should probably let you understand how much it means to me. I still haven't heard TMB (except for Lake Constance and a small fraction of Pacha Mama), I tried to buy it but I just hate the title and I don't like the cover either... so I bought a Sally Oldfield CD and a Phil Beer CD instead... But as far as the title is concerned, probably it won't sound as stupid in a few hundred years... Back to top

bennyboy Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: July 2000 Posted: Dec. 23 2000, 03:55 For my part Archangel Foster I think I was being too defensive in my attitude. You see, I'm something of a freak as far as Mike Oldfield fans go, I'm 18 and although I thought "tubular Bells" was great and enjoyed listening to it every time my dad pulled it out of his CD collection, it was only when I started listening to his nineties stuff that I really became interested. And now I've been listening to some more of his "glory day" albums I've realised how much this change in style can shock people. And I realise now that a lot of people don't think Mikes making bad music, it just not their style of music. Its only when people start saying "Mikes lost it" I start to get a bit cranky. And I thought this was another kind of "Mikes lost it, woe is me the once ardent Mike fan" sort of thing, sorry for the misunderstanding dude. So please, no offence was meant and I'm not out to convert anyone or whatever. Incidentally, "The Millennium Bell" is a good album, if you can forget the concept it is supposed to represent. Its hardly a great summing up of human history, but it has some pleasant, catchy tunes. Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: Feb. 04 2002, 05:14 I find that his recent albums have some of his best work, in particular Tubular Bells III. It has great guitar work in Serpent DReam and Far Above the Clouds. THe Millennium Bell is also quite good. Amber Light is one of his most passionate tracks for me Go to www.global.net.au/~holmangp -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Forums | Links | Instruments | Discography | Tours | Articles | FAQ | Artwork | Wallpapers
Biography | Gallery | Videos | MIDI / Ringtones | Tabs | Lyrics | Books | Sitemap | Contact


Mike Oldfield Tubular.net