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 ]

tubularbills Group: Members Posts: 528 Joined: Aug. 2000 Posted: Mar. 09 2006, 09:03 Ok, i'm confused about this. Wind Chimes Parts 1 & 2 why is that one track? every other album that has part 1 and part 2 [or part 3 and part 4], they are all seperate: Tubular Bells Part 1 Tubular Bells Part 2 Hergest Ridge Part 1 etc...etc.... why did mike lump part 1 & 2 together for wind chimes? i mean, wouldn't it have made more sense to keep them seperate, like every other album? -------------- Terrible, Wonderful, Crazy, Perfect. Back to top

Fram Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: Feb. 2006 Posted: Mar. 09 2006, 10:14 Quote (tubularbills @ Mar. 09 2006, 15:03) Ok, i'm confused about this. Wind Chimes Parts 1 & 2 why is that one track? every other album that has part 1 and part 2 [or part 3 and part 4], they are all seperate: Tubular Bells Part 1 Tubular Bells Part 2 Hergest Ridge Part 1 etc...etc.... why did mike lump part 1 & 2 together for wind chimes? i mean, wouldn't it have made more sense to keep them seperate, like every other album? The other examples you give are dictated by the album format (A and B sides). Incantations on Exposed has only two parts, not four (except for some CD pressings). Platinum's four parts are put together. I don't think you can really find a line in Mike's decisions to separate pieces or put them together (compare the two parts of TB with the many parts of TBII, or even better, with the many parts of the identical TB2003!. It's just how he felt it should be at the time, and he is known to change his mind often (for better and for worse). EDIT: why does the ) after TB2003! become a winking emoticon in my post? I have tried it with a space between the ) and the ., but that doesn't help... -------------- Knowledge is a curse, but ignorance is worse Back to top

Duggeh Group: Members Posts: 125 Joined: Oct. 2004 Posted: Mar. 09 2006, 10:57 The wind chimes part 1 is only about 90 seconds long, the remainder is part 2, what confuses me is the need for seperate parts at all. -------------- http://www.thismanwillkillyou.com http://www.last.fm/user/Dougmac21 Back to top

Ugo Group: Members Posts: 5495 Joined: April 2000 Posted: Mar. 09 2006, 12:44 I think that Part 1 is named like that because it is a complete piece in itself - a kind of intro to the longer, and more complicated piece that is Part 2. Yes, it's silly - according by the same logic as above, there should be TWC Part 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, and maybe even 9. But that's the way it is... -------------- Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian Back to top

ImAFoolAndImLaughing Group: Members Posts: 536 Joined: Feb. 2006 Posted: Mar. 09 2006, 12:49 Quote why does the ) after TB2003! become a winking emoticon in my post? I have tried it with a space between the ) and the ., but that doesn't help... I've noticed the same thing! My theory is that the board recognises a ! followed by a ) as an alternative way of writing a and converts it accordingly... -------------- "I was in this prematurely air conditioned supermarket and there were these bathing caps you could buy that had these kind of Fourth of July plumes on them that were red and yellow and blue and I wasn't tempted to buy one but I was reminded of the fact that I had been avoiding the beach." Back to top

Fram Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: Feb. 2006 Posted: Mar. 10 2006, 07:35 Quote (ImAFoolAndImLaughing @ Mar. 09 2006, 18:49) Quote why does the ) after TB2003! become a winking emoticon in my post? I have tried it with a space between the ) and the ., but that doesn't help... I've noticed the same thing! My theory is that the board recognises a ! followed by a ) as an alternative way of writing a and converts it accordingly... That seems to be it, but the strange thing is that the "!" is still present in the text before the smiley, so that only the ")" is converted...   -------------- Knowledge is a curse, but ignorance is worse Back to top

Alan D Group: Members Posts: 3670 Joined: Aug. 2004 Posted: Mar. 10 2006, 13:21 The division in Wind Chimes has never seemed strange to me, but rather natural. Part 1 is a statement of a simple but stately (and very beautiful) theme which seems, in the short treatment he gives it, to be complete in itself. I think the pause before the main piece starts is necessary - a few moments to absorb what we've just heard, before we set off on the main musical journey which proceeds to tell us that, no, in fact - there is a great deal more to be said! It seems very effective, I think. It has the effect of making the main theme particularly memorable, so that it has a marked impact when it returns in the same form, briefly, and very recognisably, near the end. A kind of 'arriving where we started but knowing the place for the first time' kind of thing. Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: Mar. 10 2006, 16:28 I just wish he had separated the ending as a "part 3", so that I could say "part two is entirely great, but I can't stand parts 1 and 3". -------------- Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds. Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com Back to top

Alan D Group: Members Posts: 3670 Joined: Aug. 2004 Posted: Mar. 10 2006, 17:12 Quote (Sir Mustapha @ Mar. 10 2006, 21:28) I just wish he had separated the ending as a "part 3", so that I could say "part two is entirely great, but I can't stand parts 1 and 3". Yes, I know you don't like that treatment at the start and finish, Sir M. But to chop 'em out would be like having a chair with no legs to stand on. The central long section that you like ... it can't stand alone - can it? I have a friend who plays the fiddle - folk music; and he always says that if you start a tune well and end it well, you can do pretty much what you like in the middle. Wind Chimes is a kind of inside-out version of that, for you, isn't it? Back to top

ImAFoolAndImLaughing Group: Members Posts: 536 Joined: Feb. 2006 Posted: Mar. 13 2006, 05:53 Quote (Alan D @ Mar. 10 2006, 17:12) Yes, I know you don't like that treatment at the start and finish, Sir M. But to chop 'em out would be like having a chair with no legs to stand on. The central long section that you like ... it can't stand alone - can it?? I disagree, I'm afraid.  I think that there is more than enough exciting and interesting music in the "middle" bit of TWC to justify cutting out the boring bits right at the beginning and at the end, particularly since the pause between the intoduction and "part two" creates the impression of two separate pieces of music anyway... -------------- "I was in this prematurely air conditioned supermarket and there were these bathing caps you could buy that had these kind of Fourth of July plumes on them that were red and yellow and blue and I wasn't tempted to buy one but I was reminded of the fact that I had been avoiding the beach." Back to top

Jammer Group: Members Posts: 643 Joined: April 2000 Posted: Mar. 17 2006, 13:35 The unusual joining of two separate pieces in one track shares more with the 'Nothing But/Bridge to Paradise' track on Earth Moving than the standard format of his earlier instrumentals. Mike was entering a more experimental phase directly at odds with marketing pressure from Virgin. The concept of skippable tracks on a CD was also relatively new, so I think these two occaisions were the result. 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