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

Pages: (2) < [1] 2 > [ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

tubularbills Group: Members Posts: 528 Joined: Aug. 2000 Posted: July 22 2002, 11:13 Tubular Bells 3 & Tres Lunas. Two very well designed and compiled albums. TB3 is my favorite of all time, and TL is up there on my list. But the only thing that kind of irritates me about both of these albums are the lyrics in the middle of the album. Man in the Rain and To Be Free seem to me just be totally out of place. I can understand that w/ TB3, Man In the Rain i guess fits the whole mood of the album and the whole Ibiza thing (and all the other stuff that was going on with his life at the time). but to me, i think he could have put that in another album. It just sounds weird right in the middle of an instrumental album. i don't mind the one-line vocals like in Source of Secrets, Jewel in the Crown, and FATC. Those i think help enhance the album. but when you put an actual SONG in there....it changes the album. I have no idea why in the world To Be Free was put in TL. i don't see a connection between it and the rest of the album. Perhaps it fits with the game, but any correlation that it has with the music in the album is mindblowing. It just doesn't make a good fit i think. What's even a bit more aggrevating is that if i'm having a friend listening to these albums and all of a sudden they hear these female voices it confuses them because i told them it's by "Mike Oldfield". so you've got a male composer with a female voice? it really messes things up. I've never been a big fan of MOs vocals/lyrics/songs. i'm more in it for the music than words. I like the one-liners and the WORDS that he puts in albums (Only Time Will Tell, In The Beginning, Jewel in the Crown, Far Above the Clouds, Thou Art in Heaven, most of the pieces in The Millennium Bell, etc...). But i don't like the idea of putting actual songs in there (Man in the Rain, To Be Free) especially if the entire album is supposed to be instrumental. -------------- Terrible, Wonderful, Crazy, Perfect. Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: July 23 2002, 05:55 It's sort of OK if the song has an instrumental bit, for example a hot guitar solo like Man in the Rain's. I don't think To be FRee has a guitar solo though (never actually heard the album yet  ). Your're right though, it does mess up the mood of the album. I suppose on Tubular Bells III, you do get The Inner Child with the wordless vocals as sort of a 'warm up' to prepare you for the full song (that's my excuse anyway...). -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

TimHighfield Group: Members Posts: 543 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: July 23 2002, 06:02 What about, say, Ommadawn or Incantations? These are two albums often referred to as instrumental, yet Ommadawn as 'On Horseback' and the vocals towards the end of Part One, and Incantations has a lot of vocals in, I think in Parts One and Four but maybe Two as well- I don't actually own a copy of Incantations so I'm not entirely sure. I'm not a fan of the one-worders, myself. ESPECIALLY 'Mastermind' on TMB. And the 'Enter' on 'Tubular World' (TSODE). Very annoying, don't really add to the piece at all. Where is the line drawn between an instrumental and a song? Predominantly instrumental, no vocals whatsoever, or vocals but no lyrics. Is Taurus II an instrumental, even with 'The Deep Deep Sound' and the vocals towards the end? What about Ommadawn Part One? The Inner Child? Far Above the Clouds? Mastermind? Let There Be Light? Tubular Bells Part Two? It'd be interesting to see whether opinions vary on this... Back to top

tubularbills Group: Members Posts: 528 Joined: Aug. 2000 Posted: July 23 2002, 11:30 Well, i've never heard the entire album of Ommadawn (one of the few albums i don't have), so i don't know how the lyrics fit in with the rest of the music. I'm trying to picture a song in the middle of Part 1 of TB (i'm assuming that's what it feels like in Ommadawn, just a song in the middle of a lengthy 15-25 minute piece). Are they vocal "chords" (kind of like the vocal chords in TB2), or is it like "The Inner Child" in TB3? or are they actually singing songs? Even with the guitar solo in the middle of Man In the Rain, it's still annoying to hear words in there. i like The Inner Child actually. i'd rather hear chant-like stuff than actual singing (and i don't think it really leads up to the singing in Man in the Rain). Mastermind is a conflicted piece because i think the way that word is said is neat (and the small phrase, "what is love?" heard in the background is kinda mysterious), but then it doesn't really fit with the song. i'm still not sure if i like the added words in there or if they take away from the piece. ENTER in Tubular World i think fits with the rest of the album because almost every other song has some kind of sayings or something in them (plus it makes me really feel like i'm going on a roller coaster). woot! I've always hated the piltdown man (i like the orchestral version - no stupid weird phrases). and don't even get me started on Altered State (UGH!. But the rest of part two is awesome (on both TB & TB2). But you're right, Tim, where should that line be drawn? Do chants count as lyrics/words/songs too? -------------- Terrible, Wonderful, Crazy, Perfect. Back to top

Korgscrew Group: Super Admins Posts: 3511 Joined: Dec. 1999 Posted: July 23 2002, 17:30 I think that how well it works depends on the song and how well integrated into the rest of the album it is. The songs in Incantations that Tim mentioned, for example, seem to fit seamlessly into the rest of the piece. Man In The Rain and To Be Free don't - they seem more like a little interlude. I don't mind it too much - I think Man In The Rain fits better into TB3 than To Be Free fits into Tres Lunas (the sound of To Be Free is just so different - I don't think it would quite fit even if the vocals were taken away). The vocals at the end of Ommadawn Part 1 are a kind of chant, like with Hergest Ridge, while 'On Horseback' is a song. I think that On Horseback shares the sound and some of the mood with the rest of the album, so again, it sits in there rather nicely. Back to top

TimHighfield Group: Members Posts: 543 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: July 24 2002, 09:16 I've just thought of another piece that has been classified as 'instrumental' but contains quite a few vocal parts- Amarok. How should the whole lot be defined (as opposed to small sections like Africa II or Didlybom)? Can the instrumental 'labelling' of the album be substantiated? (Hang on, this is sounding like a daily serial now... tune in for the answers to the nailbiting questions in tomorrow's exciting episode of [insert title here]). The vocals do (for the most part) fit in with the rest of the album, not disturbing the flow- although some people will state the Margaret Thatcher speech as breaking it up unnecessarily. And they go with the rest of the album, because the album is just that piece. I'm not sure myself- I'd like to say that Amarok is instrumental, but it isn't wholly instrumental, is it? Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: July 25 2002, 06:03 Mike's only fully instrumental album, in which there is no vocal chords, hums, chants or anything is Guitars. Every other album has had a chant, or humms, or a Piltdown man, as well as actual songs. Any yet he is more instrumental than most artists. The vocals in most of his albums do fit the music, but I'm not sure about songs. As far as I go, a song with actual lyrics is a song, and anything with one word or any chants or humming is instrumental. -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

Korgscrew Group: Super Admins Posts: 3511 Joined: Dec. 1999 Posted: July 25 2002, 19:55 Interesting that Guitars is also the only album where he plays absolutely everything himself... Back to top

tubularbills Group: Members Posts: 528 Joined: Aug. 2000 Posted: July 26 2002, 01:31 I have to agree with raven4x4x on this. Just one words or phrases or humms/hyms don't classify as actual songs, therefore they are instrumental. I noticed that Guitars was his only non-vocal album. like NO vocals at all. not even one word. it's a good CD. i like it a lot. -------------- Terrible, Wonderful, Crazy, Perfect. Back to top

TimHighfield Group: Members Posts: 543 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: July 26 2002, 03:48 I'm confused by raven4x4x's definition here... Don't chants normally have lyrics? Just because it's not a format like, say, verse verse chorus verse chorus doesn't mean it can't have lyrics or be classified as a song, so does something like "Sondela..." make Amarok instrumental or a song? If there are no apparent lyrics, what is being chanted has been made up on the spot, then maybe there's less doubt, but with Amarok, where what is being sung has been transcribed I can't make my mind up. Hmm...Guitars is a) only non-vocal album; b) only Mike-only album. This could mean something... Back to top

tubularbills Group: Members Posts: 528 Joined: Aug. 2000 Posted: July 26 2002, 12:53 Ok here's my thing. Ever since i started listening to MO's music (which started with TB1), i've considered his music to be Instrumental. Perhaps i was just trying to convince myself and others around me that it wasn't new age crap. Now if you like New Age that's fine (i really don't like some of it). but MO's music is NOT New Age. so the only thing i coudl think of to describe it was instrumental. I meean, the man can play like what 15+ instruments? (yes, i guess i'm counting the spoons as an instrument). But i realize that there are some lyrics/words in his workings. But Part 1 of TB just has a master of ceremony. To me it would be just like a conductor introducing his symphony. It's not lyrics at all, just words. (and not all words are lyrics). To me, saying (saying, not chanting or expressionally) "Grand Piano" is not a lyric. it's just words. The Piltdown man in part 2 of TB, i just have no freakin idea what to even call that. ugh. ditto with Altered States in TB2. I would consider TB2 an instrumental album. But i don't know what to say about Altered States. i mean, how the hell do you even go about describing what kind of music that is? TSODE to me would be the closest thing to New Age that MO has ever done. But it's done so well that i wouldn't consider it New Age. It's still instrumental, but also Atmospheric. And the only thing in that album i would consider "lyrics" would be A New Beginning. Hibernaculum is just humming and chanting ( no lyrics). and everything that is said in that album up to the end is just phrases. i wouldn't really call them lyrics. I'm probably just rambling on. it's a tuff subject, and i guess can be thought on different levels. I don't know. Let me just say this: Man in the Rain and To Be Free just sound out of place in TB3 and TL. there. -------------- Terrible, Wonderful, Crazy, Perfect. Back to top

Klaas Pier Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: July 2002 Posted: July 27 2002, 05:08 I don't mind songs like man in the rain, to bee free etc. at all. To me its like Mike's albums are like sleep. Some parts are deep sleep others are nearly awake. When I listen to these albums I drowse of during the instrumental parts, and become more consious again during the songs. The mood of the album is still in me, and that combined with the song is great. The cooperation is best at the end of ommadawn with the horse song, suddenly reality comes back, but you're not really there yet.... Back to top

TimHighfield Group: Members Posts: 543 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: July 29 2002, 06:33 Just a thought that's come to me recently. Guitars is, apparently, the only non-vocal album. I can't remember vocals on Voyager- can anyone confirm this. There's lyrics to some of the pieces, but Mike may have done instrumental versions of the pieces. This is moving away from the original discussion, but it's something that's just come to mind. My word- my last post was my 500th. This one, according to the bottom of the board main page at the moment, is the 10000th in total on the board. Blimey... Back to top

raven4x4x Group: Members Posts: 1535 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: July 31 2002, 06:11 I can't remember which song in Voyager had the chant (was it The Hero or something?) because I've never really listened to it for ages. And to clarify my definition of vocan/non-vocal: I do not count chants like Hergest Ridge or Sheeba as lyrics. One word, like in TSODE, or the repeated Sondela/Happy/So Fa So Fa in Amarok are also not lyrics in the conventional sence. I am looking at the definition of song in a very traditional sence, with proper words that are ,for a time at least, the main focus of the music, like Man in the Rain, On Horseback etc. I don't know, it's all to confusing for me today (just had to run a few kilometers in a fun run... ) -------------- Thank-you for helping us help you help us all. Back to top

TimHighfield Group: Members Posts: 543 Joined: Oct. 2000 Posted: Aug. 01 2002, 07:33 There's nothing wrong with a little running...anyway, Perth City to Surf's coming up this month. Now there's a 'fun run'. Back on topic: perhaps we should have a poll to try and determine what counts as instrumental and what doesn't. Something like: Where is the line drawn between instrumental and non-instrumental/An instrumental can have, at most: - No vocals/humming/etc whatsoever (eg the whole of Guitars) - Minimal vocals, for about two seconds in total in whole piece (eg Outcast) - Lyric-less vocals (eg TB Part Two) - Vocals, but not sung (eg TB Part One) - Minimal chants (eg Ommadawn Part One) - A mixture of the above, but still mostly non-vocal (eg Amarok) - Vocoder yes, actual singing voice no - Sung vocals with lyrics, but not taking up the majority of the piece (eg Incantations Part 1/4?) - A lot of vocals with a little solo instrumental part, such as a guitar solo (eg Man in the Rain) - Practically no solo instrumental work whatsoever (eg Foreign Affair) Maybe then we might be able to get a definition of 'instrumental' in terms of Mike's work   . Back to top

bennyboy Unregistered Posted: Aug. 09 2002, 20:44 "Man In The Rain" is vital to "Tubular Bells III" as an album! VITAL! Without "Man In The Rain" then the remark in "Far Above The Clouds" about how he "journeyed up the mountainside...and nothing was ever heard from him again" simply would not make sense.  If you wanted to cut out "Man In The Rain", you'd have to cut out the speech too. Back to top

tubularbills Group: Members Posts: 528 Joined: Aug. 2000 Posted: Aug. 09 2002, 22:36 No, i think i could still see a connection. he's going up a mountainside...FAR ABOVE THE CLOUDS...(not necessarily in the rain). i can see why Man in the Rain is kind of necessary for the album, but still to have a lyrical song in the middle of what deems to be almost 100% instrumental...it's just odd. And since it's a woman's voice too (by a male composer). ugh. -------------- Terrible, Wonderful, Crazy, Perfect. Back to top

Mark 1 Group: Members Posts: 65 Joined: June 2001 Posted: Aug. 10 2002, 18:56 It's a hard line to draw to differentiate vocal from instrumental pieces, but I'd say that it has as much to do with the song structure than the media used in making the song. Pieces like 'Mastermind' or The Bell in TBII don't count as vocal songs because the voice is used as an instrument, a rhythm or an effect. The music itself quite clearly carries the piece. Man in the rain and To France, on the other hand, have a story to tell in their lyrics, contain repetitions of phrases in the verse / bridge / refrain structure and are clearly vocal pieces. Interesting, however, are the hybrids which contain song-like pieces as well as large instrumental sections, but perhaps we should just consider these hybrids containing just that: instrumental and vocal pieces. Summarizing: in my view, the goal of the lyrics and the way they are used determine whether the piece is instrumental or vocal. Back to top

Korgscrew Group: Super Admins Posts: 3511 Joined: Dec. 1999 Posted: Aug. 11 2002, 09:19 But then where does that place 'The Inner Child'? It's not really a song because it has no lyrics, but it is a vocal piece...can it count as an instrumental if it has wordless vocals in such a prominent place? Back to top

Mark 1 Group: Members Posts: 65 Joined: June 2001 Posted: Aug. 11 2002, 20:21 I'd certainly count that as an instrumental: Rosa's voice is used as an instrument. To take another example on that same CD, although 'Man In The Rain' has lyrics, it's more a kind of poem being recited paralel with the music, the music is not supporting it. Later on, the lyrics return as rhythmic elements to support the music. Altered states is typical of a vocal piece where the lyrics are not understandable. Even though there's a chorus that's intelligibele (please replace 'refrain' in my last post by 'chorus' - I forgot the right word... ) I'd argue that even if the chorus was as weird as the rest of the song, it's still a vocal piece having a verse / chorus structure, where the music ultimately supports the 'lyrics'. Back to top

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ] Pages: (2) < [1] 2 >

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


Mike Oldfield Tubular.net