| re: Hang Cool | |
|
Posted by: |
Vin 08:57 pm UTC 04/21/10 |
| In reply to: | re: Hang Cool - Markus 04:43 pm UTC 04/21/10 |
| Great point on Los Angeloser! I actually enjoy it within the context of this record; its almost like a little breather, being such a happy / laid back song. (It also helps that the rest of the album doesn't sound like it) But I still think its a bad choice for a single, though. > Think thatīs a good verdict. I listened to it two times > now and there are better and less good songs on it. Even > "Los Angeloser" - one of the worde songs in my opinion - > somehow fits. Two or three really nice ones are there as > well. Definitely an album one could enjoy - just donīt > compare it to his Steinman albums, because that would be > inappropriate und unfair. ;-) It really doesnīt try to > copy Steinmans ingeniousness. And Meat sounds not as bad > as I expected - no, he sounds much better. I guess when in > the studio with Jim heīs much more under pressure! > > My favourites: > > Running away from me (donīt ask me why - maybe because > heīs not crying all the way through) > > Elvis in Vegas > > > > > > > One line in "Elvis in > > > Vegas," - Meat sings "and then the lights went out," and > > > his voice is high and pure as it was, I don't know, on Bat > > > II or maybe even Bad Attitude. Is it real, or is it > > > Auto-tune? (or whatever they use) I also like that Meat > > > uses more of his lower register, which I've long-thought > > > was under-utilized. > > > > > > Think that utilising his lower register is probably saving > > his upper and he's reaping the benefit. > > > > If you hear some of the more difficult Steinman stuff live > > then a lot of the tme he really struggles toward the end > > of phrases when he should be in full cry - basically > > because he's spent his vocal resources simply getting to > > that point in the song. > > > > I have to say that Meat has restored a little of my faith > > in him with HCTB - should have been done instead of TMIL > > as soon as jim got sick. > > > > That way we may have had another 4 years to get a proper > > 'bat 3' together. > > > > I like very much that modern country-rock sound, the fact > > that it doesn't sound like a cheap wannabe steinman copy > > and he probably Rocks harder on this album than anything > > since the original Bat or Bad Attitude era's. > > > > First impressions for me are a pleasant suprise - I'll see > > how quickly it wears out - but reckon that's when the > > first-half of the record will come into its own. > > > > It certainly isn't boring like WTTN/TMIL and is less naive > > ond cheesy than CHSIB. > > > > Good effort from Meat and his team with this one. If > > there's any justice he at least deserves a little > > credibility for coming up with this album, though I accept > > that it is more one for the Rockers than the > > Steinmaniacs. > > > > To be fair, I think he's run as far away as he can from > > the Steinman sound without loosing the style-reference > > completly - It wouldn't be impossible to listen to this > > between Bat 1 and 2 - wouldn't be like stacking up the > > auto-changer with Pantera, Celine Dion and Motley Crue for > > example - but at the same time it does successfully > > distance itself from 'trademark Jim' without turning into > > something completely bland as much commercial rock is > > nowadays. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Hang Cool - Markus 04:43 pm UTC 04/21/10 |
| Next: | Radio Show where Todd pickes... - Markus 09:18 pm UTC 04/20/10 |
| Thread: | |