| re: Bat vs BfG | |
|
Posted by: |
Wilbury 09:41 am UTC 05/19/07 |
| In reply to: | re: Bat vs BfG - Pudding 09:18 am UTC 05/19/07 |
| Interesting -- I wasn't really sure what the general consensus on this would be. I guess I've never really considered Bat out of Hell to be "sacred" in it's current form, as a "unit" or whatever. I'd quite Like Jim to "redo" (recycle?) Bat with someone. Perhaps he should redo it with Meat before meat's voice abandons him once and for all? I'd like to hear Jim do a fully fleshed and realised studio recording of All Revved Up with someone as well. Oh Dream Engine, where art thou? And I should add that to me, Bat and Bad for Good are the "brother" records, with Dead Ringer being 'something else' again, so it's interesting to hear these different opinions / takes. > I agree. Bat is so totally unique in every sense of the > word nothing can really compare. Perhaps a better > comparison would be Bad For Good & Dead Ringer. > > Pud > > > > I don’t really compare album to album or a song to a song > > each one imbeds itself into my soul and becomes part of my > > existence. > > > > I wish I could describe what the songs do to me but i just > > cant find the word other to say I don’t listen to the > > songs i feel the songs > > > > Sure I have my favourites but each one of Jim’s songs has > > its on special place > > > > That aside to compare anything to Bat would be wrong and > > unfair. How can you compare anything to perfection? > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Bat vs BfG - The_Orator 07:20 pm UTC 05/19/07 |
| Next: | re: Bat vs BfG - Pudding 09:56 am UTC 05/19/07 |
| Thread: |
|