|
Post by Tʰᵉ Wᵃˡˡ Oᶠ Dᵉᵃᵗʰ on Feb 25, 2016 18:53:51 GMT
...even tempted to listen to a few tracks on you tube then might rate it .. I wouldn't bother, I had the displeasure of that. Save your ears.
|
|
|
Post by Whoppa Choppa on Feb 25, 2016 18:58:17 GMT
Thanks to Wikipedia and Youtube I know what is on this album, so let's see.... Couldn't manage to look in the boxes in the attic. Anyone thinking it's a bit unbalanced?? But of course, when it's pro-tafkar it's ok. He is *so* creative... Little Dreamer (Francis Rossi, Bernie Frost) 4:04 Another line... 1/10 Not At All (Francis Rossi, Bernie Frost) 2:54 Another line... 1/10 Heart On Hold (Andrew Steven Bown, Phil Palmer) 3:36 Freeze frame? 1/10 Perfect Remedy (Francis Rossi, Bernie Frost) 4:36 Let's do a buugie track.... Yeah.... 1/10 Address Book (Francis Rossi, Bernie Frost) 3:37 Class! 0/10 The Power Of Rock (Rick Parfitt, Pip Williams, Francis Rossi) 6:04 I like this one. 6/10 The Way I Am (John Edwards, Jeff Rich, Mike Paxman) 3:35 No 0/10 Tommy's In Love (Francis Rossi, Bernie Frost) 3:01 EPIC! 0/10 Man Overboard (Rick Parfitt, Pip Williams) 4:29 A try, but a far cry from.... 2/10 Going Down For The First Time (Andy Bown, John Edwards) 4:00 Who went down on who? 0/10 Throw Her A Line (Francis Rossi, Bernie Frost) 3:34 Snort him a line.... 0/10 1000 Years (Francis Rossi, Bernie Frost) 3:31 Holy crapparooney... 0/10 Sorry... but 1/10 is the glimmering results. It was as bad as I remembered. 2006 reissue bonus tracks Gone Thru The Slips (Andy Bown) Strained vocals... cheap Casio 0/10 Rotten To The Bone (Francis Rossi, Andy Bown) Clever chorus but...so samey 2/10 Doing It All For You (Rick Parfitt, Pip Williams) Oh well... with a different arrangement? 2/10 Dirty Water (Live) (Francis Rossi, Robert Young) Yes! Charming! 7/10 The Power Of Rock (edited version) (Rick Parfitt, Pip Williams, Francis Rossi) Same as above. 6/10 The Anniversary Waltz Clever stuff! A real workout. 6/10
1,9/10 ... It's not a good one this one....
|
|
accidentprone
Rocker Rollin'
Posts: 230
Favourite Quo Album: Piledriver
Favourite other bands.: Neil Young and Crazy Horse, AC/DC, Lynyrd Skynyrd.
|
Post by accidentprone on Feb 25, 2016 20:19:54 GMT
One of their very worst.
Power of Rock decent but that's it. Rest just shite.
1/10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2016 20:20:04 GMT
Its a case that direct comparisions of the FF era and post 86 period are bound to lead to stark and negative reviews of the latter by many fans who prefer the former period.
I also prefer the former period. But my own reviews suspend any direct comparisons, and whilst critical of the contrived nature of the 80's (as posted previously) I don't feel 'let down' by this period because as far as I was concerned, even back then - what happened from 86 onwards represented something that was always meant to be quite different to what preceded it. And, to repeat, I have always been an FF fan first and foremost.
I can understand some fans simply just not liking the material for what it is, but comparing it to the golden yrs is bound to lead to heightened dismissive opinions built into expectations before a song is even played and listened to.
I also differ from popular opinion, because I think that the Power of Rock is one of the poorer songs on PR - it actually seems out of place because it tries to recapture some of the former grit and energy from the former years - but imo fails by some way, and, imo, sounds sterile and contrived. The principle here is no different with wishing CQ would concentrate on playing their own music live, rather than copying (and then re-copying over and over!) the FF material. They are better writing their own pop/rock songs that do not bear stark close resemblance to the FF, and promoting them on their own merits,
I prefer the grittier CQ albums, because they finally found a better higher energy balance that reminds of the former origins - but they learnt to be able to produce their own brand of rock music that didn't sound too obviously trying to emulate the early days. In that sense the keyboards etc have their place, because its different personnel playing a different interpretation of the original formula. They started this process with RTYD and then finally continued it some yrs later with UTI and then HT.
However,I still don't subscribe to the intense drubbing that some of these earlier lightweight albums get - even if the late eighties albums (overall) represent the weakest part of the 'new era' and are a far far cry from the earlier original vintage yrs of the FF.
The point is, at least as far as I am concerned, that they are separate bands playing separate brands of music - even if there remains a link with the 12 bar shuffle theme.
I have been ultimately alienated by CQ for the reason that they have hung on for far to long to identification as being a continuation of the same band pre 85. Instead of promoting their own music on its own merits and not setting themselves up for comparison.
Maybe for this reason, because they are so very different to the FF, I can appreciate albums like PR more for that reason. Its sure not as good as the FF - but that just is not the point....It should never have been set up to compare so directly with it...
|
|
|
Post by Tʰᵉ Wᵃˡˡ Oᶠ Dᵉᵃᵗʰ on Feb 25, 2016 21:02:43 GMT
Its a case that direct comparisions of the FF era and post 86 period are bound to lead to stark and negative reviews of the latter by many fans who prefer the former period. <SNIP>
Maybe for this reason, because they are so very different to the FF, I can appreciate albums like PR more for that reason. Its sure not as good as the FF - but that just is not the point....It should never have been set up to compare so directly with it...
I understand and respect your views catlady, but personally I rate the album as a Status Quo album as that is what is says "on the tin" and not a very good one at that. Maybe, as you state, they're different (of course they are - I agree), they should have changed their name too and left the Quo brand untarnished from all that they "accomplished" since '86!
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Feb 25, 2016 21:30:48 GMT
Always liked Man Overboard
The Way I Am could be really good with better production (could have imagined it being good on iycsth)
Loved POR at the time, but time hasn't been too kind
1000 years is almost lovely,but flawed / ruined by the cringey bits
The rest is terrible
I will be kind and give 2.5
|
|
|
Post by Railroad17 on Feb 25, 2016 22:04:27 GMT
Never heard it. Never will. What's the last one you bought Davy? And why was it the straw that broke etc.
|
|
|
Post by dennis on Feb 25, 2016 23:22:06 GMT
What's the last one you bought Davy? And why was it the straw that broke etc. Never Too Late. It was shite. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks so. To me it was a weak, half-baked Status Quo album. Subsequently, the releases had Status Quo on the cover but just didn't sound like Quo - not even poor quality Quo!
|
|
|
Post by Detroit on Feb 25, 2016 23:25:28 GMT
To cut it short, it was mostly shite after BFY.
|
|
|
Post by dennis on Feb 25, 2016 23:33:16 GMT
The point is, at least as far as I am concerned, that they are separate bands playing separate brands of music - even if there remains a link with the 12 bar shuffle theme.
Exactly! If Quo had folded with John's departure & some other band had come along releasing the subsequent output, I wonder how many Quo fans from the '70s would have been grabbed by that material - not too many, I suspect. It's partly the continuity of members &, in particular, the band name that has enabled them to continue all this time. The quality of material would never have been enough to build & sustain a career without the '70s back catalogue to sustain their live performances.
|
|
|
Post by Detroit on Feb 26, 2016 0:07:16 GMT
To cut it short, it was mostly shite after BFY. Correct. It amazes me that there are so many people out there that rave about "The Party Ain't Over Yet" album and all the associated horseshit....it's like they're scared to admit that the fact is, after1978, Quo were shite.Sorry folks - they were shite. I won't argue over a year or two.
|
|
|
Post by rockonquo on Feb 26, 2016 5:27:37 GMT
2/10. Like the Live version of PORR on the Rockin' thru the years video. Also like RTTB the b-side, that's it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2016 11:19:54 GMT
Its a case that direct comparisions of the FF era and post 86 period are bound to lead to stark and negative reviews of the latter by many fans who prefer the former period.
I also prefer the former period. But my own reviews suspend any direct comparisons, and whilst critical of the contrived nature of the 80's (as posted previously) I don't feel 'let down' by this period because as far as I was concerned, even back then - what happened from 86 onwards represented something that was always meant to be quite different to what preceded it. And, to repeat, I have always been an FF fan first and foremost.
I can understand some fans simply just not liking the material for what it is, but comparing it to the golden yrs is bound to lead to heightened dismissive opinions built into expectations before a song is even played and listened to.
I also differ from popular opinion, because I think that the Power of Rock is one of the poorer songs on PR - it actually seems out of place because it tries to recapture some of the former grit and energy from the former years - but imo fails by some way, and, imo, sounds sterile and contrived. The principle here is no different with wishing CQ would concentrate on playing their own music live, rather than copying (and then re-copying over and over!) the FF material. They are better writing their own pop/rock songs that do not bear stark close resemblance to the FF, and promoting them on their own merits,
I prefer the grittier CQ albums, because they finally found a better higher energy balance that reminds of the former origins - but they learnt to be able to produce their own brand of rock music that didn't sound too obviously trying to emulate the early days. In that sense the keyboards etc have their place, because its different personnel playing a different interpretation of the original formula. They started this process with RTYD and then finally continued it some yrs later with UTI and then HT.
However,I still don't subscribe to the intense drubbing that some of these earlier lightweight albums get - even if the late eighties albums (overall) represent the weakest part of the 'new era' and are a far far cry from the earlier original vintage yrs of the FF.
The point is, at least as far as I am concerned, that they are separate bands playing separate brands of music - even if there remains a link with the 12 bar shuffle theme.
I have been ultimately alienated by CQ for the reason that they have hung on for far to long to identification as being a continuation of the same band pre 85. Instead of promoting their own music on its own merits and not setting themselves up for comparison.
Maybe for this reason, because they are so very different to the FF, I can appreciate albums like PR more for that reason. Its sure not as good as the FF - but that just is not the point....It should never have been set up to compare so directly with it...
Howay man, Cats! What's the score? Hi hun I find it hard to put figure ratings next to these albums. My perspective always has been, as written above, that CQ were created actually as a separate band altogether to the FF, albeit as a follow-on from them.
That perspective has been dented by their refusal to represent 90% of their own music catalogue, and this dented perspective much heightened by the missed opportunities since the FF reunions to take inspiration from the spontaneity of those gigs in terms of shaking their own set up - and instead choosing to keep continually descending into karaoke entertainment.
I can appraise the albums in terms of how much I like them, based on the perspective I held (past tense) that CQ were a separate band in their own right - but cannot now rate them based on the fact that the identity of the band has been diluted over such a long time into a twilight zone that is a botched fudge of both the past and the present.
Virtually every album since 86 - whether it represents the early pop lightweight days (such as PR) or the rockier later yrs from UTI/HT onwards, and irrespective of subjective opinion on any of them, is unrepresented. Why bother releasing them iF they are to be left as untouched studio relics that largely pass the eye of many of the audience who simply go to CQ gigs these days to bop to RAOTW and are not interested in anything else.
One of the main interpretations one could take from this is that they don't rate their own product enough to play it live - and instead dine out on re-constituted glories (largely FF originated) to keep modern day punters happy and somehow then still appear to be a sustaining national 'rock institution' in the public eye.
On the basis that CQ are fizzling out their career not just as a caricature of the FF, but also of themselves, attempting to rate the actual albums as going concerns has become rather meaningless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2016 11:32:30 GMT
Its a case that direct comparisions of the FF era and post 86 period are bound to lead to stark and negative reviews of the latter by many fans who prefer the former period. <SNIP>
Maybe for this reason, because they are so very different to the FF, I can appreciate albums like PR more for that reason. Its sure not as good as the FF - but that just is not the point....It should never have been set up to compare so directly with it...
I understand and respect your views catlady, but personally I rate the album as a Status Quo album as that is what is says "on the tin" and not a very good one at that. Maybe, as you state, they're different (of course they are - I agree), they should have changed their name too and left the Quo brand untarnished from all that they "accomplished" since '86! Well as you can see, I have just further clarified my position more clearly in terms of what I have previously believed and what I have increasingly come to believe. On that basis I certainly do understand the view stated on here by some related to a decision to re-name the band back in 86.
That point further focusses what dennis has written in his post, and I get exactly what he means.
We cannot however re-write history - and it seems we are destined to see the name of 'Quo' (whatever opinion one holds in terms of past or present identity) limp out as a testimonial tribute band of both its original format, and its present one.
I think much of my appraisal of CQ, based on their own merits has been based on wishful thinking that they are a quite separate, if devolved, creation from the original. There was even a golden chance for that moment to be seized, late in the day, following the FF reunions. However it wasn't to be.
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Feb 26, 2016 13:48:52 GMT
1/10 ... absolute crap album
|
|