Reviews by shoegaze_vulpes86

Cool stuff. ๐˜๐˜ฆ๐˜ข๐˜ฅ ๐˜๐˜ถ๐˜ฏ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ๐˜ด grooves hard, sounds fresh even decades later, and proves that jazz can move your body as much as your brain.

๐˜š๐˜ถ๐˜ฏ๐˜ด๐˜ฉ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜ฆ ๐˜š๐˜ถ๐˜ฑ๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ๐˜ฎ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ is a fairly average album overall, but it does have its moments. What stands out most is the use of Indian instrumentation, which adds a unique psychedelic flavor to the otherwise laid-back 60s folk-pop sound. Itโ€™s more interesting in texture than in songwriting, but still worth a listen for its historical context and sonic experimentation.

GracelandPaul Simon

Rated 4/10

๐˜Ž๐˜ณ๐˜ข๐˜ค๐˜ฆ๐˜ญ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ฅ is often held up as a groundbreaking album, but to me, it mostly sounds like a smooth, safe โ€™80s pop record with occasional touches of South African rhythm and harmony. The much-praised โ€œworld musicโ€ elements are there, but they rarely lead โ€” Paul Simon stays firmly in the spotlight, and the album never feels like a true musical exchange.

Still, I do get the sense that Simon wanted to shine a light on the South African musicians he worked with. Groups like Ladysmith Black Mambazo clearly gained more visibility through this project, and that matters โ€” even if the way itโ€™s done feels more like cultural framing than collaboration.

The music itself feels tame, a bit lifeless at times, and nowhere near as bold as its reputation suggests. For an album so often described as revolutionary, it left me surprisingly unmoved.

Bjรถrk presents ๐˜”๐˜ฆ๐˜ฅรบ๐˜ญ๐˜ญ๐˜ข โ€” an album made entirely from the human voice โ€” featuring throat singing, beatboxing, choirs, whispers, and everything in between. Itโ€™s bold, raw, and intimate, stripping music down to its most primal element: breath and voice.

What could have easily been a conceptual gimmick becomes something deeply emotional and otherworldly. Bjรถrk doesnโ€™t just experiment โ€” she ๐—ฐ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ๐˜€ a sonic world that feels ancient and futuristic at once. Tracks like ๐˜รถ๐˜ฌ๐˜ถ๐˜ณรณ, ๐˜–๐˜ค๐˜ฆ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ช๐˜ข, and ๐˜ž๐˜ฉ๐˜ฐ ๐˜๐˜ด ๐˜๐˜ต offer moments of haunting beauty, while ๐˜ˆ๐˜ฏ๐˜ค๐˜ฆ๐˜ด๐˜ต๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ด plunges into the edge of vocal abstraction.

๐˜”๐˜ฆ๐˜ฅรบ๐˜ญ๐˜ญ๐˜ข isnโ€™t an easy listen, but itโ€™s a fearless one. Itโ€™s music at its most elemental โ€” and yet more advanced than what most artists dare to attempt. A masterpiece of human expression and sonic imagination.

Iโ€™ve never been a big fan of the Beatlesโ€™ early albums, and ๐˜ž๐˜ช๐˜ต๐˜ฉ ๐˜ต๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ ๐˜‰๐˜ฆ๐˜ข๐˜ต๐˜ญ๐˜ฆ๐˜ด didnโ€™t do much to change that. While itโ€™s full of youthful energy and tight performances, most of the songs feel locked into a narrow formula โ€” basic love lyrics, simple structures, little ambition.

Worse, the mix is hard to enjoy today. The artificial stereo separation โ€” what some call โ€œping-pong stereoโ€ โ€” can be downright distracting. Vocals in one ear, instruments in the other, with a strange hollowness in between. Itโ€™s a historical artifact, sure, but it doesnโ€™t make for pleasant listening.

That said, ๐˜ˆ๐˜ญ๐˜ญ ๐˜”๐˜บ ๐˜“๐˜ฐ๐˜ท๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜จ is a genuine standout, and some of the cover versions work surprisingly well. ๐˜”๐˜ฐ๐˜ฏ๐˜ฆ๐˜บ (๐˜›๐˜ฉ๐˜ข๐˜ตโ€™๐˜ด ๐˜ž๐˜ฉ๐˜ข๐˜ต ๐˜ ๐˜ž๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ต) in particular benefits from George Martinโ€™s careful overdub work โ€” it sounds tighter and more powerful than most of the album.

But overall, this isnโ€™t a phase of the Beatles I care to revisit. The real magic was still to come.

I gave ๐˜๐˜บ๐˜ฃ๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ฅ ๐˜›๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜บ an honest shot and even listened to ๐˜”๐˜ฆ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ข and ๐˜”๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜ถ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ด ๐˜ต๐˜ฐ ๐˜”๐˜ช๐˜ฅ๐˜ฏ๐˜ช๐˜จ๐˜ฉ๐˜ต for context. Still, it just doesnโ€™t click with me.

1. Chester Benningtonโ€™s screams on ๐˜๐˜บ๐˜ฃ๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ฅ ๐˜›๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜บ feel more forced than fierce โ€” his clean vocals are solid, but the shouting isnโ€™t quite there yet.
2. Mike Shinodaโ€™s rapping also lacks the confidence and flow he shows later, especially on ๐˜”๐˜ฆ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ข.
3. Without the electronic polish and DJ elements, ๐˜๐˜บ๐˜ฃ๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ฅ ๐˜›๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜บ often sounds like just another angsty metal album from the early 2000s.
4. Honestly, I wouldnโ€™t recommend ๐˜๐˜บ๐˜ฃ๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ฅ ๐˜›๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜บ as the best entry point to Linkin Park โ€” ๐˜”๐˜ฆ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ข refines the formula and delivers it with far more impact.

That said, ๐—œ๐—ป ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—˜๐—ป๐—ฑ is a clear standout, and I understand why ๐˜๐˜บ๐˜ฃ๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ฅ ๐˜›๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜บ earned its place on the 1001 Albums list. Itโ€™s a defining moment for its genre โ€” just not one that resonates with me personally.

Kid ARadiohead

Rated 10/10

Somehow, I find ๐˜’๐˜ช๐˜ฅ ๐˜ˆ even better than ๐˜–๐˜’ ๐˜Š๐˜ฐ๐˜ฎ๐˜ฑ๐˜ถ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ โ€” and I canโ€™t fully explain why. Where ๐˜–๐˜’ ๐˜Š๐˜ฐ๐˜ฎ๐˜ฑ๐˜ถ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ looks outward, anxious and analytical, ๐˜’๐˜ช๐˜ฅ ๐˜ˆ turns inward, cloaked in abstraction. Itโ€™s more introverted, more distant, yet strangely more emotional. The sparse use of guitars makes room for eerie textures, built from electronic keys, glitchy beats, and especially the haunting tones of the Ondes Martenot.

This isnโ€™t an album that asks to be understood โ€” it wants to be felt. A cold, alien fog you slowly learn to breathe in. Less protest, more dream. Less voice, more presence. And for reasons that bypass logic, it stays with you even longer.

Wow, what an incredible album! When I first saw the cover of ๐˜’๐˜ช๐˜ธ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ถ๐˜ฌ๐˜ข, I assumed it was just another run-of-the-mill soul record. I couldnโ€™t have been more wrong. Michael Kiwanukaโ€™s voice is warm and effortlessly smooth, and the instrumentation is perfectly tailored to a psychedelic soul landscape โ€” lush, immersive, and deeply textured.

Why did I overlook ๐˜’๐˜ช๐˜ธ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ถ๐˜ฌ๐˜ข for so long and just let it sit there, unnoticed? This isnโ€™t just a good soul album โ€” itโ€™s a fully realized, emotionally resonant journey that deserves to be heard as a whole. A true gem hiding in plain sight.

Hot RatsFrank Zappa

Rated 8/10

๐˜๐˜ฐ๐˜ต ๐˜™๐˜ข๐˜ต๐˜ด is what happens when Frank Zappa decides to behave โ€” at least a little. Stripped of most of his trademark absurdism (minus a dash of Beefheart chaos and some delightfully odd titles), this album dives deep into jazz-rock fusion with surprising accessibility. Tracks like ๐—ฃ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐—ต๐—ฒ๐˜€ ๐—ฒ๐—ป ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐—ด๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ถ๐—ฎ donโ€™t just groove โ€” they glide, twist, and sparkle. Itโ€™s experimental, yes, but with enough structure to welcome even the Zappa-curious. A wild ride, but one with seatbelts.

๐˜ฆ๐˜ท๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ๐˜ฎ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ฆ feels like Taylor Swift wandered into the woods with a notebook, a flannel shirt, and a thousand unresolved emotions โ€” and honestly, Iโ€™m here for it. Itโ€™s moody, introspective, and occasionally sounds like it was recorded in a haunted but emotionally supportive cabin. At times it leans a bit too hard into the melancholy, but itโ€™s beautifully written and full of quiet power. Basically, itโ€™s the musical equivalent of staring pensively out a window while it rains โ€” dramatic, but kind of perfect.