Reviews by simonh

Wings is really just Paul McCartney being more inclusive. He plays nearly all the instruments and wrote all the songs after all. Fair dos he wanted his wife to feel like she was a part of the project. And nothing wrong with that.

Such a variety of great tunes and arrangements and everything fits together really well. I particularly like the reprises of Jet and Band On The Run in other songs. Some might call it a bit lazy but I think that’s what makes this feel like a proper collection.
Top quality. Really liked it

This was the first in the ‘golden period’ of, in my opinion, the 5 greatest Rush albums, between 1976 and 1981. Consecutively
2112, A Farewell To Kings, Hemispheres, Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures.
Not that Fly By Night or Caress of Steel before those were in any way bad, or Power Windows after. (I don’t like to think about Signals or Grace Under Pressure too much. Geddy’s synth madness years).
I haven’t listened to 2112 as recently as I’ve listened to Hemispheres (regularly) or Permanent Waves (often) - but that’s clearly been a mistake.
2112 (the track) is up there with Supper’s Ready as one of the greatest “longs” of all time. And I’d forgotten how much I liked the whole of side 2. And how many of the lyrics I could remember (pretty much all of them).
Possibly the production isn’t as good as the later albums in that particular golden set, but this is the album that got me into Rush and for that it will always hold a place in my heart.
6

So somebody has flicked the switch on the day of Ozzy's death and everyone has a Sabbath album to listen to. A nice touch.

I've been a little lax with 5's recently and this is my third Black Sabbath album, the other two both getting a 5.

If I was to be ultra critical I don't think this is quite up there with Paranoid and Vol 4. However how can I give a debut album of this quality, and an album which gave birth to a whole new genre of music a mere 4? I can't.

Kinda washed over me in a pleasant way. Liked the first couple of tracks a lot but then it petered away a bit. Good closing track too.
She has a good voice for the folky stuff she's using it for. Inoffensive.

I’ve been looking forward to my first Bowie album, knowing there are so many on the list. But it’s taken 190 days for one to finally arrive.

I was never a huge fan of Bowie growing up, but his music is difficult to avoid as you go through life and I’ve liked most of what I’ve heard.

But his is the first time I’ve sat down and listened to a full album… and this isn’t really what I expected. It’s almost ‘middle of the road’ funky soul. What I'd have expected to hear on 'old person' radio? Not at all what I thought a David Bowie album would be like.
But maybe that’s the point? Did he ever produce what people expected him to? I don’t know the answer to that but I suppose I’ll find out when I get the next Bowie album on the list. 



So.. unexpected, but I’m not saying I didn’t like it. I rarely mark tracks individually, but for this album I did. Can’t be arsed to list them all but the average is 4.25. So there you have it.

I was never the Eurythmics biggest fan. Annie Lennox, although she has a great voice, used to freak me out a little. And Dave Stewart was just a bit weird (How he got off with Bananarama's Siobhan Fahey is beyond me).

Their early hits Sweet Dreams and Love is a Stranger got very tiresome very quickly. This album is listenable, but uninteresting.

I rank Eurythmics as substandard compared to Soft Cell, Human League, Heaven 17, Depeche Mode and most of their other synth-pop contemporaries.

So this album was released in 1978. I was 14. Possibly the period when I was listening to the radio, watching music tv programmes (OG Whistle Test / Revolver etc) the most, and reading the music press. Yet I've never head of the album, or the band.

Listening to this I know why

Superb fusion of virtuoso rock guitar and Latin rhythm section. Liked it even more on subsequent listens.
4½

Dave Davies, Dennis and Carl Wilson, Mike McCartney, Martin Kemp, Danii Minogue, Liam Gallagher.

Rock & roll is littered with the less able, slightly less attractive siblings of talented musicians who only got in the band because of mothers' threats or who got a record deal because an executive thought that talent must run in families*.
They were wrong and Solange is a fine example of that.

In one song I genuinely thought she was singing about shitting her knickers. But she wasn't. And that's about as exciting as this album got.

Bland, monotonous and boring. With tedious 'interludes' (if I want to be talked at I'll listen to a podcast or the news thanks). 2 stars as it might have some use as background. But then with songs about shitty knickers maybe not even that.

* Bros and Jedward? Not even going there!

I think the reason I can give Björk's weird stuff the time of day is that
a) she’s got a beautiful voice
b) I love her accent
c) she’s fit

On the contrary, Tom Waits gives the impression of a down-&-out old busker that has been given the keys to a multi-million pound studio.
“Yeah, mate, the percussion is over here; the instruments are over there; just bash and twang and blow whatever you like and I’ll be back in an hour”.

On the positive side, it’s entertaining. It’s fun. In fact some of the tracks are actually quite good. He seems to be using a different ‘voice’ for every song so he’s clearly taking the piss and enjoying himself.

Not dreadful but not one for my collection.
2½

I just love Björk's annunciation, her phrasing, her accent, her tone. I could listen to Björk sing the phone book.
This is my second Björk album after Debut and I found it a bit less accessible and a little less trippy. But the production and sound is great. Definitely headphone music though, and something that needs proper listening to.
For Björk though, I'll do it.

I've listened to 2 Beck albums so far and don't remember them being like this.
Moody, atmospheric, gentle, good chords (I love good chords).
I said in a previous review that he must be dead boring live - and I was pulled up on it by someone who's seen him. But I totally stand by that comment as there's no way I would want to sit through him doing these songs live unless I had been given a guest pass and was right at the back near the exit.
However for pootling around in headphones, tidying away the garden stuff and putting the bins out then this is perfect.
So far Beck albums have got a 4 & 4 from me. He's consistent I'll give him that.
4½

I wanted to give this time of day and review it objectively and I have.
Sadly even without prejudice it's an overlong set of formulaic teeny pap songs dropping off the teeny-pop factory conveyor belt that could have been composed for any boy/girl/manufactured band/singer of the 1990s/2000s.
I'll give her this though - she does have a good voice and delivers them well.

Absolute cracker of an album spoiled by one song. And not because of the title or the lyrics - after all this was the 1960s. No this one song was all-round bilge.
Where the hell did it come from? How can a guy write and record such a bunch of good tunes and then shit this one out? I'd have given the album a 5 otherwise.

First listen. Great driving music. Some duds though but on the whole good. Going to need to listen again.
Provisional 3½

As a grammar school boy I remember thinking that UB40 were a bit too 'Labour Party' for me. A bunch of oiks whining about not being able to get a job. Later on I grew to dispise 'Red Red Wine' as it was played at every party and every wedding, I just grew sick of it.
Listening to UB40 nearly 50 years later, 'Signing On' is a bit of a revelation. I like the mix, in particular the bass. Some of the songs I recognise from house parties when I was at school (there were some oiks there too).
In truth I was mistaken. A lot of the tracks I really liked. Mainly on side 1 and 2. Then it kind of loses its way a bit, like they had slightly too much good stuff for a single album, so committed to a double album and then got writers' block.
I think if this was a single album with just the cream, then I'd give it a 5. But I did get a bit tired of it after 45 minutes.
4

The album sounds like a group of youths who have just discovered sonic feedback. So an apt name then.
But you'd think after 7 albums they'd have moved on from feedback as a feature.
I think after a few listens this might grow on me so I'm not dismissing it out of hand. However, this project is so relentless that I can't afford it that luxury.
3

OMD have been a band I've wanted to see for years but the stars never aligned (and they are still too big to do 80's festivals). And as a pioneer of 80s synth pop I was amazed that in 1981 this was their third album. Really strong. But not quite a 5 for me

Never heard of Jurassic 5 and when it popped up I confused them with Maroon 5 and expected some boy-band pap.
When I realised it was hip-hop I was even more disappointed. However, this does have some good melodies.
...And ear worms. For a while I was singing to myself "You one of them niggas". But of course I can't because I'm an old white guy and if I was to be caught singing that to myself in public I'd either get my head kicked in or at the very least some disgusted looks.
And there's where the problem lies with hip-hop that uses this lyric; it's inaccessible and un-inclusive. I'm sure a lot of people can recall a young girl being brought up on stage at a festival and invited to sing along with Kendrick Lamar to one of his songs, and then when she does she's immediately shut down for singing the words that Lamar had written. Because she was white. How inclusive is that?
Anyway. I liked some of this album. The language was only used in some songs so I'm going to give it a 2

Classy album.
Sounds like an album of 1950s and 1960s covers except with drug references and profanity! Of course they are not covers (apart from 'Tears dry...' I believe).
She had a wonderful voice. Such a shame she joined the 27 club. I'd love to hear what she'd be doing now.
4½