MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

lol yeah, you're right about Otis. As for James, as much great grooves he created, he couldn't create a decent album unless it was live (and even then, you wonder how much was "live"). Now that guy was truly all over the place.

Sydney Nathan wasn't interested in albums, so that wasn't the focus of King Records anyway. The equipment at King studio wasn't great either, so the records sound quality varied.

Hmm interesting...

James didn't really make "albums", kinda like Sun Ra didn't. They just recorded a lot of songs and just stuck some together into a LP. Some of James albums have the same songs re-recorded with different arrangements.

MickyDolenz said:

James didn't really make "albums", kinda like Sun Ra didn't. They just recorded a lot of songs and just stuck some together into a LP. Some of James albums have the same songs re-recorded with different arrangements.

Reminds me a lot of Ike Turner's catalog with and without Tina Turner...

Timmy84 said:

MickyDolenz said:

Sydney Nathan wasn't interested in albums, so that wasn't the focus of King Records anyway. The equipment at King studio wasn't great either, so the records sound quality varied.

Hmm interesting...

If you listen to the Tammi Terrell compilation, the songs she did with James sound "muddy" compared to the other songs on it. Some of the original records released by King were of poor quality and wore out quickly, because Sydney would just "recycle" old records that didn't sell and melt them down to print up new ones, because he didn't want to spend a lot of money. That's why Syd didn't care about albums, because he figured they didn't sell enough for the expense. Remember James spent his own money to record Live At The Apollo, because Syd told him nobody was going to buy songs they had already, and you couldn't make singles from live tracks.

[Edited 6/14/12 10:44am]

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

Hmm interesting...

If you listen to the Tammi Terrell compilation, the songs she did with James sound "muddy" compared to the other songs on it. Some of the original records released by King were of poor quality and wore out quickly, because Sydney would just "recycle" old records that didn't sell and melt them down to print up new ones, because he didn't want to spend a lot of money. That's why Syd didn't care about albums, because he figured they didn't sell enough for the expense. Remember James spent his own money to record Live At The Apollo, because Syd told him nobody was going to buy songs they had already, and you couldn't make singles from live tracks.

[Edited 6/14/12 10:44am]

That just makes the situation with James and production of the Apollo album even more interesting.

Timmy84 said:

That just makes the situation with James and production of the Apollo album even more interesting.

Sometimes James did make an album with a purpose like Soul On Top or the Christmas records. James & Syd always seemed to disagree, so James put out stuff on other labels. Syd sued, saying James was breaking contract. Ben Bart found a loophole, that James could release albums on another label (Smash) as long as his voice wasn't on the records. So James released instrumental albums and albums with his other singers.

thedance said:

just take that "Number 9" track and replace it with "Hey Jude"..

and then.. perfect.

the White Album.. excellent, masterpiece, no less.

I actually am one of the very few who likes Revolution 9. I generally don't even skip it when I am listening to the album. Plus the hype surrounding it just adds to their mystique. Pure John Lennon nuttiness (and insight into the acid mindset), but it's put together in a pretty artful way.

BUT...I do think the album might have been just that much stronger with Hey Jude instead. I'd put it in place of Julia and move Julia to where #9 is.

imago said:

NDRU said:

Tough comparison, because I have known the White Album my whole life, and only got PG about five years ago.

They are both really fantastic albums. The White Album feels like more than a double album to me. Each disc has like 17 songs on it! It's a tougher listen for more conservative Beatles fans, but still full of classic tracks. It almost feels like a bootleg collection.

PG is less all over the place, and disc one is classic Zeppelin. Disc 2 is more experimental, but still quite easy to listen to IMO. When people dismiss Zeppelin as mere ripoffs of the real blues artists, I refer them to Night Flight, and ask which Willie Dixon song they stole that from. Kashmir is the essential Zeppelin sound. If they did nothing but covers & ripoffs, I would still call them one of the greatest bands of all time.

I would say that for range, and classic songs, I would go with the White Album. To think the same man sang Helter Skelter and I Will, and the same man wrote Good Night and Revolution 9, and that they are all on the same album is something I don't think we've ever seen the likes of before or since.

But I am biased. And in the end art is not a competition. Physical Graffiti is an awesome achievement.

What? Have I been listening to an abridged version of the White album all these years, and just too much of a casual fan to know it?

http://www.amazon.com/The...B0025KVLU6

17 tracks on disc 1, and 14 tracks on disc 2

NDRU said:

imago said:

What? Have I been listening to an abridged version of the White album all these years, and just too much of a casual fan to know it?

http://www.amazon.com/The...B0025KVLU6

17 tracks on disc 1, and 14 tracks on disc 2

13 on disc 2. The fourteenth track is a mini doc available only on the remasters.

Cloudbuster said:

NDRU said:

http://www.amazon.com/The...B0025KVLU6

17 tracks on disc 1, and 14 tracks on disc 2

13 on disc 2. The fourteenth track is a mini doc available only on the remasters.

ah, right you are!

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

That just makes the situation with James and production of the Apollo album even more interesting.

Sometimes James did make an album with a purpose like Soul On Top or the Christmas records. James & Syd always seemed to disagree, so James put out stuff on other labels. Syd sued, saying James was breaking contract. Ben Bart found a loophole, that James could release albums on another label (Smash) as long as his voice wasn't on the records. So James released instrumental albums and albums with his other singers.

I read about that...

rialb said:

No need to apologise for your dislike of The Beatles but do Led Zeppelin's songs, specifically the lyrics, make sense? A lot of their lyrics are just "borrowed" from old blues songs or fantasy type gibberish, particularly in the early years.

Yeah, Zep pretty much stole a lot of blues songs, but the fantasy type gibberish you're talking about is borrowed a lot from ancient mythologies and world religions, I think anyway. Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds and about 98% of everything else the Beatles ever made was about drugs. At least it was original though.

Timmy84 said:

bigd74 said:

Just think how good Use Your Illusion could have been if it was cut down to just the 1 double album instead of the 2, that would've been up there with the greats.

after having listened to both albums quite alot this is what my UYI tracklist would look like

1. Right Next Door To Hell

2. Live And Let Die

3. Dust N Bones

4. Double Talkin' Jive

5. November Rain

6. Garden Of Eden

7. Civil War

8. You Could Be Mine

9. Yesterdays

10. 14 Years

11. Breakdown

12. Pretty Tied Up

13. Locomotive

14. Estranged

it took a bit of juggling and i left off a few songs that i really do like. this just fits on a cd and it rocks. i burnt this yesterday and listened to it in the car today