Big Al Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 Anyone heard it and can offer an opinion? B&N has a 50%-off special, and I'm thinking of getting it. The audio clips are okay, and for that price, what the heck? But if it's gonna be a dog to play, then maybe it isn't worth it anyway. Quote
RDK Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 Well, I suppose it depends on whether or not one likes Springsteen. I do, and I think the album is pretty terrific on just a few listens and seeing him live on Monday night. It's a very good album - maybe great - though closer to Tom Joad than anything else in his catalog. (I think I already like it more than Joad.) Quote
Michael Fitzgerald Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 I don't think it's as easy as whether one likes Springsteen or not. I would be more specific. It depends on *what* one likes about Springsteen. I haven't had any use for him for about 25 years, but I do *very much* like quite a bit of what he was doing before that - which is completely absent from his post-1970s work. I have heard the new record in bits here and there on radio and TV and it hasn't changed my opinion of his recent (which is no longer recent) efforts. Mike Quote
couw Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 There you have it Big Al: if you do not like what Springsteen has been up to in the past 25 years, don't bother with the album. I mean, why did you even ask?! :rsly: Quote
Michael Fitzgerald Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 Well, that could well be true, but I don't think it's as simple as that. However, I suspect that if someone thinks the audio clips are OK, then the full album probably won't be any big disappointment. In the end, what I was trying to point out was that because of a fairly wide disparity between various periods of Springsteen's career, it isn't all that easy to say whether or not you a Springsteen fan. It's like whether or not you are a Miles Davis fan - well, maybe not that extreme. Mike Quote
wolff Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 I'm getting it. I like Tom Joad(most did not), but did not care for The Rising(except for one or two songs) for various reasons. This one sounds like it's right up my alley. Quote
GregK Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 Devils and Dust is a good record, but it's really nothing at all like Tom Joad. There is more optimisim, more of a rock sound, and less folk-ish melodies. If anything it's slightly more country-rock than folk-rock. It really doesn't sound like anything else he's done, maybe Tunnel of Love (in terms of instrumentations and melodies) but it really shouldn't be compared to the Tom Joad or Nebraska records. It isn't as much a folk album as those were. It's very good, not nearly as great as The Rising was, but the songs are just as interesting. It also isn't a political record like Tom Joad- only the title song has any kind of a political theme. The rest largely deal with relationships, such as mother-son. I recommend catching his current solo tour, too. I saw him on opening night in Detroit and it was great. I also saw him for the Tom Joad tour, and this one had a lot more going on. The music was more varied, and there were no hits played at all. He played all but two of the new songs, with some piano, one on electric guitar and one (Reason to Believe) was sung through his harmonica with him stomping out the beat on the floor. Very good show. LOTS of talking, intros, etc by Bruce. Oh, the new record is only on DualDisc, which is a shame. This is a dumb format. It won't play in a couple of my CD players, and when I take it out I can't help but get fingerprints on the DVD side (which is "up" when it's in the player for the CD side). Why people must have video content I'll never understand Quote
bertrand Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 For those not aware, there is a discussion of the whole dualdisc format in the audio forum. Mike, Out of curiosity, which Springsteen record was the turning point for you? I feel kind of the same way about him, but since you mention post-70s, this really doesn't leave many good records to choose from! There were four in the seventies, all of which had some great moments (although I feel only the second was completely successful). When did The River come out? That's the last one I have any use for, as you put it. Some of it was filler, but the good parts were some of his best work. Do you put The River in the ones you like, or the ones you don't? I assume everything after that is downhill for you, as it is for me. Bertrand. Quote
Michael Fitzgerald Posted May 4, 2005 Report Posted May 4, 2005 The River still has some worthwhile stuff - I could probably pull a single album of that. But there's nothing on the level of Born To Run and Wild & Innocent. And the single album I make wouldn't be very well programmed. Too much of this stuff doesn't flow together. First album is somewhat half-baked, hit or miss but still one of the top three. The second album is ambitious, but misses the mark a few times. But the looseness of the stuff is beautiful. David Sancious is extremely important to the sound. Drummer Vini Lopez had a great feel. From what I can tell, Boom Carter was a good one too. Weinberg was no problem in the early days. The live performances of early 1975 are fantastic, particularly because of the presence of Suki Lahav in the band. The way Springsteen used dynamics and dramatic storytelling within the context of a super tight, hard-rocking band is one of his greatest achievements. There are some pieces that weren't on the records that are further evidence of this period - live tunes never done in the studio, and the tune Fever, which I think ended up on that recent boxed set. Born To Run is the masterpiece. Production, songwriting, orchestration, performance, the programming of the tracks, all fully realized. If only there were more like it. Or if someone would build on what this album showed was possible. Darkness On The Edge of Town is where things started to decline - listen to the drums. The snare drum backbeat has become overexaggerated and the music isn't subtle. I guess it's great for stadiums. (There are no redeeming qualities to Born In The USA, the epitome of mind-numbing repetitive boredom. Boom THWACK Boom THWACK!) The live shows of 1978 are still worth hearing - just for the incredible energy those guys could put out over the course of three hours. Mike Quote
Eric Posted May 5, 2005 Report Posted May 5, 2005 I think Devils & Dust is a decent record. I agree that it is more Tunnel than anyhing, but it not a copy of that. The tunes are pretty good, although the melodies of a few seem underdeveloped. My biggest issue is his voice on some of the cuts. In the third song - the one about the guy and the hooker - he adopts this Dylan-like drawl that is damn near undecipherable. Kind of ruins it for me. He does the same thing on a couple other tracks. He also sings in a falsetto on a few others, which is not nearly as annoying. Probably 75% of the tracks are very good IMHO. Not his best, certainly not his worst. Quote
Big Al Posted May 5, 2005 Author Report Posted May 5, 2005 I've owned a couple of Springsteen records in the past; but none of them ever stuck with me, despite some grand moments. This thing is being so hyped up, I just wonder if it's really as good as all the reviewers say it is. I've never heard Tom Joad or Rising; maybe I should one of these days. Thanks for the input, folks! Quote
Eric Posted May 5, 2005 Report Posted May 5, 2005 (edited) I've owned a couple of Springsteen records in the past; but none of them ever stuck with me, despite some grand moments. This thing is being so hyped up, I just wonder if it's really as good as all the reviewers say it is. I've never heard Tom Joad or Rising; maybe I should one of these days. Thanks for the input, folks! This one may not convert you For me it did not happen until I saw him on the River tour, back in (gasp) 1980. Prior to then, I thought he was just a corny wuss. Once you get the live energy, you see the catalog in a different light, at least that is how is has been for me. Edited May 5, 2005 by Eric Quote
Tjazz Posted May 6, 2005 Report Posted May 6, 2005 B&N has a 50%-off special, and I'm thinking of getting it. Where do find the 50% off special? Quote
Big Al Posted May 6, 2005 Author Report Posted May 6, 2005 Starbucks? You have to have a "preferred membership," which costs $25/year. It's worth it because in addition to saving 10% on anything you buy, but they're constantly sending me e-mails to take an additional 10-15% off anything in the store. The only downside, at least around here, is their CD collection ain't worth much. But it adds up over the year! Quote
RDK Posted May 6, 2005 Report Posted May 6, 2005 I've owned a couple of Springsteen records in the past; but none of them ever stuck with me, despite some grand moments. This thing is being so hyped up, I just wonder if it's really as good as all the reviewers say it is. I've never heard Tom Joad or Rising; maybe I should one of these days. Thanks for the input, folks! It's interesting being a die-hard fan of certain artists and then hearing about people who don't dig 'em. I know we all have different tastes, and such things don't generally bug me. Still, to hear about someone not liking/getting Springsteen or Dylan or the Beatles - and I don't mean to single you out Al - it's just like hearing about someone not liking/getting Ellington or Mingus or Miles. It just seems so incomprehensible... Quote
Noj Posted May 6, 2005 Report Posted May 6, 2005 Uh oh, I've never gotten Springsteen, but I dig Dylan and The Beatles. Springsteen's just that Born In The USA guy that danced with Courtney Cox... Quote
Big Al Posted May 6, 2005 Author Report Posted May 6, 2005 That's alright; I don't particularly get Mingus, either..... Quote
Man with the Golden Arm Posted April 3, 2006 Report Posted April 3, 2006 (edited) been nearly a year... Hoe Down video clip starting, er, no, has been, to be a cartoon of his future self. reminding me a bit of Adam Sandler, only more gruff and gentile. got some players on this new one tho. Edited April 3, 2006 by Man with the Golden Arm Quote
Jim Alfredson Posted April 3, 2006 Report Posted April 3, 2006 Kinda late to try cashing in on the whole "Brother Where Art Thou?" bluegrass fad, ain't it? Quote
RDK Posted April 3, 2006 Report Posted April 3, 2006 Kinda late to try cashing in on the whole "Brother Where Art Thou?" bluegrass fad, ain't it? What did you expect? He's already done gone and mastered the whole Bob Seeger thing, no? Quote
GregK Posted April 3, 2006 Report Posted April 3, 2006 Kinda late to try cashing in on the whole "Brother Where Art Thou?" bluegrass fad, ain't it? bluegrass takes of old folk songs is a fad?? Quote
gdogus Posted April 3, 2006 Report Posted April 3, 2006 Springsteen has as much right as anyone to undertake this material - and more right than most popular performers. Though I admit that he was the only one who looked to be having any fun playing in that video clip... Quote
GregK Posted April 3, 2006 Report Posted April 3, 2006 Springsteen has as much right as anyone to undertake this material - and more right than most popular performers. Though I admit that he was the only one who looked to be having any fun playing in that video clip... too many closeups of him in that clip- I don't need to see that again! Nice rendition of the song though Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.