- This topic has 12 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
After having Martin & Me on heavy rotation for a couple of days I started comparing J’s solo shows from 94-95 and 03-04. And I’m not sure if anyone will agree with me, but I’ve come to the conclusion that I enjoy the the earlier shows the most. They might not have the extensive soloes, cool effects etc, but even so the performances sounds more inspired and energetic(is this a word?)
And with the songs performed purely acoustic the melodies and lyrics are allowed to shine brightly. I’m not saying that I don’t like the present day solo shows, they’re just not as good compared to the early ones.*puts on flameretardent clothes*
Quote:energetic(is this a word?)yes, it is …
Quote:*puts on flameretardent clothes*good idea
i’m glad to have seen both … :aliensmile:
i agree with robert. It’s more exciting to hear the old shows. maybe it’s because he was more fresh back then.
He’s a better guitarist now, but it doesn’t matter. It’s like he’s playing the songs with more distance now. back then, it seems like he was more in a floating process. I could not know his next step,the future of his music was more open. I feel J’s future in music is more predictable now. But, hey, maybe I will be surprised by the next record."rambleon" wrote:i’m glad to have seen both … :aliensmile:now that’s what I’d call lucky !!
I’m sure J’s live performances in the ’94-95 era were intense and much of it has been saved on Martin & Me or the other live recordings from that time.
I have seen him in solo performances twice, in 2001 and 2002 and the shows were both so very awesome… that might be the reason I still listen differently to the live recordings of the later era. it’s much easier to get the spirits of these performances with the impression of the real event back in mind.so maybe that’s why I prefer the later solo performances
to paraphrase JIMI:"…they’re living in the past…"
everyone has personal favorite of this and that.
hopefully no one is in favor of an artist to stay the same, to never change and grow.
its all good
s
"stanner" wrote:hopefully no one is in favor of an artist to stay the same, to never change and grow.of course not, and as I said in my previous post, I do enjoy his later solo shows a lot as well. It’s just that to me his playing sounded more adventureous, as if he was constanly searching and discovering. Now it’s like as if he knows everything, and thus the searching is over. I’m not sure that made a lot of sense, it’s hard to explaining these kind of feelings.
I can’t remember who, but someone once said:
writing about music is like dancing about architecture. I don’t know if it’s true, but it’s a great thing to say nonetheless.oh and yeah, it’s all good
Havent heard the martinme songs but when i find the record ill have to buy it. The newer songs are atleast good, except for some of the solos.. Its a good idea to play solos as a troubadour but J’s solos are just so much better with a band i think.
I would be thrilled if J played acoustic in Norway again, but when it comes to audio recordings of acoustic shows, I like the older shows better, because they sound more "into the moment". the new ones sound more "routine". quite natural after years of practising and gigs.
btw, I would love to see some acoustic videos from the era 94-99.
"simmons" wrote:the new ones sound more "routine".now that you say it, I guess something about that was what impressed me most when I saw J playing the solo shows. he was so absolutely sure with what he was doing, that it looked like he didn’t have to clamp on a certain pattern or schedule, but let things come like they are and let the solos develop. I also found it impressing how he managed to put these solos on stage in a recognizable way, but still with development in it. I’d say he never played one solo exactly the same.
so I guess, it’s something close to routine, but not exactly the same.
…in the Martin & me ear there was not the same certainty, I think.
I don’t think I’ve seen enough shows to really say anything about it, but I’d like to say this: To me, it doesn’t seem "fair" to compare Martin+Me to the acoustic stuff J’s done recently. Because M+M was released as an album I think J or somebody else has done some production work, making it sound way better than the acoustic shows we, as fans, have recorded ourselves. Seeing that he released the Martin+Me concert (or concertS, is it actually one single show?), he must have been very happy about the songs himself as well. So it’s impossible to see Martin+Me as the average show at that time. Some of the recent shows might seem routine, but some shows in the M+M era might have sounded routine as well, it seems to me we just don’t know.
One more thing, the acoustic songs on the John Peel sessions cd are excellent. I find myself enjoying the second part of the album more than the first.
Olaf
Hi Olaf, long time no viddy
I agree about the unfairness of comparing M&M to present day bootlegs. And just to clear it up, my comparison is between bootlegs from 94-95 and bootlegs from 02-04.
M&M just sparked the comparisons so to speak.
I think M&M is a result of several concerts, not just one. I’m not sure though. Does anyone have any info on this?
And yeah, the acoustic ones on the Peel sessions album are greati believe Martin + Me is one live show recorded in 1996.
If I see J in November, I’ll be sure to ask him..check out the Iron Horse Bootleg from Northampton Mass or the Slims 1995 bootleg. –both striaght up acoustic.
I got a chance to see J play acoustic in DC in 1996, and to be honest I like the pedals and the fuzz a lot more than just the Martin.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.