brusko

THE REVIEW is good, but perhaps a bit harsh. I like this live album, but I don't know the band's other live performances, so my judgment is partial. However, frankly, I think it’s good. It has a nice raw rock sound, MAMA KIN and WALK THIS WAY seem excellent, and in the first one, Tyler intentionally modifies his voice. He’s a rock singer, not a tenor, and honestly, I never expect a perfect performance from a rock singer, just that he can engage the audience; that’s his main purpose. It’s also a pretty long live album, and it's quite common for longer live sets to present a few less convincing moments; what matters is the overall result. Of course, if someone starts dissecting the music like a scientist, looking for offbeats here and an out-of-tune note there, then he might as well have become a forensic doctor instead of listening to rock. When I listen to a live album, what I ask myself is: "If I had been in the audience, would I have enjoyed myself?" In this case, the answer is yes; everything else is just hot air!

great review of a very, very good live performance. whether or not it's a historic live is a detail that might interest the rock history enthusiasts, but as a music consumer, I only care that the content is up to par, and here it is. the final improvisation in SULTANS OF SWING is rock history. excellent drumming with all those crazy rolls. I like it because it has a bit of a raw sound; you can tell it's an honest live performance. Knopfler's solos are excellent. I’ve always considered it the soft version of MADE IN JAPAN by Purple. I don’t know why, but I’ve always seen similarities; maybe it's the virtuosity and the hyper-extended pieces, I don't know. I recommend listening to it in the car during a nice, relaxing trip; it enhances the experience even more. it’s a shame that Skate Away is missing, one of my favorite pieces.

Maybe I was a bit harsh; let's say that it's also important to consider that this is a complete recording, without cuts or hasty additions in the studio. It comes from a single concert and isn't a collection of pieces selected from different performances, so I would say that overall it’s a VERY HONEST live recording! Furthermore, it's a pretty long concert with a certainly excellent setlist. That said, I can raise my judgment; I’d say it deserves a 3.5, so now I’ll give it a 4 to average it out with the previous 3. But not more than that because what I said in the above comment still stands. Of course, these are my personal opinions. Nothing scientific.

difficult to judge; the performance is definitely excellent, but at the beginning it really sounds bad. I mean in BURN you can hardly hear the guitar, damn it! too bad because from MISTREATED onwards it sounds definitely better. for me this is absolutely the best version of MISTREATED. sorry dreamvoice, but you should have mentioned that it sounds bad at the beginning; that's also the purpose of a review. otherwise, one might trust it, buy the CD, and then get angry.

Hi alevox, I hope the vaffa isn't directed at me, I didn't do it on purpose! Thanks to everyone for the 4s and 5s on the review, you're too kind. This is my first review. I wanted to write one for IF YOU WANT BLOOD, but then I saw there were already several, while this one only had one. It's true I didn't mention the wonderful SHOOT TO THRILL, nor HELLS BELLS and others, but at a certain point I say "the best from BACK IN BLACK onwards," obviously including the songs I didn’t mention. There are 23 tracks, and a track-by-track breakdown would have been out of place. Dr. Fottermeier is also right, there are some less exhilarating moments, but in almost two hours and a quarter of music, I think it's largely tolerable. The definition by defender85 is indeed, in its simplicity, truly fitting—animal rock 'n' roll—man, that's what I tried to convey with a bunch more words, but you found the best ones, you're awesome. I almost forgot, while I'm at it, can I vote for myself? Who's gonna notice anyway!

Certainly better than the concert at the NEC, but 5 stars seem exaggerated. It's a great show, I would say up to CHILD IN TIME; after that, there are several flaws, especially from Gillan. The high notes of the masterpiece from IN ROCK come out only halfway, and at the end of the piece, there's a significant off-key moment. But the problem is his persistent attempts at high notes that just aren't happening; at the end of WOMAN FROM TOKYO, he tries and tries, but they get stuck in his throat, and it doesn't look very good (I say, if you can't hit them, don't stubbornly insist on trying at all costs!). In PAINT IT BLACK, at one point it’s clear he can't remember the words, and in HUSH, he anticipates the attack of the verses when there was still a "la la la la" to sing; fortunately, he corrects himself quickly. John Lord's organ is far from the sounds of the "Beast" from the '70s, and it sounds more like a piano bar keyboard; he plays well, but the sound is no longer that of MADE IN JAPAN. Blackmore occasionally delivers excellent moments, but at times he seems a bit showy with self-indulgent virtuosity, and also lacking inspiration in his improvisations, like in the instrumental interlude of SPEED KING; after a few minutes of fooling around, he resorts to the riff of BURN to wake up the audience. On the other hand, the rhythm section is excellent. IAN PAICE confirms himself as one of the greatest drummers of all time, perhaps the greatest, the true soul of Deep PURPLE, the only one present in all line-ups from the '60s to today.
In short, I'm not saying it’s not a good album; it's definitely better than COME HELL OR HIGH WATER, but from the review, it seems to be hailed as a masterpiece, and only the positive aspects are highlighted. With all due respect, tiger.

the review is definitely biased. it's not a useless album, but it's not a masterpiece either. it's saved by that great track with balls, I WANT IT ALL. honestly, in this album, I see a bit too many copycat moments; in Khashogg's ship towards the end, Brian plays a riff that's identical to the one Jimi Page plays at one point in Black Dog. the bass riff of Breakthru seems almost identical to that of Whole Lotta Rosie by AC/DC. The Invisible Man has a melody very similar to the soundtrack of GhostBusters. are they coincidences? yeah, come on, they are coincidences. Freddie's voice is, as usual, fantastic; there's no debating that, he's a legend.

It's a good record. I've always found the commercial versus non-commercial debate pointless. The fact that it's commercial doesn't mean it's not good; it just means it appeals to the masses, it's suitable for radio play because it's musically quite easy and immediate. Quality has nothing to do with it; being commercial doesn't mean lacking quality; they're two different discussions. If that were the case, the Beatles would be one of the worst groups in history. I'M GOING DOWN is my favorite track from the Boss; for the reviewer, it's barely listenable—well, tastes are tastes, but to say a track is bad just because it's catchy is a huge contradiction in itself, as well as a true paradox. Composing music that people enjoy isn't as easy as it may seem. You write a piece that has the same success as BORN IN THE U.S.A., and then we'll talk. It takes considerable musical intelligence to compose those tracks. Thinking that music with complex structures, far from the masses and the world of radio, is the only kind worth considering is a big mistake. You end up wanting to be alternative at all costs and not enjoying the genuineness of simple things. And there's probably a different way to listen to each record; for instance, this one, when listened to in the car or while traveling, is much more rewarding.

good review and good album. it's a long way to the top is among the 4-5 best tracks of the band. I'd say I mostly agree with cinghiale; indeed, during the '70s, rock began to take some strange paths: art rock, glam, progressive. In general, there was a trend to complicate things, to make rock music for virtuosos, stuff for connoisseurs; concept albums, enigmatic lyrics, overdubs, symphonic orchestrations, brass, keyboards, etc. Certainly, important pages were written, and high-level musical works emerged, but much of what rock originally was got lost. It’s no coincidence that by the mid-'70s, what was the quintessential youth music began to enter a crisis, and not coincidentally, disco music and punk were born, which opposed rock in principle, but in reality was in antithesis only to the rock of those last years, and unconsciously aimed to recover the freshness and spontaneity of the early rock & roll. AC/DC, with their raw, immediate sound, returned to the roots of rock; at first, they were considered too backward in style, but it was precisely with the advent of punk that they began to be taken into consideration, and there were even those who considered them punk themselves. In reality, they had the immediacy and impact of punk, but technically they were musicians of a different level compared to the punks of the time, and the musical structure of their songs was typical of rock and blues. They liberated rock from contamination and presented it naked and raw, and they were loved by punks, metalheads, disco-goers, and paninari alike. They showed that rock, if true to itself, pleases everyone. For some, they always play the same songs, it's true, but that’s why they are great.

nothing against compilations and best ofs, I’m not a fixated collector who buys an album just to own it and then at best likes 1-2 songs from it. but publishing 3 practically identical best ofs seems really pointless to me. if they really wanted to make another compilation, at least they could have made a 3CD set like a platinum collection or something similar, maybe with some live tracks. instead, it’s the usual two CDs again, with CD1 summarizing the first 4 albums and CD2 the other 4, sigh!