Mark-T
Well-Known Member
Okay, so I'm listening to "Made in America" this afternoon while I write. It sure is a pretty album. And that's the problem. Soft, lightweight, but without bite.
I would think most fans would break down their recording career into two segments- albums recorded pre-"Singles 1969 - 1973" and those that came afterwards. I tend to fall into that category. As much as I love the later recordings and sometimes actually prefer them to the earlier ones, when I dissect them, the whole is weaker than the individual pieces.
It all got me to thinking. Overall "Horizon" aside, the songs themselves are much weaker than the earlier ones chosen to record. Compare "Superstar", "Rainy Days and Mondays" and "Goodbye to Love" to most of what came later.
Although Karen's vocals are lovely and Richard's arrangements are often effective, the end result is just not as strong. I think the poorer song choice adversely affected how they chose to sing, arrange, and produce. Resulting in lesser quality, fewer classics.
What do you think?
I would think most fans would break down their recording career into two segments- albums recorded pre-"Singles 1969 - 1973" and those that came afterwards. I tend to fall into that category. As much as I love the later recordings and sometimes actually prefer them to the earlier ones, when I dissect them, the whole is weaker than the individual pieces.
It all got me to thinking. Overall "Horizon" aside, the songs themselves are much weaker than the earlier ones chosen to record. Compare "Superstar", "Rainy Days and Mondays" and "Goodbye to Love" to most of what came later.
Although Karen's vocals are lovely and Richard's arrangements are often effective, the end result is just not as strong. I think the poorer song choice adversely affected how they chose to sing, arrange, and produce. Resulting in lesser quality, fewer classics.
What do you think?