|
| |
|
|
|
Review Summary: This is an accessible, creative debut album from the band and one of their career highlights. This is one bloody amazing debut if you ask me; among the best in the funk genre and, for me anyway, one of the band’s career highlights.
The most enthralling aspect here is the sound. Rich, g-r-o-o-v-y and tight as hell and full, it never ceases to amaze me. You don’t have to listen further than the opening track, Help Somebody to understand that. A thin-sounding, quick guitar riff begins; then the drums with the saxophones and the trumpets bash their way in and the groove becomes very fast and aggressive. Then, a poppy bridge follows with a calmer beat and the brass section plays a wonderful riff.The playing is also very professional without sounding ‘strict’ in any way, though, and is definitely a major point in the album.
Another big highlight is the mournful This World Today that boasts a terrific melody, embellished by the fantastic singing abilities of the group as well as the mid-tempo rhythm section. Notice, also, the ethereal piano-driven intro and the colorings of the brass section that give the song a sad mood. Love is Life is no worse a ballad, either, but this time the tone of the song is much more erotic and warm as opposed to the former’s depressed mood.
The record also has a lot of grooving moments. Check Moment Of Truth for instance, where the wah-wah effect on the guitar combined with the rhythm section provides an airy, graceful color to the track. C’mon Children features a first-class riff that also serves as the main vocal hook and, of course, a sensational rhythmic backbone. Fan The Fire starts with spaced-out slow guitar wailing, accentuated by the subtle drums and the ghostly vocals of the members. Then it settles into a mid-tempo groove with a great vocal hook ( I believe, I believe, I believe, I believe and more great playing from all.
Any blunders? Sure, check the last song on the record. Now, it isn’t bad…but it isn't great either; it’s groovy and features the most diverse arrangement on the record but it is not developed well. At two minutes it would be great; the first part is incredible. The kalimba that is featured on the intro is astonishing, as well as the sped-up rhythm afterwards, but after that the songs changes into a slower, dreamier state and then again to a more ‘tribal’ rhythm before the final resolution into the main theme. It is an interesting concept but as I said they needed either to expand on the themes a little more or scrap them all together and keep the first part only. I don’t skip it when I listen to the album, but it certainly pales in comparison to the rest of the album when it comes to execution matching the concept.
But this is a minor complaint, mind you. The first six tracks all rule without a doubt. Exciting, groovy, with clever arrangements; and while we are at that, the embellishments on each song are great. Sure, the brass section is prominent everywhere but what about the African percussion on the bridge of the opening track? The reed section on Love Is Life? The piano arrangement on This World Today? The kalimba on the closing track? Simply amazing.
All in all, this is a satisfying record, boasting inredible rhythms, excellent -if somewhat subtle for a funk record- guitar playing, terrific harmonies and diverse instrumentation. What more do you want from a funk record? Be sure to make this your first purchase of Earth, Wind & Fire, as it is one of their most accessible ever, without the overtly soul and disco stylings of their latter period.
| trending all genres albums |
|
"Funkadelic’s Free Your Ass…"
............
1. It's called Free Your Mind...And Your Ass Will Follow
2. Funkadelic's debut was a self titled
Also your review really comes off as amateurish with its writing from a first person style, combined with the holding effects which end up being distracting, while I appreciate the review for an EWF album, I'm going to have to neg, sorry
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
Yeah that was my fault, just fixed it.
As for the rest of your criticism, I disagree; if you don't like first person reviews or amateurish ones, that's not my problem. I don't claim to be a professional critic nor an expert at the english language. And from what I have read, this site welcomes first person or amateurish reviews to be published. It's not Pitchfork, anyway.
And what the hell is wrong with the bolds and italics. When I began writing on this site, they told me it's better than quotes or anything like that. Plus, the bolds used for highlighting the songs and the italics for emphasis. If it's too distracting, may I suggest you have a tiny attention span?
| | |
Nothing wrong with italics, it's just the bolding which kinda irks me, especially when put for everything that has a name, the bolded words kinda stick out, while the italics can emphasize words and look a bit prettier for lack of a better term
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
Well that's you aesthetic and no problem with that. But don't put down my review because of your biases, that's all ;)
| | |
It's not about having a bias, it's just universally agreed upon that the first person perspective is a really shitty and lazy style of reviewing.
| | |
It's also not about one's aesthetics, your review looks ugly and awkward, and that's why everyone else uses italics instead of bold. Maybe you should take constructive criticism and consider the people who will be reading your review instead of whining.
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
''It's not about having a bias, it's just universally agreed upon that the first person perspective is a really shitty and lazy style of reviewing''
Give me a break; What exactly is ''lazy'' or ''shitty'' with first person reviews? First person perspective is used ( if you don't know it already) for making a text more personal, subjective and friendly to the reader. In case you missed it, music reviewing, despite what you or anybody else might believe, is a subjective matter not (here's your italics) objective. Sure, you can argue well about your tastes and end up having a legit opinion on why X album deserves Y rating. But, eventually, it all boils down to taste. Which is, I hate to break it to you, 100% subjective.
So this is why I use first person perspective. When I'm typing ''I don’t skip it when I listen to the album, but it certainly pales in comparison to the rest of the album when it comes to execution matching the concept.'', what person do you expect me to use? I'm informing the reader that I, personally, don't skip the damn track when playing the record and suggesting that he might as well do the same if he likes.
In the end, I find the third person perspective kind of faceless and bland. If you dig that style, good for you, but keep it for your reviews. Who the hell made you king of music reviewing, anyway?
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
''It's also not about one's aesthetics, your review looks ugly and awkward, and that's why everyone else uses italics instead of bold. Maybe you should take constructive criticism and consider the people who will be reading your review instead of whining.''
Now you're kidding me, right? The terms ''ugly'' and ''awkward'' are used to describe one's aesthetics. Or maybe you think that your definition of ''beauty'', ''ugly'', ''awkward'' is 100% the same as anyone else's?
Want an example? Starting from Live At Leeds of the Who and until this here page it's a whole 10 reviews of mine that use that exact type of writing; bolds, italics, first person perspective etc. You and the other guy above are the first to complain about that. Just calm your tits a little and accept different kinds of writing; after all, no ones forcing you to read me, so stop with these pseudo-objective remarks of yours already ;)
| | |
Lol I mean if you're completely determined to never improve as a writer and you think that anything you publish is exempt from criticism, then you have the right attitude toward things. Good luck with that I guess. I hope you're writing solely for yourself because you'll find that people typically enjoy reading reviews that at least try to be somewhat professional.
| | |
You know that cheap excuses like "it's my style", "i'm an amateur" or "what's good and bad is subjective" can be used to defend even the shittiest review ever, right?
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
''Lol I mean if you're completely determined to never improve as a writer and you think that anything you publish is exempt from criticism, then you have the right attitude toward things. Good luck with that I guess. I hope you're writing solely for yourself because you'll find that people typically enjoy reading reviews that at least try to be somewhat professional.''
I don't think my material is exempt from criticism, I just think that your criticism right here is not valid; and don't try to act like some professional critic, because you're not. I'll say it once more. I use bolds because I think it's easier for the reader, if he wants to read my criticism for specific songs rather than the whole text, to scan the review quickly and find the song he likes. If you don't accept that, I'm sorry, but I'm not changing my way of making reviews because you're butthurt 
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
''You know that cheap excuses like "it's my style", "i'm an amateur" or "what's good and bad is subjective" can be used to defend even the shittiest review ever, right?''
Well, it is my style but I'm tired explaining to you simple things. Also, no matter what you or anyone else might say, whether you find my writing style good or bad is subjective (I already explained that to the other fella).
The only thing in which I will gladly take criticism is grammar, syntax as well as factual errors, which can be measured objectively and help make a better review. The rest is all aesthetics and I don't, for one, agree with yours
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
I also think that out of 12 replies, no one has bothered to say a word about, er, the actual music that's reviewed here. So much for stuffiness, I guess
| | | Album Rating: 5.0
Your last paragraph summarizes all the virtues and bads of this album with absolute frankness inclining te listener.All the review is to the point and well written but i would like to see a small introduction for the band.Why all this fuzz? You guys have some serious problems
| | |
"The only thing in which I will gladly take criticism is grammar, syntax as well as factual errors, which can be measured objectively and help make a better review. The rest is all aesthetics and I don't, for one, agree with yours"
You must have quite the inflated ego if you believe that you can do no wrong in your writing aside from minor things like grammar and factual errors. This isn't a website for grade school papers or something. You're producing a product for other people to read, and the fact that you seem to have no concept of issues with pacing or verbosity making a review lackluster really makes me question why you're writing music reviews in the first place. Also, I love how you continue to insist that the bold makes the review easier for the reader when the actual readers of this review are the ones telling you otherwise. I'm sure you know what's best for your audience. I would suggest checking the actual definition of "aesthetic," and getting a less shitty attitude toward reasonable feedback.
| | |
@doctorjimmy are making a much bigger deal of this than it really is, I'm just giving feedback from past experience for what makes for well written reviews, I'm not criticizing your style as much as just suggesting what you should pay attention to in the future in order to improve
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
@breakingthefragile
''no concept of issues with pacing or verbosity'' then why didn't you actually make a 'constructive criticism' about these flaws of my review? I would gladly accept them. And trust me, I have no ego, it's just that your comments come across more as bitching than actual constructive criticism. Would it be hard for you to point out the pacing or verbosity issues instead of calling my style ''lazy and shitty'' or bolds ''ugly and awkward''? Do you expect me to respect your (deficient as it seems now) criticism when you are being rude in the first place?
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
@breakingthefragile
''no concept of issues with pacing or verbosity'' then why didn't you actually make a 'constructive criticism' about these flaws of my review? I would gladly accept them. And trust me, I have no ego, it's just that your comments come across more as bitching than actual constructive criticism. Would it be hard for you to point out the pacing or verbosity issues instead of calling my style ''lazy and shitty'' or bolds ''ugly and awkward''? Do you expect me to respect your (deficient as it seems now) criticism when you are being rude in the first place?
| | |
I never offered an in-depth criticism of this review because I assumed you would just be as rude and dickish to me as you were to SharkTooth after he politely offered you some feedback and you just spit in his face with your conceded attitude and a tantrum of completely unwarrented insults such as asking if he has a short attention span. Based on how you have put words in my mouth with the whole "objectivity and subjectivity" thing and other stuff you mentioned that I didn't even bring up, you honestly seem like a very condenscending and entitled person who makes a lot of unfounded assumptions and always has an excuse for everything. I'm not even going to bother with giving you constructive criticism after seeing you say things like "It's not my problem" in response to SharkTooth's constructive criticism, and you come across as a very unpleasent and close-minded person on the whole so, I'm gonna go ahead and end our little chat right here. The best constructive criticism I can offer you is to fix your attitude and be more receptive to advice from the website you're writing for. Have a good one.
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
@breakingthefragile Woah.Dude.Dude. You don't even know me personally and assume I am unpleasant? Who's making petty assumptions now? Anyway.
When I said 'that's not my problem' to SharkTooth, I didn't mean it in an aggresive way. Ok, 'tiny attention span' is kinda aggressive. But hear me out; since I began reviewing on this site, every once in a while a member comes and tells me that ''hey bolds don't look good'', ''hey italics annoy me'', ''hey don't use quotes'', ''hey (insert personal preference here) change that''. What am I supposed to do with this contradicting criticism? Who am I going to listen to? No review can satisfy every single person in the world, you know.
And, wait a minute, you didn't offer any insightful criticism because you just assumed i would be rude and dickish to you as I was ( I wasn't) before. Why don't you offer now? Poor assumption from your part and what a cheap excuse for your lacking criticism.
And yes, when you say 'it's just universally agreed upon' one cannot take this any other way than a pseudo-objective claim. But I'm sure you will sort it out for yourself ;)
| | | |
|
| |
