Quote:
Originally Posted by Routine Builder
Question: in terms of covers, do you prefer James's acoustic versions or the full band versions?
I generally believe that James's acoustic versions are usually far superior. Their stripped down nature seem to demonstrate the feeling and affection James has for the songs where as the studio versions feels a bit like by the numbers with the passion softened by the studio environment and possibly trying to get something to go on a b-sides. The best examples are Red Sleeping Beauty and Plain of Endless Fortune where James gave some of best vocal performances for the acoustic takes but by the time it goes to the studio, the magic is lost.
|
Acoustic versions can strip a song down to the soul in some cases. I think. This is awkward. Songs like This is Yesterday can reduce me to tears though that isn't strictly acoustic but quieter? Generally though I think the manics work best when loud. I don't think James has the range of say Jeff Buckley who could convey so much with his voice to the point you want to marry it  James works better on the big songs the big anthemics which can be as affecting but i feel with no musical knowledge lies his strength. Sorry for the sin but then as i say he sings this is yesterday and I can't take it it hits so hard so could be i know nothing
__________________
"There is a pleasure in the pathless woods,
There is a rapture on the lonely shore
There is society, where none intrudes,
By the deep sea, and music in its roar:
I love not man the less, but Nature more," - Byron
'I must go down to the seas again, for the call of the running tide
Is a wild call and a clear call that may not be denied;
And all I ask is a windy day with the white clouds flying,
And the flung spray and the blown spume, and the sea-gulls crying.' (from Sea Fever - John Masefield)
"Hope is the thing with feathers
That perches in the soul
And sings the tune without the words
And never stops at all" - Emily Dickinson
Last edited by raven; 13-10-2019 at 20:31.
|