Renaissance444
Purple fan
Global user
Registered: 12-2006
Location: somewhere over the rainbow...
Posts: 202
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Do you consider Mark V as Purple???
yeah
---
http://com2.runboard.com/bmetaltalk
my forum-all are welcome!
|
|
9/2/2007, 6:07
|
Send Email to Renaissance444
Send PM to Renaissance444
|
Ratpatblue
Purple fan
Global user
Registered: 07-2005
Posts: 20
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Do you consider Mark V as Purple???
quote:
Witchy Nightmare wrote:
For me, S&M is more Deep Purple than HOBL. S&M has riffs, HOBL has nearly no riffs. Just chords, overloaded keyboard sound, strained vocals and lousy production.
So for me, MK V is Deep Purple. Despite JLT's horrible in-between-song banter. I don't regret that it didn't last longer, but I also don't want to have that chapter erased from the DP history. It's an episode which belongs to DP history as a whole.
I respectfully disagree with your position regarding HOBL--(I like it)---But reading what you said made me realize (maybe)why a lot o people arn't into WDWTWA. On that album they stepped a bit away from riffs and got "chordy" as well. I like a vatiory myself as for. S&M-----I gotta go back and get another listen-(after reaquiring it)
|
|
24/2/2008, 20:42
|
Send Email to Ratpatblue
Send PM to Ratpatblue
|
Al Erikson
Purple fan
Global user
Registered: 09-2006
Posts: 2747
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Do you consider Mark V as Purple???
Though I understand why "Slaves & Masters" is considered by some as a (good) "Rainbow album", I've always thought it would better fit as an MkIII album, or even as a Whitesnake album.
I can almost hear Coverdale singing songs such as "Fortuneteller", "Love conquers all" or "Breakfast in Bed".
I would have added "Fire in the Basement", but the lyrics are definitely too gross and rude, even for David Coverdale.
Last edited by Al Erikson, 22/3/2008, 9:50
---
"You and me Baby
Are nothing but mammals
So let's do what they do
On the Discovery channel"
|
|
22/3/2008, 9:49
|
Send Email to Al Erikson
Send PM to Al Erikson
|
