A Mark In Time
Mark Knopfler Discussion => Mark Knopfler Discussion Forum => Topic started by: boriszhukov on July 03, 2015, 04:55:40 PM
-
I read back on some old topics a few days back and interstingly it seems that the Ed Bicknell MK split happened partly because EB wanted Mark to release it as a Dire Straits album. Listening back to the album it could easily have been a DS album, especially if it had included Pyroman and maybe omited a few songs.
Any truth to this rumour and how do you think the album would have fared with the extra attention it would have gotten being a return album for DS? Would they have been able to do a tour on the same level as OES tour etc etc?
Personally I think it would have done greatly. What it is, Who's Your Lover Now, Speedway, Silvertown and Junkie Doll all have some mainstream radio potential IMO.
Also it would have been interesting having other Straits memeber contributions on these songs especially Alan Clarks.
-
It was not that Ed wanted STP to be a Dire Straits cd, it was that MK wanted it to sound like Ragpickers Dream sounded some years after, and Ed pushed MK to record STP trying to sound more "Straits".
Then MK kick out Ed as a manager and started a low profile career, as he wanted.
-
Still my favourite. ;)
:)
-
It was not that Ed wanted STP to be a Dire Straits cd, it was that MK wanted it to sound like Ragpickers Dream sounded some years after, and Ed pushed MK to record STP trying to sound more "Straits".
Then MK kick out Ed as a manager and started a low profile career, as he wanted.
Good old Ed! Makes one wonder what the other albums may have sounded like with Ed behind them... :think
-
It was not that Ed wanted STP to be a Dire Straits cd, it was that MK wanted it to sound like Ragpickers Dream sounded some years after, and Ed pushed MK to record STP trying to sound more "Straits".
Then MK kick out Ed as a manager and started a low profile career, as he wanted.
Good old Ed! Makes one wonder what the other albums may have sounded like with Ed behind them... :think
Ed wanted that MK solo career could be more commercial oriented, following more or less what DS did, but MK wanted the opposite. A friend who talked once with Ed told me that the conversation that broke their relation was something like "if that is what you want to do in the future I can't manage you anymore", MK: "then I need a new manager"
-
I think I was the one guilty for spreading the rumour, I imagined an hypothetical dialogue bwtween Mark and Ed in which Ed was pushing mark to restore DS with the STP album :)
I'm not sure ED had even an opportunity to explain himself and resign - if the (in)famous helmet story ("you are fired") is true ;)
Yes STP is very straits-esque and could have been released as it was with a DS sticker on it - it would have been accepted as such with great success.
STP is clearly my favorite solo album, but I also love TRD and understand this new direction - very courageous from Mark, he could have just continued making DS/STP stuff with great success and money, but chose to finally do what he really wanted to do...
-
Frankly, I've never really been able to understand Mark's and Guy's obsession with "sound". STP is my favourite MK solo CD because the songs are magnificent, the arrangements are great and the sound is...well, good I suppose. Slightly different from later CDs, but mainly because of the songs and arrangements, which are more energetic and varied than later efforts. Kill to Get Crisom may sound great to Guy and Mark, but I hardly ever listen to that album simply because the songs are nothing special and they are arranged like lullabies.
Going back further, Mark has a history of somewhat cold and sterile albums soundwise (such as Love Over Gold), but killer songs still work.
-
I completely understand that Mark wanted to make it more low profile. (Even though drawing 5000-10000 people per night is still only one level under DS stadium acts) Looking at Nimes 92 the other day. It seems to be such a guitar show off. Done to perfection by MK but also very boring in a lot of ways. It seems at the time it was becoming too much of MK guitar hero thing "whos the worlds greatest rock guitarist" etc. etc.
What he does today is much more true to the roots and is something that makes sense performing every night from the perspective of a 65 year old songwriter. Even if it isnt exactly inovative etc etc.
-
I completely understand that Mark wanted to make it more low profile. (Even though drawing 5000-10000 people per night is still only one level under DS stadium acts) Looking at Nimes 92 the other day. It seems to be such a guitar show off. Done to perfection by MK but also very boring in a lot of ways. It seems at the time it was becoming too much of MK guitar hero thing "whos the worlds greatest rock guitarist" etc. etc.
What he does today is much more true to the roots and is something that makes sense performing every night from the perspective of a 65 year old songwriter. Even if it isnt exactly inovative etc etc.
Here's a 67-year old guy who knows how to "show off" in a good way and put tons of fun into his soloing. Just listen to the solo at 3:20 and onwards. I mean, wow. This pretty bad quality clip makes me stomp my feet and smile. Can't say the same after listening to the better quality clips of Mark ... Unfortunately.
gsTX0RfmUHk
-
It was not that Ed wanted STP to be a Dire Straits cd, it was that MK wanted it to sound like Ragpickers Dream sounded some years after, and Ed pushed MK to record STP trying to sound more "Straits".
Then MK kick out Ed as a manager and started a low profile career, as he wanted.
Good old Ed! Makes one wonder what the other albums may have sounded like with Ed behind them... :think
Ed wanted that MK solo career could be more commercial oriented, following more or less what DS did, but MK wanted the opposite. A friend who talked once with Ed told me that the conversation that broke their relation was something like "if that is what you want to do in the future I can't manage you anymore", MK: "then I need a new manager"
What Mark needed was a "yes man" and he got one. A passive manager who only organises tours (ahem) and does promotion for him (em...). Yes, one has to ask what exactly does PC do? ::)
-
And tell me Guy isn't a "yes man" ...
-
And tell me Guy isn't a "yes man" ...
The fans at gigs should start singing these words to the well known football chant "are you Crockford in disGUYse!" ;D
Actually, you're spot on. They're all "yes men." It's easy money for them. No wonder they're laughing and having fun up there!
-
Perhaps Ed is available for an exclusive amit interview in a private section? Or maybe it is better not to disturb the ghosts of the past? :hmm
-
Perhaps Ed is available for an exclusive amit interview in a private section? Or maybe it is better not to disturb the ghosts of the past? :hmm
It's no secret I love Ed to bits. I think Mark is the sort of guy who needs someone like Ed to keep him on track. Without Ed I sometimes think that Mark just doesn't know his best songs or what direction to go. Perhaps he's just too arrogant in that respect and needs someone of Ed's personality to put him in his place and let him know. Whatever it was, they complimented each other and it worked.
With PC there is no direction, no promo, no organisation and Mark seemingly left to get on with it choosing some awful songs for albums while leaving out the best ones! There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that his career has taken a downturn overall (not only the music) since PC came along.
-
Perhaps Ed is available for an exclusive amit interview in a private section? Or maybe it is better not to disturb the ghosts of the past? :hmm
It's no secret I love Ed to bits. I think Mark is the sort of guy who needs someone like Ed to keep him on track. Without Ed I sometimes think that Mark just doesn't know his best songs or what direction to go. Perhaps he's just too arrogant in that respect and needs someone of Ed's personality to put him in his place and let him know. Whatever it was, they complimented each other and it worked.
With PC there is no direction, no promo, no organisation and Mark seemingly left to get on with it choosing some awful songs for albums while leaving out the best ones! There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that his career has taken a downturn overall (not only the music) since PC came along.
I agree with you. But in the end it could be the way MK wants his career. When he is touring he is able to walk through all these cities in the spare time unrecognised. I can't image Eric Clapton, Sir Paul, or Mighty Barking Bob doing that.
-
Paul Crockford shouting 'Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaark Knooooooooooooopfler' in his Union Jack suit is one of the worst things I can remember in my life.
-
It's fun.
-
It's fun.
I like it too :)
-
Paul Crockford shouting 'Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaark Knooooooooooooopfler' in his Union Jack suit is one of the worst things I can remember in my life.
You need to attend the Glasgow show then because he doesn't wear that jacket here. In Glasgow he'd get attacked by some Yes voters and Celtic supporters!
-
He's got a bright orange one, too. Maybe he should wear it in the Netherlands ;D
Anyway I like his announcement. Some people even mistake him for MK when he enters the stage, I guess, because of the loud cheering by some people.
-
He's got a bright orange one, too. Maybe he should wear it in the Netherlands ;D
That's banned in Glasgow too due to the possibility of outraging some Celtic supporters! It's a "complicated" city. :(
-
Hm, I still find it pretty strange. Never saw such an over-super-loud-proud announcement. I like modest walking on stage by Mark much more.
One of the best walking on stage was performed by Hugh Laurie — he appeared on the side of the stage while dancing like amateur.
This was super-duper-fun and settled the good mood on the whole show ahead. But this roar by PC on stage in jacket is just not for me.
-
Hm, I still find it pretty strange. Never saw such an over-super-loud-proud announcement. I like modest walking on stage by Mark much more.
One of the best walking on stage was performed by Hugh Laurie — he appeared on the side of the stage while dancing like amateur.
This was super-duper-fun and settled the good mood on the whole show ahead. But this roar by PC on stage in jacket is just not for me.
I see what you mean. It's the one thing that doesn't fit with the rest of the show; everything in the show is so underrated and low-key, yet you have it announced by a man wearing a costume jacket with a voice like a foghorn. No one would ever suspect he's actually his "manager." Perhaps this is his job? I haven't any doubt that this part of the show was invented by PC himself and has nothing to do with Mark.
-
Perhaps Ed is available for an exclusive amit interview in a private section? Or maybe it is better not to disturb the ghosts of the past? :hmm
It's no secret I love Ed to bits. I think Mark is the sort of guy who needs someone like Ed to keep him on track. Without Ed I sometimes think that Mark just doesn't know his best songs or what direction to go. Perhaps he's just too arrogant in that respect and needs someone of Ed's personality to put him in his place and let him know. Whatever it was, they complimented each other and it worked.
With PC there is no direction, no promo, no organisation and Mark seemingly left to get on with it choosing some awful songs for albums while leaving out the best ones! There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that his career has taken a downturn overall (not only the music) since PC came along.
You nailed it!
-
Paul Crockford shouting 'Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaark Knooooooooooooopfler' in his Union Jack suit is one of the worst things I can remember in my life.
I don't like it either. It started as PC reading the no video recordings policy, and when touring with Dylan and seeing Dylan was introduced that way, or similar, PC started to do it.
Totally unnecessary
-
Hm, I still find it pretty strange. Never saw such an over-super-loud-proud announcement. I like modest walking on stage by Mark much more.
One of the best walking on stage was performed by Hugh Laurie — he appeared on the side of the stage while dancing like amateur.
This was super-duper-fun and settled the good mood on the whole show ahead. But this roar by PC on stage in jacket is just not for me.
I see what you mean. It's the one thing that doesn't fit with the rest of the show; everything in the show is so underrated and low-key, yet you have it announced by a man wearing a costume jacket with a voice like a foghorn. No one would ever suspect he's actually his "manager." Perhaps this is his job? I haven't any doubt that this part of the show was invented by PC himself and has nothing to do with Mark.
Yes, I hope it wasn't Mark's idea :lol :lol
Sailing to Philladelphia as a Dire Straits album — I heard only about 'What It Is' being a Dire Straits alike-song.
I believe Mark's relationships with Ed wasn't interrupted on a bad chord. I think it's something like John Illsley thing. Hey, he can't play double bass, so Mark just have to search somebody else. Looking at whole Dire Straits chronology and success I can only say — Ed was really good.
“I always say to bands: why take me on for my experience if you then ignore my advice?
If you want somebody who just is going to tell you that you’re great, you might as well get your mum to manage you.”
Said Paul Crockford. Read more: http://www.hitquarters.com/index.php3?page=intrview/2008/February18_0_0_2.html#ixzz3f1YrtO2S
-
That quote from PC is quite fun, as he does it just for the rest of his bands, that are very unknown to me...
In that interview he kind of says how lucky he is managing something like MK who guarantee a big amount of success without having to work too much (the big and loyal MK fan base...)
I wonder if PC manage to take more than 20% of the decisions... With someone so successful and that fan base you only have to "go with the swallows"
-
I guess PC is in charge of the deal with the cars company and the associated contractual corp. gig.
With Dire Straits Mark was built for success.
Solo, Mark does what he intends to.
-
My two cents on this subject, not regarding to Ed or Paul.
I always thought the other way round, that OES was the first Mark Knopfler solo album, with the help from some familiar musicians. This was Vgonis the Greek input, and I think he nails it.
-
Despite a few exception such as the closing track OES really sounds like a DS album. STP ix a mixed bag, half of the stuff really sounds as a DS follow up whereas the other half is a step to more personal stuff but this album has more unit than Golden Heart that was more of a patchwork of Mark's influences.
-
What does a DS album sound like anyway? I think most of them have a different kind of sound.
Stripped-down four-piece in the first two albums; rock influenced with first real epic song 3rd; more theatrical, experimental 4th; bland, pop infested 5th; mixed bag of mostly country rock influenced with some standout tracks 6th.
None of the albums, except the first 2 seem to sound that similar to me. Only his latest solo albums have stuttered in their style and not changed direction.
-
Good question, a Dire straits album is mainly softened rock sounding with extra lite influence. A good example is "When It Comes to You" the way it sounds on the album is completely different than when previously done with the NHB. "How Long" and "Ticket To Heavens" are announcing the way Mark will go afterwards such as "Je Suis Désolé" (but Imelda or Darling Pretty without intro could have been on a straits album). Let say that OES starts a transition. We can understand that DS did imply some musical limit to Mark. The other thing is the bass playing, John provided basic but solid bass line, Mark wanted more than that.
-
Good question, a Dire straits album is mainly softened rock sounding with extra lite influence. A good example is "When It Comes to You" the way it sounds on the album is completely different than when previously done with the NHB. "How Long" and "Ticket To Heavens" are announcing the way Mark will go afterwards such as "Je Suis Désolé" (but Imelda or Darling Pretty without intro could have been on a straits album). Let say that OES starts a transition. We can understand that DS did imply some musical limit to Mark. The other thing is the bass playing, John provided basic but solid bass line, Mark wanted more than that.
I like JI's bass playing. Bass is like incidental music in a film; you shouldn't really notice it. Most of the time GW sounds like he's playing a song on his own.
The Doors and others didn't even use a bass player (except in studio I think). Ray's "old leftie" took care of all that!
-
Good question, a Dire straits album is mainly softened rock sounding with extra lite influence. A good example is "When It Comes to You" the way it sounds on the album is completely different than when previously done with the NHB. "How Long" and "Ticket To Heavens" are announcing the way Mark will go afterwards such as "Je Suis Désolé" (but Imelda or Darling Pretty without intro could have been on a straits album). Let say that OES starts a transition. We can understand that DS did imply some musical limit to Mark. The other thing is the bass playing, John provided basic but solid bass line, Mark wanted more than that.
I like JI's bass playing. Bass is like incidental music in a film; you shouldn't really notice it. Most of the time GW sounds like he's playing a song on his own.
The Doors and others didn't even use a bass player (except in studio I think). Ray's "old leftie" took care of all that!
Yes, The Doors used to have a bass player on all studio sessions, as Ray himself said, 'to get that low frequencies'. Bass work on their debut is awesome!
-
I like JI's bass playing. Bass is like incidental music in a film; you shouldn't really notice it. Most of the time GW sounds like he's playing a song on his own.
I like both style and find GW works on HFB quite amazing. I have no real preference on the subject, they are just two different approach.
-
I like JI's bass playing. Bass is like incidental music in a film; you shouldn't really notice it. Most of the time GW sounds like he's playing a song on his own.
I like both style and find GW works on HFB quite amazing. I have no real preference on the subject, they are just two different approach.
I recall Tony Levin telling that once, when about to be hired for a very important session, he was told "I need a bassist that you don't notice at all is there playing" and Tony Levin answered "I'm your man".
For me Tony Levin is really the ideal bassist, when he's playing you don't notice, but if he stops playing, the song is clearly empty.
-
Yes, The Doors used to have a bass player on all studio sessions, as Ray himself said, 'to get that low frequencies'. Bass work on their debut is awesome!
yes right, I far prefer their studio versions because of that. And Lonnie Mack is playing bass on roadhouse blues !
-
For me Tony Levin is really the ideal bassist, when he's playing you don't notice, but if he stops playing, the song is clearly empty.
I wouldn't say that you "don't notice" Tony Levin on One world. I find his prat is very proeminent...but I like it !
Another example is Paul McCartney : during the beatles debuts, he played bass while singing, so it was quite simple. Then, with 8 tracks recordings he started to record his bass lines independantly, so he could concentrate on it, and indeed if you listen carrefully to beatles songs from let's say 65-70, they are really pure gems on them regarding bass parts.
As for JI vs GW, I like them both in different styles
-
For me Tony Levin is really the ideal bassist, when he's playing you don't notice, but if he stops playing, the song is clearly empty.
I wouldn't say that you "don't notice" Tony Levin on One world. I find his prat is very proeminent...but I like it !
I was thinking exactly the same while reading jbaent.
-
My two cents on this subject, not regarding to Ed or Paul.
I always thought the other way round, that OES was the first Mark Knopfler solo album, with the help from some familiar musicians. This was Vgonis the Greek input, and I think he nails it.
I alwasy thought exactly the same.
To me, DS ended with BIA, or eventually at the Mandela gig.
OES is "just" a comeback, but after other projects showing clearly a more "solo" approach (soundtrcaks, NHBs, neck & neck...) and is closer to GH than BIA imho.
DS was a late 70ies / 80ies band.
the late 80ies and 90ies were the debuts of Mark's solo carreer.
Well in my point of view of course, don't pretend it's the objective reality :)
-
For me Tony Levin is really the ideal bassist, when he's playing you don't notice, but if he stops playing, the song is clearly empty.
I wouldn't say that you "don't notice" Tony Levin on One world. I find his prat is very proeminent...but I like it !
I was thinking exactly the same while reading jbaent.
He's also a master of the slap bass and the stick.
By the way, we don't know if in One Workd is Tony Levin orthebotger bassist credited, Neil Jason?
However it does sound as Levin slap bass, a master of it.
-
Sailing to Philladelphia as a Dire Straits album — I heard only about 'What It Is' being a Dire Straits alike-song.
I find these songs have also a DS flavour :
Sainling to Philadephia
Silvertown blues
speedway at Nazareth
Junkie Doll
Do America
Camerado
Let's see you
Baloney again
who's your baby now
Prairie Wedding
and also the overall sound on the album, the production, the guitar tones, etc...
except for songs like :
El Macho
Wanderlust
One more matinee
Sand of Nevada
-
By the way, we don't know if in One Workd is Tony Levin orthebotger bassist credited, Neil Jason?
However it does sound as Levin slap bass, a master of it.
yes it clearly sounds tony levin
-
The OES tour was certainly not the first MK solo tour ;D
And the album was modelled on BIA, as has often been mentioned:
Walk of Life - The Bug
Money for Nothing - Heavy Fuel
Ride Across the River - Planet of NO
Man's Too Strong - Iron Hand
By the way, a very interesting thread, this. :thumbsup If STP had been released as a DS album, nobody would have complained, that's for sure.
-
Good observations Tally! I have more interesting question by the way.
What if Dire Straits albums was issued as MK's solo albums? This would be awesome. He would be less famous, like Chris Rea.
-
Good observations Tally! I have more interesting question by the way.
What if Dire Straits albums was issued as MK's solo albums? This would be awesome. He would be less famous, like Chris Rea.
I don´t get your point here. Yor do you mean that as a solo artists MK would have chosen small stages etc. at very early stages of the career?
-
Bass is such an interesting instrument, even in simple musical styles such as blues and country. Technically it is easier to learn than the guitar - one finger, boom-boom. But to play it well, or simply right, requires an understanding of where the music is going.
I also like Illsley's style. He's not technically advanced, but he plays the right notes and he is solid. Glen is a bit hit and miss for me. On some things he's just excellent, so versatile, but on other things, he's to busy. That chordal progression he does on Sultans, for instance. Sounds just wrong to my ears.
-
I also like Illsley's style. He's not technically advanced, but he plays the right notes and he is solid. Glen is a bit hit and miss for me. On some things he's just excellent, so versatile, but on other things, he's to busy. That chordal progression he does on Sultans, for instance. Sounds just wrong to my ears.
The whole paragraph but that last sentence - yes, just YES! :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup
-
Good observations Tally! I have more interesting question by the way.
What if Dire Straits albums was issued as MK's solo albums? This would be awesome. He would be less famous, like Chris Rea.
I don´t get your point here. Yor do you mean that as a solo artists MK would have chosen small stages etc. at very early stages of the career?
Yes, but the thing with Chris Rea was — he was pushed by producers and their thoughts early on and managed to do 'his thing' only from third album.
Very hard to tell indeed about 'if it happened', but anyway. I imagine Brothers In Arms like Mark Knopfler's solo album and it looks cool to me!
-
You can call me crazy (I actually am), but I see a little difference between all DS albums issued by MK and between all MK albums released by DS.
To me there's no difference whatsoever. Different musicians, different age, but same songwriter, singer and guitarist all the time. So why worry?
-
I think that if Kill to Get Crimson had been released as a DS album, people would have raised a few eyebrows... ;D
-
The OES tour was certainly not the first MK solo tour ;D
And the album was modelled on BIA, as has often been mentioned:
Walk of Life - The Bug
Money for Nothing - Heavy Fuel
Ride Across the River - Planet of NO
Man's Too Strong - Iron Hand
By the way, a very interesting thread, this. :thumbsup If STP had been released as a DS album, nobody would have complained, that's for sure.
you are right and you could add You and your friend - Brothers in arms, but on the other hand, the overall OES sound with so much pedal steel in it has a NHB/CA flavour, and several songs like How long, ticket to heaven, fade to black sounds so much NHB rather than DS. These songs are closer to later solo style, like ballads on GH, rather than DS stuff imho
-
You can call me crazy (I actually am), but I see a little difference between all DS albums issued by MK and between all MK albums released by DS.
To me there's no difference whatsoever. Different musicians, different age, but same songwriter, singer and guitarist all the time. So why worry?
True just not same management and other little things such as the record company : DS was for success and Mark was then not free to really do on record what he really wanted. Mark going solo has started to really become free from the TRP area. The first two solo effort was mark trying to emancipate, first from management and after SL from the record company. In short the answer for the difference between Dire Straits and Mark Knopfler is : Ed Bicknell!
-
You can call me crazy (I actually am), but I see a little difference between all DS albums issued by MK and between all MK albums released by DS.
To me there's no difference whatsoever. Different musicians, different age, but same songwriter, singer and guitarist all the time. So why worry?
True just not same management and other little things such as the record company : DS was for success and Mark was then not free to really do on record what he really wanted. Mark going solo has started to really become free from the TRP area. The first two solo effort was mark trying to emancipate, first from management and after SL from the record company. In short the answer for the difference between Dire Straits and Mark Knopfler is : Ed Bicknell!
Yes!
I always considered that Ed had a capital role with DS and his success.
-
Good question, a Dire straits album is mainly softened rock sounding with extra lite influence. A good example is "When It Comes to You" the way it sounds on the album is completely different than when previously done with the NHB. "How Long" and "Ticket To Heavens" are announcing the way Mark will go afterwards such as "Je Suis Désolé" (but Imelda or Darling Pretty without intro could have been on a straits album). Let say that OES starts a transition. We can understand that DS did imply some musical limit to Mark. The other thing is the bass playing, John provided basic but solid bass line, Mark wanted more than that.
With OES, Mark delivered the basis for his solo career, in my opinion. On past albums, DS sounded very diverse from one to another, but sounded as a rock band. With OES, the experimentations and other styles of music started to gain proeminence. So we can hear echoes of each On Every Street song in further solo efforts
-
yes totally agree Nababo.
Although he did several collaborations from the beginning, I think they increased a lot in late 80ies-early 90ies. He clearly turned to a "solo" attitude with many other projects, DS being left side.
To me, his solo "vision" began after the BIA tour when he started this "collaborations-soundtracks-charity-events-production-other-projects" era
at least, when I discovered DS in 88, that was the feeling I had : it was over... I was wrong "officially" of course because OES, but "musically" I think it was the case
-
If you ask me, I would say that DS was a band during 77-86, not 77-93, and that OES appears to me as a "parenthesis" in his solo carreer
just my opinion
-
yes totally agree Nababo.
Although he did several collaborations from the beginning, I think they increased a lot in late 80ies-early 90ies. He clearly turned to a "solo" attitude with many other projects, DS being left side.
To me, his solo "vision" began after the BIA tour when he started this "collaborations-soundtracks-charity-events-production-other-projects" era
at least, when I discovered DS in 88, that was the feeling I had : it was over... I was wrong "officially" of course because OES, but "musically" I think it was the case
And I agree with you as well. It makes me agree with myself 8) 8) 8). No, the point is, you have gone further in the subject. Your explanation fits perfectly with the unique situation of OES in MK's overall career. It was a DS album only due to pressures raised against MK by different people, as if he was owing something to someone - maybe not in terms of money, but other kind of commitment. Actually, I'd read somewhere that he just made the album and tour to assure the assets of DS members for "three or four generations", but in fact DS was already done and gone.
-
Don't forget he has a recording contract, that Mark actually did not fully honour it.
The other thing is Mark and John were on the producer list (ie putting their own money) on the OES tour and got ticket sales figures in red for the US and Oz legs but Europe got them strong attendances.
-
I find these songs have also a DS flavour :
Sainling to Philadephia
Silvertown blues
speedway at Nazareth
Junkie Doll
Do America
Camerado
Let's see you
Baloney again
who's your baby now
Prairie Wedding
From a mainstream standpoint and making it a DS album, would have made one hell of a comeback. Interestingly the b-side tracks all have the guitar/rock sound of DS. Rejecting those for the album and putting on the other less markatable tunes, really shows what direction MK wanted to go for the next albums.
-
The OES tour was certainly not the first MK solo tour ;D
And the album was modelled on BIA, as has often been mentioned:
Walk of Life - The Bug
Money for Nothing - Heavy Fuel
Ride Across the River - Planet of NO
Man's Too Strong - Iron Hand
By the way, a very interesting thread, this. :thumbsup If STP had been released as a DS album, nobody would have complained, that's for sure.
You can add Brothers In Arms - You and Your Friend to that philosophy.
I don't neccesaraly see OES as the beginning of MK's solo career from a musical standpoint. MK was very influenced by Nashville and country in those years, so OES had a lot of that. I remember dreading that GH would have the same since he had released three countryfied albums in a row (the Chet album, NHB and OES) but it turned out that he had moved away from country on GK and therefore it doesn't really have a strong connection with OES. From a personal standpoint however I can see where people are coming from. In 91 DS was basically MK. There was so much pressure on him at the time, both to deliver an album that was on par with BIA, both musically and commercially. On top of that all the expectations from the guitar community who saw him as one of the greatest guitar players of the period. By 91 though MK and DS had grown out of mainstream and wasn't really cathing on with the younger demographic as they did in 85. It was quite surprising with all the country influences once OES came out and it unsurpisingly didn't catch on as the previous album. It lacked the mainstream sound of early ninties maintream and it lacked the songs that could top the charts. The band also looked middle-aged and a bit out of place to the MTV target audience. MK was probably aware of all these things and realized that a change in direction musically (making more mature sounding music and trying to avoid it all being too mainstream) would be the way to go in order to get away from the pressure of stadium rock on a long term basis. In that sense it was the point where he shifted towards the direction of what he does now.
-
So finally its here!! 8)
Damage Management Presents:
The Dire Straits comeback album "Sailing To Philadelphia" !!
The brand new album can be heard here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPwFgPkcmeg&index=1&list=PLYBaPsbPKtmJuL1tSKg3nCeRtwlM468xs
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPwFgPkcmeg&index=1&list=PLYBaPsbPKtmJuL1tSKg3nCeRtwlM468xs)
(http://i1077.photobucket.com/albums/w476/Martin_Olsen/sailing-to-philadelphia-ds_zpsw0cufxqo.jpg)
-
Well if STP was a DS album we would have gotten AC keys sound style on WII instead of a genuine fiddle player. But the spirit of WII is clearly so Straitish and that is why a lot of people like me liked it.
-
oh yeah the album would have been diferent with AC on it. It has been mentioned from many sides that he did have a lot of input to some of the songparts.
-
oh yeah the album would have been diferent with AC on it. It has been mentioned from many sides that he did have a lot of input to some of the songparts.
Listening to recordings from the 1980/81 OLT show how important AC has been into modelling DS new sound.
I still wonder why Alan was not able to pursue a successful career after DS being disbanded.
-
oh yeah the album would have been diferent with AC on it. It has been mentioned from many sides that he did have a lot of input to some of the songparts.
Listening to recordings from the 1980/81 OLT show how important AC has been into modelling DS new sound.
I still wonder why Alan was not able to pursue a successful career after DS being disbanded.
He continued playing as a session player and as a musical directors for many artists, but after so major tours with Clapton and DS he needed to lower his profile to avoid the crazyness of big tourings, and he lost his train with big names in the meantime, keeping busy with less known artists andvwritting music for spots, documentaries (he did one with Guy Fletcher for a Ibiza documentary) etc
-
oh yeah the album would have been diferent with AC on it. It has been mentioned from many sides that he did have a lot of input to some of the songparts.
Listening to recordings from the 1980/81 OLT show how important AC has been into modelling DS new sound.
I still wonder why Alan was not able to pursue a successful career after DS being disbanded.
Maybe because his part in the DS sound wasn't a big as he'd have us believe. Just speculating.
-
Maybe because his part in the DS sound wasn't a big as he'd have us believe. Just speculating.
I dont think so. Even if you were a menber of a band of DS size it is not guaranteed that you can to a high profile career as sideman forever after. It has to do with a lot of other things than musicality to do that. Having the right connections, luck and many other factors go into this. I don't doubt that he had a big role in the sound/arrangements of the songs he was involved with. The sound os DS before he was there was night and day to what it became after he came in.
-
Maybe because his part in the DS sound wasn't a big as he'd have us believe. Just speculating.
I dont think so. Even if you were a menber of a band of DS size it is not guaranteed that you can to a high profile career as sideman forever after. It has to do with a lot of other things than musicality to do that. Having the right connections, luck and many other factors go into this. I don't doubt that he had a big role in the sound/arrangements of the songs he was involved with. The sound os DS before he was there was night and day to what it became after he came in.
I think his input has always been overrated. There is no doubt that Mark's songs, in terms of style, were always evolving over the DS days, so I don't think that AC coming in suddenly made the telling difference because there would have been a difference anyway. In any event it was Mark who brought in a keyboard player in the first place because he wanted to change the sound and not AC who told Mark he should join the band! Well, we do know his ego... :lol
-
No ofcourse Mk has always been the one with the main ideas for songs and could at any time do without AC. But that doesnt mean he didn't have valuable input. Terry Williams confirms this in the interview on soundcloud. It is notable though how MK/DS sound evolved in the years when AC came in. It is also very notable that he chose to bring AC in as the only DS member for the Infidels sessions. There must be a reason for that.
-
I don't want to go too much off topic here, but all this talk of OES and BiA, does anyone else prefer OES over BiA? I do... :-X
-
I don't want to go too much off topic here, but all this talk of OES and BiA, does anyone else prefer OES over BiA? I do... :-X
I think there are two factors to consider here: which one you consider to be the better song and which one you would prefer to hear live. They are not necessarily the same. For instance, I think TR is a (slighly) better song that TOL. But I would choose TOL over TR any time, because I've heard TR many times and I never got a chance to hear TOL live !
I've heard both BIA and OES in the past, and I think BIA is a more Mighty song than OES. Nonetheless I would prefer to hear OES, because it has never been played since the DS days and that would be quite an event !
-
I don't want to go too much off topic here, but all this talk of OES and BiA, does anyone else prefer OES over BiA? I do... :-X
Much prefer it; heard BIA way too many times now. I know I've heard Sultans more but somehow I just can't get enough of that.
-
I like OES better apart from MFN BIA and WOL ofcourse.
-
Herlock, I tink the question was about the album not the song.... ::)
-
I still wonder why Alan was not able to pursue a successful career after DS being disbanded.
same goes for Tony Banks. he is the one who wrotes almost 90% of genesis stuff, he is the Genesis sound, but he is the one in the band who had the less sucess in his solo career
-
Herlock, I tink the question was about the album not the song.... ::)
Yes, I meant the albums but I enjoyed the answer nonetheless :) !
dmg, yes that probebly has something to do with it. I also really like the "dark" tone on many songs from OES, and the amount of country is just right IMHO. I guess Mark didn't feel too good or enjoyed himself during that period which probably explains why he doesn't seem to like that album, but he did write good stuff!
-
Mark later told in an interview that he did not like how cynical his writing was for the OES album.
-
Mark later told in an interview that he did not like how cynical his writing was for the OES album.
Where can I find this interview? I recall many post-DS interviews in which he expressed his dislike of the whole album and tour package. Nevertheless, OES is superb, despite some - IMO - weak points.
-
He has said on many occasions that it had just become too big. I can easily understand it. 99% of the pressure was on him having to live up with expectations from all sides. Writing hit songs, playing perfect solos, being a part of pop culture etc. etc. Most of it didn't seem to have to do with songwriting and to thing he values so high today. So he made the right descision. We can slam him for not playing all the songs we would like and all this but in the end I'd rather see him as he is to day - being more balanced and seemingly loving every second of it all. (Expect the promo tours where he always seems to be a annoyed playing at tv shows and waiting all day for 5-10 minutes of air time )
-
Mark later told in an interview that he did not like how cynical his writing was for the OES album.
Where can I find this interview? I recall many post-DS interviews in which he expressed his dislike of the whole album and tour package. Nevertheless, OES is superb, despite some - IMO - weak points.
I read some review saying that OES was crap as an album because it featured both superb songs (OES, PONO, IH, YAYF) and stupid commercial rockers (HF, The Bug).
My take is quite simple: An album with 4 masterpiece song is a masterpiece album with a few skippers. If you don't like the skippers, just skip them !
-
He has said on many occasions that it had just become too big. I can easily understand it. 99% of the pressure was on him having to live up with expectations from all sides. Writing hit songs, playing perfect solos, being a part of pop culture etc. etc. Most of it didn't seem to have to do with songwriting and to thing he values so high today. So he made the right descision. We can slam him for not playing all the songs we would like and all this but in the end I'd rather see him as he is to day - being more balanced and seemingly loving every second of it all. (Expect the promo tours where he always seems to be a annoyed playing at tv shows and waiting all day for 5-10 minutes of air time )
Thanks, Boris, for the input. I'm aware of all his trouble on carrying on with DS at that point. I was just trying to find the exact interview in which he may have said that he wrote the songs with a "cynical" approach. Thnaks indeed
-
Mark later told in an interview that he did not like how cynical his writing was for the OES album.
Where can I find this interview? I recall many post-DS interviews in which he expressed his dislike of the whole album and tour package. Nevertheless, OES is superb, despite some - IMO - weak points.
I read some review saying that OES was crap as an album because it featured both superb songs (OES, PONO, IH, YAYF) and stupid commercial rockers (HF, The Bug).
My take is quite simple: An album with 4 masterpiece song is a masterpiece album with a few skippers. If you don't like the skippers, just skip them !
Actually I enjoy even more songs from OES. My skippers would be CE (sacrilege, i know 8)), FtB, MyP...
-
Mark later told in an interview that he did not like how cynical his writing was for the OES album.
Where can I find this interview? I recall many post-DS interviews in which he expressed his dislike of the whole album and tour package. Nevertheless, OES is superb, despite some - IMO - weak points.
I don't have the reference available otherwise I would have put it.
What I am sure of is it was something written - but where?
-
Mark later told in an interview that he did not like how cynical his writing was for the OES album.
I guess he also told that he later found the sound too "perfect" too much "cold", too much "digital" (he alos said that about BIA) and since british groove he is obssessed with Guy to go back to analog and to a more "organic" sound approcah
-
My take is quite simple: An album with 4 masterpiece song is a masterpiece album with a few skippers. If you don't like the skippers, just skip them !
disagree. An album is a masterpiece if all songs are great. If there are skippers, it can't be a matserpice imho.
it's like if you said a movie is a matserpiece, but some sequences are boring, or a book is a matserpiece, but I skip some chapters !
to me an album is a whole piece of art and is a matserpiece as a whole. If not, then you can range songs as masterpieces, but it's another story
what's why I prefer BIA : I Like all the songs, yes even WOL
OES has some great songs, but also some fillers imho
-
My take is quite simple: An album with 4 masterpiece song is a masterpiece album with a few skippers. If you don't like the skippers, just skip them !
disagree. An album is a masterpiece if all songs are great. If there are skippers, it can't be a matserpice imho.
it's like if you said a movie is a matserpiece, but some sequences are boring, or a book is a matserpiece, but I skip some chapters !
to me an album is a whole piece of art and is a matserpiece as a whole. If not, then you can range songs as masterpieces, but it's another story
what's why I prefer BIA : I Like all the songs, yes even WOL
OES has some great songs, but also some fillers imho
I think you are right. A masterpiece means no weak elements. That's why I prefer MK over Bruce Springsteen, Chris Rea, Pink Floyd. They and other have great works, maybe greater than MK in some aspects, butthere's no single album which I myself consider perfect from begining to end. As for MK, the first 5 studio albums are perfect.
-
The proper definition of "masterpiece" in this case would be his greatest piece of work i.e. his best album. Not just any of his albums considered great, very good, excellent or any other adjective you care to use. :)
-
If a true masterpiece album has to have nothing but masterpiece songs, I don't think a masterpiece album exists (from any band or artist). Just my opinion of course ;D
-
If a true masterpiece album has to have nothing but masterpiece songs, I don't think a masterpiece album exists (from any band or artist). Just my opinion of course ;D
A "masterpiece" is the best (master) item (piece) to be produced by it's artist. So just like the Mona Lisa is recognised to be Leonardo da Vinci's "master piece," some will consider Making Movies to be Mark Knopfler's masterpiece. It's simply a person's greatest piece of work by definition.
-
thanks for litteral explanation dmg
I was more talking about a "chef d'oeuvre" like we say in fench, that mean a piece of art with no "default", "perfect" (if perfection exists...), no filler, no weak part, so in a case of an album, one without any weak song, like nababo said
-
another difference is rating the album vs rating songs on it
you can have "masterpieces" songs but together with weaker songs that makes an album not a matserpiece, and an album with a constent quality average so to say that makes it to a "better" album, at least to a more coherent album
examples with rating on Stones albums by fans :
http://www.keno.org/AlbumsRate.htm (http://www.keno.org/AlbumsRate.htm)
the "best" albums are not necessarily the ones containing the "best" songs
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece
It can have both meanings.
Pink Floyd have at least 5 masterpieces, like DS! ;)
I believe that a masterpiece in music, can have weak moments, that push the narrative and help it work as a whole.(depending on the nature of the recording, if it is a concept album, for example) Pink Floyd's The Wall is a masterpiece, despite the fact that some individual songs are weak(er) and don't work out of context. The same goes to Dark side of the moon. Who can intentionally chose to listen only to "On the run"? Animals on the other hand has no skippers, but with 3 songs (pigs on the wig 1&2 are hardly songs) it is hard to fail, or is it? Same for Wish you were here which has 4 songs. And I would also include Piper at the gates of dawn as their 5th masterpiece, despite the fact that the non - Syd songs are not that great.
But I believe that any album that MK has put out under his name could have been introduced as a DS album, up until SL. (Yes even TRD with a different approach, like the treatment he gave to the live version of Hill farmer's blues) . It would of course be a marketing trick, cashing on the DS name. But after 20 years since the break up of DS, I think his fan base is still huge, and he doesn't need to rely on such trickery. And I don't think it would work in any case. For some reason (probably because he started in 1977 and not in the 60ies) he has not gained status in the younger generation, who knows Eric Clapton because of his Cream and Derek and the dominoes days, even if they don't follow his last 20 years output.
Thanks JF for the stones page! Fans and the writer, really nail the 3 first ones! Together with my secret favorite"Satanic majesties request" are the essential RS albums. Still not a 10, though. And about the Beatles, we had this discussion, but it is strange that Srgt Pepper gets to be the best album ever in polls, when in the separate song rating, at least 3 songs would be far below 10. And my favorite white album has a horrid piece called revolution 9, which would certainly spoil the result. And if you play some songs alne they just don't sound like 10s. But as a whole they all get 10s! Despite the fact that this is not a concept album. Sequencing the album with so many diverse music styles is very important after all. Abbey road on the other hand is not working the same way, but could be a near 10, if it wasn't for OG.
The easier , to me, artist to give a 10 is Dylan. Blonde on blonde is just perfect. John Wesley Harding , a close second. Highway 61, as well. Blood on the tracks, too. Not one skipper.
All in all, I would give a ten, even if an album has a weaker song, but certainly not a skipper or a filler. And I would consider it a masterpiece, as well. The first four DS albums are exactly the case. And there are at least 500 albums that qualify.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece
It can have both meanings.
Pink Floyd have at least 5 masterpieces, like DS! ;)
I believe that a masterpiece in music, can have weak moments, that push the narrative and help it work as a whole.(depending on the nature of the recording, if it is a concept album, for example) Pink Floyd's The Wall is a masterpiece, despite the fact that some individual songs are weak(er) and don't work out of context. The same goes to Dark side of the moon. Who can intentionally chose to listen only to "On the run"? Animals on the other hand has no skippers, but with 3 songs (pigs on the wig 1&2 are hardly songs) it is hard to fail, or is it? Same for Wish you were here which has 4 songs. And I would also include Piper at the gates of dawn as their 5th masterpiece, despite the fact that the non - Syd songs are not that great.
But I believe that any album that MK has put out under his name could have been introduced as a DS album, up until SL. (Yes even TRD with a different approach, like the treatment he gave to the live version of Hill farmer's blues) . It would of course be a marketing trick, cashing on the DS name. But after 20 years since the break up of DS, I think his fan base is still huge, and he doesn't need to rely on such trickery. And I don't think it would work in any case. For some reason (probably because he started in 1977 and not in the 60ies) he has not gained status in the younger generation, who knows Eric Clapton because of his Cream and Derek and the dominoes days, even if they don't follow his last 20 years output.
Thanks JF for the stones page! Fans and the writer, really nail the 3 first ones! Together with my secret favorite"Satanic majesties request" are the essential RS albums. Still not a 10, though. And about the Beatles, we had this discussion, but it is strange that Srgt Pepper gets to be the best album ever in polls, when in the separate song rating, at least 3 songs would be far below 10. And my favorite white album has a horrid piece called revolution 9, which would certainly spoil the result. And if you play some songs alne they just don't sound like 10s. But as a whole they all get 10s! Despite the fact that this is not a concept album. Sequencing the album with so many diverse music styles is very important after all. Abbey road on the other hand is not working the same way, but could be a near 10, if it wasn't for OG.
The easier , to me, artist to give a 10 is Dylan. Blonde on blonde is just perfect. John Wesley Harding , a close second. Highway 61, as well. Blood on the tracks, too. Not one skipper.
All in all, I would give a ten, even if an album has a weaker song, but certainly not a skipper or a filler. And I would consider it a masterpiece, as well. The first four DS albums are exactly the case. And there are at least 500 albums that qualify.
totally agree on all subjects vgonis :thumbsup
about the white album, it is my fav beatles album, and the paradox is that it is generally the favourite album among many beatles's fans, while it is the less "beatles" album : it's a "comp" of four individualities, but not a "band's " album, obvioulsy
-
We are going a bit off topic now... The white album indeed reveals the tendencies of the individual musicians, rather than a unified band. On the other hand, we had noticed the differences of the McCartney and Lennon compositions in previous records, especially after Rubber soul. In fact this is the record that due to the difficulties and disagreements both Lennon and McCartney tried in a mysterious way to imitate each other, in a subconscious way to bring back the fine partnership, writing songs in the style of their partner. The mixing of these songs is what unifies the album so good in my opinion. (Even George Harrison left his eastern patterns for more straight forward pop-rock songs)