Now, that's a cover that would have sold some albums!Originally Posted by Dave (in MA)
Now, that's a cover that would have sold some albums!
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
I do believe that was rather intentional. It's supposed to be WTF cover. It appeals directly to the surrealist side of me, as does the "Atom Heart Mother Suite."
Not everyone digs surrealism, and that's okay.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world.
Someone above mentioned it didn't do well in his store even with it in the KC bin! THIS I think is a lot more of the issue. I think it has a lot more to do with the fact a lot of people don't know who is in a particular band, nor do they care? I also don't think many fans travel outside the band they know to investigate collaborations, or solos works etc. I went to a Transatlantic tour, their first, and figured the place would be swamped seeing there were FOUR different bands represented, the place was barren. I was taught to read credits, and i know this one has NONE outside the two guys, so if I saw something like this cold, ( I have it because my older brother had it first) in a KC bin, I would probably have recognized the names, and that alone would have piqued my interest. The cover isn't as interesting or inspiring as a Dean or Hipgnosis cover for sure! But I think people not "following" band members is more an issue.
Agreed. Growing up, Floyd NEVER did interviews, I rarely read anything about THEM outside their shows etc. They were a flipping mystery, which added to their allure. The cow on the cover was a total trip for me, wondering what did these mysterious devils MEAN by this? It was always iconic for me.
Let's face it: it's not that good an album either.
my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicts to complete nutcases.
Depends what you mean by "that" good. For my taste, the vocals are weak and I wish that in places they'd given the album a bit more oomph. Of course, Fripp would have done that, had these compositions made it onto a KC album. But notwithstanding those problems I like it and I listen to it more than I listen to the contemporary KC album ItWoP (which, it's worth remembering, went higher in the charts than did ItCotKC). So for me it's that good. And I recall that when the McDonald and Giles (and Giles) version of the 21st Century Schizoid Band played some of this stuff live (with added oomph), it stacked up well against the KC material.
For me it compares to "Fish Out Of Water" -- solo tracks that haven't been given the full gloss of a band rewrite, but very strong composing in a rather more raw state than we're used to.
Love the cover, love the album. It's one of those that's in between this and that, and all the better for it. Interesting all the way around.
"Always ready with the ray of sunshine"
I like the album. It's a parallel-dimension King Crimson album, except King Crimson is already the evil twin, so McD&G is the good twin. IMO it is as strong as Poseidon but lacks the menace. I see it, Poseidon, and the ELP debut as all carrying forward with the original KC sound, but with different tints and shades.
From my historically removed POV, it's pretty clear that popular tastes were turning dark and heavy. McD&G kept up the sunny psychedelic optimism that was more a hallmark of The Beatles. I can easily imagine that the album was overlooked because of this, in addition to what others have mentioned in this thread. It just wasn't the hot new sound people were eager to explore.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world.
I agree, but what is surreal about the ass end of a cow? Seems more real then surreal to me. And ugly.
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
It's surreal in the context of being placed on the front of a rock album with no contextualization or explanation. Everything in that record store makes sense except there is a cow on the cover of the records. It is that startling dreamlike discontinuity with its surroundings that makes the cow surreal.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world.
I'm not disputing how the album cover appeared to you. Only how it appeared to me. You saw a surreal image and I saw tasteless trash.
It's all about one's own perspective, is it not?
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
I've never looked closely at the cover (and I think I've only heard a little of the album once!), but at quick glance the cover always looked like they were suggesting it was a great album to listen to with your date.
Yes, that's possible with M&G. But not likely with Atom Heart Mother.
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
I like the album......always have, and never really thought much about the cover though it could have been more artistic but many artists back in the day just put their pics on the cover standing around.
It read like you were disputing how it was surreal. "...what is surreal about the ass end of a cow?" I took the query as non-rhetorical. Now, clearly it wasn't.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world.
Just by the way, John G. Perry's album "Sunset Wading" (1976) has a very similar sound, in places, to M&G and makes a good adjunct.
I understand how people can put certain things into perspective as you did with the cover of AHM, but sometimes when something is ugly, odd and out of place, that does not automatically make it dreamily surrealistic to some people, but simply ugly, odd and out of place. It depends on the viewer's perspective, either way.
Last edited by StevegSr; 06-13-2016 at 06:43 PM.
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
Yeah. +1 on that.
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
I did much the same.. I bought dozens of albums based on personnel or producer etc. in the 70's Come to think of it I bought my share of albums solely based on the album art work as well..
I always quite liked the cover.
Two vaguely groovy looking musicians with their comely ladies.
Lookin all pastoral and stuff.
Which pretty much reflected the vibe of the album.
I doubt a different cover would've improved sales or lent more insight into the musical content.
It's not a knockout release but seemingly does what the artists that made it wanted it to do well enough.
What I meant, is that this is a second (if not third) tier 70's prog album... Nothing I would call essential or a classic... Maybe one of those "unearthed gem"... if it was ever "unearthed", and "gem" might be a strong word for it
Don't get me wrong, I bought the remaster and it gets some spins
my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicts to complete nutcases.
Just listened to M&G for the first time in decades and it hasn't improved. I think what holds back the album is that Ian McDonald was such a limited vocalist for material that called for either a Jon Anderson or a Greg Lake, depending on the song. Giles is still one the truly underappreciated drummers in prog or rock. The man just oozes with jazz, is busy as hell, while never being a distraction. Amazing!
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
I also just re-listened this yesterday and I gotta say that busyness of drumming WAS distracting to me some of the time. And it does not help that drums are mixed very up-front. Great drumsound on the other hand but bit too much!
My progressive music site: https://pienemmatpurot.com/ Reviews in English: https://pienemmatpurot.com/in-english/
I was trying to be kind, but with a limited flat vocalist like McDonald, I'll take the drums up front on this album!
To be or not to be? That is the point. - Harry Nilsson.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks