Definitely...I was thrilled to see this pop up and was hoping for the studio version. Vocals aren't up to snuff on this one and it shows. They are great live, though, even after all these years.
This is not the original version of this song, that's what you need to listen to, this is a rerecording of the song decades after it was first recorded. Unofunately this is an inferior version, the original was recorded in 1977 and is far superior to this version, and the singer is different as well. Get a hold of that one and you'll get it.
I kept waiting for this to go somewhere. It never arrived. Too many ideas without a cohesive through line. The vocals at the end reminded me of a shoegaze version of Lemmy. I give this a 1.5. Recommended: Fracture and Starless from King Crimson.
John Palumbo’s a genius!! Top 5 greatest song writers in rock history! Master at word play in poetic lyrics and complexed melodic compositions! 30 studio albums, 22 or so for CTS! Still going! A lot on moving parts! Pop/ Rock/Punk/ jazz /Blues and progressive. Even a rap song in Hey Earl! There all better versions of this song. Listen to the original!
Four years later checking in. Great album phenomenal song. The greatest band that remained unknown. They got screwed by the label. Phenomenal band from Baltimore Maryland
Crack the Sky were from the Baltimore, DC area, well that is where they became popularIzed and still have a fanbase although most are from West Virginia. Anyway, this sounds like it has an extended/different intro. and sounds like an alternate take up to where all the band comes in. The vocals sound different as in an alternate take and differ from my lp’s and cd. The original is better. This must be reissue, I will look into this. Was pleasantly surprised to see you guys listen to this. Glad to see interest still in this band. There are live versions: Live at WBAI and Live Sky. Do yourselves a favor and listen to Animal Notes and notice Beatles influences. CTS has remained active.
JPMP, No, Thank you, JPMP. Thanks for keeping it all alive. I am not just a prog head, but when very young was a classically trained (trumpet) and guitar (self taught cause it was the way back then) and I go now to play with my jazz, rock, blues etc etc brother in arms drummer. I have seen your list of videos and am amazed. See you in the funny something.
Since the original album was written mostly by John Palumbo, but recorded without him, they decided years later to re-record it with him. Thus the vocals especially sound quite different, but the arrangements were not changed too much. I prefer the original just because I heard it a zillion times and love it, but this is a little different from that.
KaThouSe MuSic, So that is what happened. I was aware that they recorded SIN (wow the acronym spells sin, don’t think I noticed that before!) without Palumbo, but didn’t realize they re recorded it with him. I thought I had finally gone over...something. Thanks so much for straightening me out, man.
Crack the Sky is a very experimental and versatile band and they rarely play a song the same way twice when performing.. Seen them 2 times and they're always amazing. Still performing presently and just put out a new LP.. So they're are many different variations of their tunes out there, and most are different and intriguing. Much thanks for reviewing and I would recommend the song "Ice".. 4.1 for overall effort for Nuclear Apathy.
This song was very interesting to say the least. When the drums first came in it sounded like the person just learned how to do a fill on the drums. The time signatures were very misplaced and honestly it sound pretty bad. Then when they all came in together it definitely gave off a Rush vibe and even the singing had a cool vibe to it. Which I really enjoyed. I give it a 3 I still can't get over the intro drums that was a big yikes in my opinion. I'd personally like to see you guys react to Polyphia - GOAT . Keep up the great work guys. btw I like the lights
You should give the actual studio version a try, this sounds like a recording of them doing this song 25 years later in a bar rofl. The drums and synchronized bass in the intro will make more sense, it's still very chaotic and weird, don't get me wrong.
Yeah, that was cool. I was getting a Rush vibe with the prog elements and the vocals I was getting Pink Floyd "Welcome to the Machine" vibe for some reason, weird. I liked the acoustic intro. I liked the pace and odd time signature they played the meat of the song in. The best section of the song was the toggle between the guitars and keys (hard and soft). I detected the guitar harmony thing as well, which was cool. There wasn't much not to like about the song. I really want to give it a 4.0 but I'm not quite there, so 3.9. By the way, I liked Manny's attitude on this song, it came across very opened minded. Manny that's a complement not trying to be sarcastic. Justin you mentioned you were a fan boy of DT on multiple reactions. Just checking if you are aware that Portnoy and Petrucci are or were big Rush fan boys as well. I would expect the odd time signatures to be the standard in DT songs.
I am! And yeah, changing the time signatures in DT songs is quite the norm. It's funny, now I'm listening to all the bands DT was inspired by, and I can definitely hear that. -JP
Lost me as well when the heavy drums started against the light guitar. Seemed they were playing two different time signatures. I was thinking "that's it, they suck", then the rest of the song played out so much better. Transitions were a bit rough, intial guitar bits seemed a bit too borrowed from RUSH 2112. But there was something to like there. I think if they had spent more time with the song they could have really hit a homerun. 2.8
It's a shame you guys didn't get to hear the "real" version, this one was sort of rerecorded etc. Go find the one from the 77 album, and I promise you'll think much more highly of this band. This is not a great representation of what they were in the heyday.
@@jpmp1201 P.S. I liked Manny's analysis and I think the description he was looking for is "sonic smorgasbord" ;-) Glad you both picked up on the cool bass playing too.
Unfortunately this is not their original version from the 1977 album. That version is better! I know John did not sing on the original, but still the better version.
Y'all should check out some Lemon Demon! Very fun, jammin' synth pop stuff. I'd recommend starting with something from his latest album, Spirit Phone. It's a semi-concept album about the supernatural and cryptids. Top tracks I'd suggest are Lifetime Achievement Award, Touch-Tone Telephone, Eighth Wonder and the bonus track Redesign Your Logo!
I'm giving this a 5. I was very surprised with where the song went after the beginning. I also wanted to kill all my employees this morning and this song put me in a much better mood so that may be part of the rating. I liked it a lot either way! 1. The Mars Volta - The Widow (prog rock) 2. Steam Powered Giraffe - Automatonic Electronics Harmonics (steam punk musical comedy) 4. Red Hot Chili Peppers - Wet Sand (you already knows) 5. Thomas Giles - Sleep Shake (solo project from vocalist of Between the Buried and Me) 6. Weezer - The Greastest Man That Ever Lived (a theme song for both of you :D) 7. Death Cab For Cutie - Soul Meets Body (alt rock) 8. JUSTICE - Fire (electronic duo) 9. Snarky Puppy - Shofukan (YOU'RE WELCOME) 10. Something With Numbers - Twisted (rock) back down to 10, took all the prog stuff out :D (#1 doesn't really count as prog in my opinion)
Opening guitar piece - lovely. Everything else felt a bit like musicians who want to show just how clever they are by having odd numbered time signatures and non-ionian modes. There's some cool riffs and ideas, but a collection of interesting riffs and ideas does not a good piece of music make. Would be interesting to contrast this to something like the first movement of Sibelius' Violin Concerto in D minor (a good performance here - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-iIafobNq-tU.html - the first movement goes up to about 17 minutes). Similar ideas with changes in texture, rhythm (2/2, 6/4 and 4/4) and speed. And because it's Sibelius, you've got some wonderful use of harsh, dischordant melodic passages. For example, around 10.15 to 10.35, which he uses to create tension and release as one phrase flows into the next, building into the violin bringing in the bassoons. There's a similar thing going on here in 6.40 to 6.55, bringing in the keyboards and bass, before moving into the next movement of the piece in 3/4 around 7.20. It's in things like that where it's musically interesting. But for me, it's not consistently elegant enough in how it does that, and the individual motifs and ideas aren't good enough to justify it. It's not bad, just... unrefined. 3/5.
Oh no you haven't heard the correct version. goodness gracious you have the safety in numbers album cover their but you're playing it off of an album that they remade the song with different band members 40 years later. Noooooo. Please do yourself a favor and listen to the original version off of safety in numbers. And listen to the rest of the album while you're at it. Cheers. Now I need to go listen to the real version. Lol. Cheers.
