Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!GAFFA.MIT.EDU!Love-Hounds-request From: Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa Subject: Re: Love-Hounds Digest Message-ID: Date: 20 Jul 90 21:19:52 GMT Sender: Love-Hounds-request@gaffa.MIT.EDU Reply-To: Love-Hounds@gaffa.MIT.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 28 Approved: love-hounds@eddie.mit.edu Really-From: John M. Relph Andrew Marvick (IED) says: > However convenient it may be for you, Richard, to accept it as "a >given" that _TSW_ is inferior to _Hounds_of_Love_, the claim--unsupported >as it is--remains profoundly unconvincing to this fan. IED does _not_ >accept the album's inferiority as a given. Perhaps not given, but if I, personally, base my judgment solely upon my emotional response to the two albums, _The Sensual World_ clearly comes up the inferior album. That's just the way I feel it. And more rationally, I don't particularly care for the sound quality of the album. I definitely would rather listen to _Hounds of Love_. I would rather listen to _The Dreaming_. I think there is no transparency to the recording. Where in _Hounds of Love_ there were layers of sound, _The Sensual World_ has an impenetrable wall. Where in _Hounds of Love_ the quiet background noises were clever and necessary, in _The Sensual World_ the noises are too planned, and almost a cliche; their cleverness is transformed into routine. Remember folks, this is merely my opinion. -- John -- If you are interested in joining an XTC mailing list, drop a line to chalkhills-request@presto.ig.com.