It’s that Ishmael guy again under yet another nom de plume, this time with another irresistible platter of UK goon wave, ska and retropunk - and so much bounce and energy you just might have to glue it to your turntable! This is my personal favorite of all his assorted projects with a sound similar to but slightly leaner than Ishmael United. Mystify your mind with titles like ‘Hell Ain’t For Heroes’, ‘Dr. Heckle And Mr. Snide’, ‘2 Years On A Camel’ and ‘Marmite Sandwiches’, all accompanied profusely with what has got to be the chintziest sounding organ ever - glorious! Eventually got released in the US on the then-visionary Star Song label. (Ken Scott – The Archivist).
Tracks:
01. All Mixed Up
02. Love So Great
03. Motex
04. Hell Ain't For Heroes
05. For What We Are About To Receive
06. Dr. Heckle + Mr Snide
07. Marksman
08. NO Coincidence
09. 2 Years On A Camel (Full Of Eastern Promise)
10. Every Circus Needs A Strongman
11. Marmite Sandwiches
12. Ferguson's Mule
13. Miss Us
14. Wot A Life
Biterate: 160 Download
I love this album. I transferred it to CD about 6 years ago along with "If You Can't Shout Saved".
ReplyDeleteGosh, I wish they'd done another Rev Counta album.
A frequent complaint towards certain genres of music, particularly by those that are not fans of those genres is that 'it all sounds the same'. On the surface, that can sound like an utterly ridiculous assertion. For example, there is great variation in heavy metal/hard rock, reggae, jazz, classical, folk, rap, rock in general, country and western, latin and other styles. But it's not a totally stupid notion because there have been artists and by extension genres that lend themselves more to a limited scope than others. That's just a fact of history and artistic development, rather than whether one form of music is intrinsically of more worth than another. I don't know why this is. Punk for example by it's very nature and the critical, contemptuous stance that so many of it's adherents took against much of the pop and rock of the day was limited in scope. I heard Johnny Rotten say that when young, hopeless people are angry, beautiful art is not their aim, their music will be loud, harsh, discordant and melody will be almost non existent. In his highly entertaining autobiography, he said he wanted the Sex Pistols' recordings to be unlistenable. For me that's so ironic because they were the most musically inventive and melodically rich of any of the punk bands that I heard. At the risk of sounding like a dunderhead, alot of punk does 'sound the same'. Of course when one says that such and such just 'sounds the same' that's not a literalism. What's meant is that the same kind of structures, instruments, tones, rhythms and harmonies are used, the melodies don't stretch and convolute, they remain 'safe' within narrow confines and variety isn't a keystone. Worship music in many of it's various guises over the last 15 or so years has felt that way to me. The guitar tones ( for example, that ubiquitous electro-acoustic guitar sound ), the limited keyboard range, the industry standard generic sounding bass, the predictable lyrics,all of those things plus other acoutrements make for a readilly identifiable sound - but too much of that and too many artists going that way and it can 'sound the same'. The blues is a prime example of a genre that falls into that pit; it took white english kids, black American jazzmen and southern oddballs {like Elvis and Jerry Lee } and Jamaican shanty town dwellers to demonstrate it's true scope as the basis for most of the popular music of the second half of the 20th century.
ReplyDeleteBut I digress !!
I like Ian Smale and what he's done in music. He's been a man with his fingers in many pies and if you want to get a stale congregation over here in the UK whipping up a storm, just hit that E minor and start singing "Father God I wonder". By the time you hit the chorus, the windows will be rattling and one becomes truly aware of christian armpits !! ( I'm jesting there - it's quite awe inspiring at times ). He's also done some well worked stuff for kids that really gets them going. And musically, this album fizzes with energy and like Ken implies, you'll be hard pressed not to be bouncing around the room at virtually every one of the songs. They're in that ska / punky / new wave fusion style that groups like the Specials, the Selector and sometimes Madness excelled in in the late 70s and early 80s. And if you make a comparison between Rev Counta ( fantastic name, by the way. It's so ridiculous that it's great ) and a group like Madness, then the Speedoze' problem becomes readilly apparent. Whereas Madness and some of their ilk presented primarilly songs and employed a style to do this, Rev Counter plays a style but employs songs to do this ! The result is that so much of the album 'sounds the same'. With maybe three exceptions, this could be one long 37 minute groove to bounce to because the style seems set in stone. What's quite frustrating is that some of the song intros are pretty different and show the band in a different vein, then comes that style and songs that rarely differ in tone, tempo, rhythm or melody ( where it's prominent ). Scores of reggae artists used to do that, have a great intro that had nothing to do with reggae and was ever so refreshing, giving the band a few seconds to stretch out and show but a snatch of what they could do before hitting the rhythm and groove. But the difference there was that most of the songs had great melodies that never left the subconscious, even where one didn't particularly like the song. In early heavy rock, although heavy instrumentation was nearly always used and even where the tricks and components rarely differed, there was tremendous scope and invention in how those tricks and components were put together and the essential presentation was of the song. The style, though crucial, was secondary. Maybe only just, but secondary nonetheless. After Dylan went electric and the Byrds were around, folkies were no longer limited to an acoustic guitar; songs were conceived and written and how they were presented came after.
I could, if I haven't already done so, bore everyone to tears with a zillion examples but I won't. Suffice it to say that if one is going to stick strictly to a style, then the songs should at least have some variety about them on an album; indeed the songs need to be sufficiently different and attractive, for then, the fact that stylistically they are located in the same zone ceases to matter. I don't feel Rev Counta manages this on the album in any way that could be called consistently. That said, 11 of the tracks were keepable, some of that 11 were pretty good, a couple more were better so I'm glad I've now got the LP. It's increased my respect for Ian Smale, anyway.
Where this album really is a winner is in it's lyrics. Though often humourous and tongue in cheek, they're brilliantly written and they underscore some serious points and thoughts that we could all do with considering from time to time.
Ken, thanks for your site. I was the photographer who took some of the images (including the cover) on this album and it was great to see them again! I'm even mentioned on the back (David Heys).
ReplyDeleteKinda like a Christian version of the Monkees...
ReplyDeleteAfter a sample from a friend I am genuinely looking forward to eating the whole meal. All very exciting. Peace and goodwill in the New Year. K.J.
ReplyDelete