Shelter

I too have to disagree. Perhaps not surprisingly. As I've stated elsewhere, I think of music almost as a most cosmic experience - an artform that optimally, at least when played and performed live, extends far beyond any brand or copy write. That is, it's an integral part of the rock'n'roll tradition and history - and of music in general, as an oral and communal tradition - to perform, interpret, spread and share stuff that sometimes someone else came up with. Thus, the amount of covers don't bother me at all. I could take even more of them (especially if it meant that I had to hear fewer takes on Runnin' Down a Dream, as it were). Although - I will say that I think that sometimes they tend to stick to the same cover stuff for too long. That is, I wouldn't say that the amount of covers is what prevent them from varying their own stuff to a much more reasonable degree - one does not exclude the other, as Marion suggests we can indeed have it all, of course we can! - but the main problem TP seems to have with his own stuff, does actually transmit to the borrowd stuff as well, at least to some degree. It's all about... yeah, you guessed it, ladies and gentlemen: Rotation!! That said, I'm am torn when it comes to the live record context and the Live Anthology example MJ2LD brought up (and Pack Up The Plantation has five of them!). On the one hand, as long as a record documents a whole show, or whole tour, whatever amount of covers that were played need to be represented. Or in general, if you try to reflect the TP show experience on disc, there will need to be a few covers included. On the other hand, when compiling a collection of live cuts from the whole career and various sources, like Live Anthology, it could indeed be argued that the cause had been much better served had they cut back on the ridiculous 25% cover rate, agreed. I guess to some defgree this is what happens when 10-15 songs have stayed they same for each show in over 20 years of touring and once you have put those "core" songs on the live compilation set, you don't want to put another eight different versions of Free Fallin' spread over four discs just as filler - but still, there are obviously a lot more original gems to highlight on such a box than they went with, perhaps keeping the covers down to one or so per disc, I believe you are right. And since PUTP was suggesting an almost 33% cover rate for the Southern Accents Tour, I'd say that is over the top too.

^ Unfortunately, I think you are right. I don't know of any live version either. But in terms of fun videos.. there is also these two from the same french Houba Houba show from 1982. Bad quality, but it seems like 1982 was indeed a very good year for this band creatively speaking (although an outtake song and Wild Thing is not what I'd chose if I had so much good new original stuff going, it seems like such a filler pick too - almost as if they contractually were just allowed to play them one song from the album.. but if so.. why not the single.. hm.. this performance is odd, but great never the less). Me, I just love the vibe and sound they had in those days. Definately personal favorites, and while I might not agree to every aspect of your above review, I sure do agree - like would so many TP&TH fans - that LAD is indeed both badly underrated and the core stuff of legend. A really, really great album. Great songs (on paper - see other discussion ) and great arrangements and sounds abound! Not a bad or boring or filler note on the whole record, if you asked me. You didn't. But I just needed to support the cause, somehow. I need to hear so many of those LAD songs live ASAP! Anyway here's the Houba..

Hm.. interesting. Exciting and depressing at the same time.. since I guess it's safe to say both nurktwin and tomfest are probably spot on in their assumptions. On the one hand we all know we are reduced to customers and numbers, on the other, this may well be a sign that "All The Rest" has finally(!!) been assigned a date by WB or that Mudcrutch 2 is ready for launch. One would think that, in a just world, any info or bait would be plain in sight before you are asked to pay, if there is anything coming up. Unless the office is looking to have you guys pay twice (stranger things have happened!) - once now, asap and once when the VIP 40th Anniversary HCC membership package (with all you can eat cheese, brand cutlery, official sponsor rental cars, zippo lighters, beer openers and a chance to maybe buy tickets) will be announced within weeks. Ok, these thoughts of mine are not random at all.. How's this for random: my harvest of beetroot have failed. Bummer.

^ Quite right. I'm not here to convert you. Just answered your question really, trying to specify my view. Then a bit further yet, since you started talking of versions, reproducing the studio version and so on, which was largely beside my point. Other than that - to each their own, as always. (And you're right - discussions are often fun and interesting in their own right. I am even a firm believer in the fruitfulness of discussing things not distinctly right or wrong or even measurable in the usual sense. I am quite certain that aspects and angles of other people's taste can be both interesting and educational, that some aspects are of more in-depth importance than others and that it's sometimes way beyond just thinking something is great or not - there is always a why and how that can be compared and teach us something, even if I had no intention of tangle myself up in this right here and now and chosed to be brief - and vague, surely - rather than writing a 10.000 words essay of all the whys and hows behind my belief that I Won't Back Down is a Little(!) more stuck in Jukebox mode than American Girl, no matter how many versions they come up with. But just cause I didn't feel like making this a thesis of academic proportions, I am quite sure it can be done. I am even certain that there are loads of interesting and debatable layers of objective in the subjective, if you catch my drift, that there can be technical aspects that can be compared and conclusions that can be reached even behind the end point of "just because". Besides, I think all questions, when traced back far enough ends with a "just because" and that in general philosophy serves us better than simple numeric statistics that can easily be verified or refuted. Ok. Now I really derailed it. But I can't really make myself any more clear I'm afraid. Speaking of discussing things.. I ramble.. )

^ I guess this is a bit of a side to the topic by now, but to further ponder it: I mentioned those examples, since I think they represent the kind of songs that have more of a hard time shedding their aura, for lack of a better word, than a song like American Girl, that somehow manages to be bigger than both it's original context and even it's creators. If that makes sense. More than enough dignity here to avoid the jukebox vibe otherwise so often associated with old habits songs. Again, my point - while hard to put into words - has nothing to do with trying to or succeeding at reproducing an original recording or not. (If anything, as a general rule, I'm against such ambitions, and hence it's no wonder that I am more in favor of songs, the more they survive out of their context.) A radically reworked version of one song can feel more like a "self-cover" than a safe true-to-blueprint version of another song, depending on the makings of said material. It is, again, as I see it, somehow and somewhere inside the song as a composition how well this will work. That is not to say that Free Fallin or I Won't Back Down are not classic, even anthematic stuff. Just that they, to me, will never - regardless of version - be able to reach as far outside their context as many other and often times commercially lesser TP songs. There is, after all, a difference between hype and taste, even if too many people seem to think not. Or like this: if a mega hit deeply associated with TP perhaps gets "tied" to this context/existence inescapably - and both American Girl and I Won't Back Down would be so in this case, I don't refute this - I still think there are something, not sure what, that makes the latter a grand TP classic and the former more of a universally eternal song. Both on paper, on record and in hype, as it were - and hitting all three is a fairly rare thing even in TP land - where so many of the best songs seem to miss out on the hype and so many great recordings fail to ever get played live. And what I really meant to imply initially, when bringing American Girl up as the perhaps most famous example of timeless qualities that extend and override any recording (and live somewhere within the sheet music perhaps?) was that I think that TP has written many such songs that rarely or never get due credit or even the rarest live slots.

^ It didn't intend to dethrone your enjoyment of IANTM as the nr 1 freak thing here! In fact, I don't think what I said - at least not what I meant - is that radical. There's been lots of water under the bridges, is all. The ultra intense, cocky, yelping, somewhat dark American Girl of 1976 wouldn't be either possible or desireble to "reproduce" by a band of old timers. Thankfully the song, as composition, free from the recording details of arrangement and delivery, IMO are timeless and have been gradually reworked for the stardom era, then the mature temper and sound of latter days, without becoming a case of TP&TH covering TP&TH. Really good songs do that, they follow. Lesser songs and even more so lesser bands tend to go the jukebox way, simply trying to honor the "perfect" version or era you mention, rather than the song itself - and thus running the unavoidable risk for the artist of looking both desperate and pathetic. Or like this: Some compositions (as opposed to recordings in this here context - even though I suppose AG can be claimed for both) age better and contains more timeless qualities and possibilities than others, is all. Again, while I enjoy a song like Hometown Blues in it's original, slightly naive charm, I'm pretty sure they couldn't have brought it along, transformed it, over the years with the same smooth dignity as they have American Girl. To stretch this logic even further, one could argue to some length (and I would, if I had the time and energy, and perhaps it is not for this thread anyway) - that despite trying their best to tweak them at times, and what else can they do when playing these songs each and every night, perfectly great songs like I Won't Back Down and Free Fallin' are slightly more stuck in their respective recording, as it were, a tad more "dated" and thus a also come across a tad more like TP playing TP covers. Still good songs, of course. And that may also be a radical stand.. and certainly just me.. but.. hey.. I rest my case, please "make-it-last-all-night!!"

Ah, sweet restraint.. Not for me. Besides, martin here pretty much sums it up. Very well put. I look forward to more sweet sense in the second half ponderings of that. I could add, that to me - and I might have said this before somewhere - Something Big seems like some sort of poor man's Hotel California. Very film noir indeed, about this barely noticeble character, perhaps one of the 'shadow people' who, while Eagles 'can check out any time they like, but never can leave', is trying desperately to find his way in, to catch a break, 'working on something big'. Really, really love this song, one of those core favorites of all time.

Great, thanks for info!

Oh, I can see a lot's been going on since I've been away color coding my TP records.. Yeah.. I'm not up for a tirade here and now, but most of that is crazy talk to my ears. Hard Promises to me, is one of those albums that define TP&TH. Chilling core stuff. Excellent songwriting all over. If anything, Nightwatchman - a song that most fans seem to like a lot - is what stands out as a bit "weak" to me, in terms of songwriting, but it still fits the vibe of the album well enough and does have a great groove, so.. I have no complaints. Hard Promises not being a Torpedoes 2 is the whole point. This is where TP not only excelled at what he already been doing. This is where he prooved he's no 70s garage rock icon - he is a multi dimensional song writing genius. This is where he prooved that the future could hope for more of the Lousiana Rain type quality songwriting. That that one was no fluke. Btw - I think this album has a wonderful flow - it's just not your fastest, wildest or straighest flow - and that it is one of their best effort. I leave it with that.

I think there is something to that. More than a few times I've encountered people who badly misjudge or underrate TP&TH, simply because they think the Greatest Hits album (or rather the Jeff Lynne era singles + American Girl, Refugee and Mary Jane - or in some cases Full Moon Fever alone) tells the whole story. Which clearly is not the case. Good point. As for judging the first album (and the second.. or any album, for that matter), other than general taste I think it's important to keep track of a few dimensions.. When it was recorded and in what place (mentally, physically, band's/member's age), being key aspects. To me, the first album, and even more so the second one, are great albums in their own right - good songs, good flow, good sound, good looks abound. But I'm even more fond of these records when keeping in mind that TP&TH were youngsters, comparatively, when they were written and recorded, and when keeping in mind how other music sounded like around the same time. It's simply great stuff out of time and of it's time. It's obvious that a song like American Girl have stood the test of time very well, but the point here is that I don't think the current live version is great in the same ways or for the same reasons exactly, as is the original recording. In some ways it's not even the same song. That is, to me AG was both recorded in a way that made it great - even on the border on mind tingling - and written in a way that made it possible not only to cut it as an instant classic back then, but also for old geezers to make it evolve, to make gold out of it time and time again to this day onwards. And I think this multi layered quality, of being great both on the record and on paper, goes for many of the other songs on the first albums as well. The Wild One, Forever, Fooled Again and Luna especially.. Songs that I think it's some kind of art-crime that they don't play occasionally even nowadays. Songs that are both good as dated tracks on an old record and great timeless stuff ready to revisit and reshape at any time. If only.. And this is not an obvious thing. Sometimes it takes the world of ears to change to have a song get due credit long after the fact, other times it may have sounded good upon relese just to be outdated all too soon. Yet other times a song can be great in their time, in their context or in a certain version only, which means it stays great but don't exactly lend itself too well to be interpreted or developed the way American Girl has. And the first album, to me, has such songs too, contributing to making it an awesome and absolutely great 1976 album by a bunch of wild ones, that is a perfect listen to this day. Most notably this goes for Rockin' Around (With You) and Hometown Blues - songs that I like, that I think are fun, that were a good idea to include on that first effort, but I have no interest in hearing them do old guys' takes of. (The former because it would take a pose that I don't think would add anything of interest and the latter because it was just an immature (if fun and talanted) early attempt at what they are so much better at and suited for these days.) All in all, I think this early stuff have aged incredibly well. It sounds cool for it's time and it still sounds cool. Most of it would even hold up as songwriting to this day.

Haha, yeah, isn't it funny how even the stuff they cover so often gets picked up as a "cover cover". Inspirational stuff. Happened a lot here too. I always liked bands like Animals or Kinks, but certain titles grew on me tons thanks to TP&TH. Gotta Move, for example.. although I never figured out a good way to play it on my own..

^ I think many do, yes! On various levels. In fact, don't we all know how some gentlemen among us here at the Farm are quite knowledgeable in the field, and further more how they have lots of awesome gear on which I'm sure they are.. making some noise. And that goes for other fellow fans/musicians I've got to know over they years as well, over at the the officials and IRL and here and there. A very groovy and well equiped bunch of people are humming and strumming the TP stuff from what I can tell. As for myself, I have a decent collection of old string instruments, and while I'm not in any band at this point, I've always been trying to bring up this or that certain TP angle whenever I get the chance to play with people in some context. I see it not only as great songs to play, but also as educational for whomever gets to play it or hear it that may not be overly familiar with it since before. Mostly then I play guitars. 6 or 12. Fairly basic level, I guess.. but that can get you far in this context. Also, there could be the occasional mandolin or, on a wild day perhaps a banjo. Bass too, if circumstances forces me. When I play on my own, for pleasure or therapeutic reasons.. it can honestly end up being almost anything. I tend to move my focus over time, but it seems I often return to the ITGWO songs and Mudcrutch for some reason. Somewhere Under Heaven on an off lately.. Favorite songs I tend to try on others include The Waiting, King of the Hill, Letting You Go, Walls, Wild One, Forever, Lost Children among others.

Let Me Up you say.. right.. that's what we were supposed to discuss. Haha Derailed a bit there, but back on track. I too want to hear some more takes on this kind of underrated, yet strange album.

^^ Oh, wait. If it seemed as if I was suggesting performing the same songs each night, but in different order, that was clearly not what I was aiming at. I was talking of how a certain song could be treated to a jam one night, disappear all toghether the next night and reappear as a shorter version some other night, and so on. That way the jam session aspect, like most everything else I rant about seemingly, comes down to rotation. (Let me try to be more clear, if needed: If you rehearse.. say 60 songs, at least 10 of which that would be decided as extra suitable for an extended jam, I think that 1) all 60 songs should be rotated throughout the tour 2) a song that works well as a jam session does not have to be a jam session each time it's played and 3) the song or songs they choose to jam on could thus be different ones from night to another. That's my view on how jams work the best and how setlists work the best in general. Rotation. Next. Moving on.)

Ok then. Sounds good to me. "A little variation in a song" is as much key as a good variation of songs in a show. For sure. Perhaps we don't differ as much in this, but given that I am limited to 90 minutes to experience a show, my point just was that while I do love some inspired extentions here or there and plenty of variation, I rather get a couple more songs squeezed in - to ensure at least theoretically - the possibility of a more varied setlist, than to get a lower number of much longer songs that will nail the core of material even further into its cast. After all, each 10+ minute song means some other two or three normal length songs are denied rotation. To some degree I too understand how it's important for the musicians to know ahead of time what's gonna happen. But I wouldn't want to over stress that. If you rehearse a certain number of songs and feel like you have a handful of them that lend themselves nicely for various extensive improvisations, solos and jams, this doesn't mean it has to end up being the same song getting the same:ish treatment each night. (What happend to King on a few tours was bordeline to me, while hearing Melinda evolve over time was more of an awesome example - and it wasn't even THAT long.) I just mean that it would be awesome to go to an imaginable show and have a 12 minutes King and the next night hear how they switched it for a 8 minutes Mary Jane and a 4 minute Wasted Life and the third night perhaps they could perform just a 4 minutes King and a few shorter kick-#ss rockers in the same slots, saving the onslaught for Shadow People at some other point in the show .. Catch my drift, here? I try to be very specific. Haha.. It is all good, mind you - to a certain degree - but it can easily be overly self indulgent and static if done too much within the rather short time of 90 minutes. There are so much fun to be had within a 3 to 5 minute song, so many ways to skin a cat as it were. So, I'd say optimally (within the time frame) no more than two songs longer than 6 minutes, unless you are prepared to stay on stage for 2 or 3 hours and maintain a variety. And you welcome more than two. Ok, that doesn't matter, it's an interesting discussion no matter where the line is to be drawn between 30 fast punk rockers and 4 rock opera style opuses on a 90 minute night. True. It is a way to keep the dead horse kind of alive. Granted. As for me, suspended animation is less of my forte.

day off today. can't think of anything. I'm off. will be on again tomorrow and start wondering who did post here in my name....

How cool! This will be interesting. Thanks for info. The comparative lack of more or less official books (not to mention in-depth discography, session info and so on, for that matter, although such is usually fan generated) in the case of TP/TH always astounded me. This will be a much welcome addition and I hope it will add some fascination and interesting aspects to the story.

Good thinking! I've been pondering the possibility of writing a residency of more rare arguments at some point. Something to tickle the minds of the passionate and hoist my own spirit and legacy with one stone. It's getting so tedious beating the same old nag every day. I deserve better and so do you. So, I'm working on a masterplan of genius, believe me. I'm gonna let it all hang out. I just haven't decided on which deep thoughts to share, or what section in which to post yet... I know they keep telling me that thinking is best done in the one way and yada yada, that one dimension is all people ask for and can handle, but I know those voices are just part of the evil scheme, trying to brain wash me into stop thinking and start writing in line. So stay tuned.. I've been rehearsing a whole lot of long lost thoughts for my upcoming posts........ Yes. That is exactly it. Just that.. you seemingly suggest or encourage the "stretching out" as an almost universal remedy in your posts (I might be mistaken here, but hence my comment), while I think it's a tonic better served with severe caution for any band that are not Grateful Dead. But, oh yes, I love reworkings of songs - to do something with a song in the live setting is the whole point in performing it as I see it. Trying to duplicate the record is utter folly. But stretching things out, jamming extensively and what have you, is far from the only way to "do something", imo. But sure, I can appreciate a certain inspired looong It's Good To Be King here, a Chrystal River there.. Certainly. I don't particularly like to know if, when and how it's gonna happen though. As always, I think scripts are for rock'n'roll sceptics.. and to to script the unscripted.. well.. let's not go there. In short, there's no need to extend the same songs every night, or to extend a certain number of songs each night.. Besides, usually one thorough jam session per show is more than enough, and more than two is too much, in the same way a genuine 25 songs sets are better than over baked 15 songs set. Rule of thumb as far as jam goes. Peanut butter though, I like. Very interesting, indeed. I often stated how I could understand and also much lament that the development of things made Stan obsolete from Full Moon Fever on (in reality perhaps gradually so all the way back since 1982, or even longer if Iovine had a say). However I also often stated that I think the pendelum of development seemingly swung back (like Sonny Liston) his way again towards the late 90s, and that I could now definately imagine Stan doing a fantastic job in TP&TH of the 2000s. (Exception, of course, being Highway Companion and parts of Last DJ, where he and the record may not have been the best match.) For most of the Mojo or Hypnotic Eye kind of stuff, I think Stan's dynamic feverish style would be extremely fitting. Not necessarily better than Steve's, but different, highlighting the soul of it in a way and.. yeah.. perhaps better.. Anyway, to me it's just ironic that Stan was ousted - all personal differences aside, and I know those were key as well - due to musical differences, just to have TP&TH go back towards what could be called more of a "Stan way" within some 10 years of TP letting his Jeff-Jeffs out. Of which Stan already sat through at least 5, before he was let up.

...and a few club gigs in Sweden and/or Denmark. Thanks

Congrats! And such a nice pic with the rasta man too ! Awesome

Speaking of what the likes of Shelter has to say.. I gave my piece. But perhaps I should also add, that apart from the unusually boring example of '87 sound (being it the mix or whatever else) and the bunch of songs that don't feel quite ready to me - there is also an aspect of TP vocals that drags this album down from what could have been half grand. The singing at times seems.. squeezed, shall I say.. forced.. or even whiny.. and at the same time with a bit of singing while chewing tobacco feel to it, which add a certain slapstick vibe to the whole thing. Perhaps that is just me. I've been searching my soul to find the itchy spot, but it struck me today that that's what it is, and it doesn't help this album's well farings in my record collection, I'm afraid. (I know I once mentioned how I feel Echo suffers from a few off-key notes from TP, adding to the misery one could argue, for better or worse, but here it's not about key, it's just a.. strung.. quality that I don't particularly fancy.) You don't say? As you may know, I'm generally not a jam man myself. I prefer short, sweet and intense, if I get to choose. But I do try to strech out the endings of my posts at times, which perhaps is to your benefit then, and is something that perhaps you can tell from this totally erratic subordinate clause, for example, or this whole second part of my post if you like................

@‌martin: I'm glad you named it "thesis". As such I very much like it. And I do apreciate that "chaos" angle. I also recognize all those sorely dated, yet splendid and/or fascinating albums, of which the 80s especially - but let's not forget the 90s shall we - were so rich. Sometimes albums are great not despite being dated, but almost because. I love many of them. Generally though, at least it takes some recognition and hit value in an album's own right, in it's own time, before the whole reason for it being disregarded now is sweeped under the argument of it being our times not understanding what it was and all that.. Not always a dated album was hailed even in it's own time, is my point. Just as sometimes an album that were misunderstood simply because it was out of sync with it's own time, can later be hailed as a true and inovative classic. LMU wasn't that big of a hit then, and it isn't now, so.. Nuff of that.. just a side note really.. Thus far I'm all for your thesis. And that's why I do admit LMU(IHE) is underrated. But it's also why I did chose the word "potential". Cause to me - as true as it is that this album carries the vibe of band and dynamics to a considerable degree - something I am usually a fan of - and while it's true that it's nothing wrong with sounding like 1987 if you happen to be from 1987, and while furhtermore true that some songs are really great on paper yet a few carries great promise - it kinda stops there. In theory. Cause, in reality, this particular 1987 vibe - if ever so cool in theory, as such in fact even cooler than most things in 1987 - does still not sit quite right with me (and I'm not sure it sat more than moderately right even with 1987 itself, if years had a say in retrospect, and if we should even listen to what a bastard of a year like 1987 has to say...). The aim and method may be ok, but it falls flat on my ears. The sound being state of the art or very modern even then is not what drives the album's charm if you ask me. But it may still be ok, sure why not. The arrangements as such, the "chaos" aspect and all that may be good enough - I am prepared to say all that is great. But if so, it's still butchered by the mix and the resulting sound still doesn't impress me, as it didn't seem to have impressed 1987 that much. Still, it is when this is combined with the level or style of much of the material, I guess, that the final nail is really in for me. The total of it just fails all it's great promise. I like the concept, just as I like your thesis - I just don't like the resulting album that much. I really want to, because of some of what you say and some of the songs. But it just sounds so much better when you say it, than it does on record.

To that I would just like to add that the people who decided against going to a 1987 show on the back of their experience with the album, really pulled a blank. Suckers. The shows from around then were business as usual, rocking good and lightyears ahead of the somewhat clinical album vibe. Still, those were the days, hu? Days when a set could actually change enough from tour to tour, for people to be cautious as of what to expect. Moreover, days when a new albums worth's of material actually was expected to have a great impact on what was likely to happen on stage. Enter Full Moon Fever and soon those days were no more. Soon all the ingredients and the go to formula was arrived at. LMU material were not to be part of that and neither were much else.

I think the case can, and perhaps should be made that LMU(IHE) indeed is a somewhat overlooked, underrated album. It's pretty far from my favorites, but as is the case with some of the other "lesser favorites" we've discussed, it's not as easy as bad or good. It rather depends on what angle you take, and for me LMU have some promsing song Writing that doesn't normally get the credit deserved. The key word might be "potential". To me there is a general problem of the LMU album being more dated than the average TP record. Not to say the most dated of all TP albums. While Southern accents went over board with the "contemporary experiments" (in the context of TP recording history that is) on a some tracks, and while the Lynne era carried all the 1990:ish Jeff:iness, for better or worse, LMU doesn't go anywhere fast. That is, I find the sound to be largely.. flat(?), shiny(?) and boring(!), not to say a bit dead in a quite typical 1987 fashion. To make matters worse, the mix is far from optimal in terms of how the vocals was treated and where they ended up. It's supposed to sound contemporary and mature, I'm sure - a Here's a rock band coming of age with style, sort of thing - but to me it sound less that than anything else they recorded in the 80s up til that point. Even 1981's Hard Promises, from when they were practically still youngsters, sounds a lot more thought through and multi dimensional. Not to mention timeless - the least and last of all things that can be said about LMU.* As for the material, this is where things start to happen to this album as I see it. Or could start to happen. On the face of it, a few truly great compositions anchors this records: Jammin Me, Runaway Trains, It'll All Work Out and the title track (right - that is one forgotten gem!) are all absolutely great. Runaway Trains and the title tracks stands out as the mistreated classics here, as I see it. Then at least two, somwhat leighter weight but fairly solid tracks: The Damage You've Done, How Many More Days. All of these decent enough to ensure a really great album, had the sound and aesthetics been elsewhere. As for the rest of the tracks - well, here's the catch - I don't find one really bad song in the lot but I don't really find a really good single hit either and not more than three or four really great songs. But I do find plenty of potential. Much like Southern Accents, but from largely other reasons, LMU feels like the album that could have been. Cause, to me both the lesser of the ones mentioned and the tracks I haven't listed suffer from some kind of.. sketchy:ness.. there is something missing in the way they are composed. Tracks like My Life/Your World, A Self-Made Man and All Mixed Up don't even feel finished to me. A decent idea for an intro here, an ok verse or a nice bridge there.. but something seems to be missing to make those really good songs. (Especially absurd I find it that All Mixed Up was the advance single in the CD format. If I knew this band and had that land on my desk in 1987, I would surely have lost faith for the time being.) This vagueness in a lot of the material combined with the dated vagueness in sound makes for a less than optimal album experience as I see it. It is what it is, but the least they can do is to revive some of it's best moments in a live setting. At least three or four of these songs would have a glorious second life dressed in the much more fitting sound and attitude of the contemporary TP&TH, I'm quite sure. Finally - In the thread about Let Me Up (the song) MJ2LD wrote about "hearing Jamming Me and expecting a really good rock album and the second song is Runaway Trains!" implying disappointment. As far as the argument is that Jammin Me promises something that the rest of the disc don't deliver, I can perhaps agree slightly, but it's not what I'd call a deal breaker. Besides, speaking of disappointments.. To me Runaway Trains is among the most underrated songs in all of the TP cataloge. Sure, the sound, as much of this album, leaves a lot to be desired, but the song.. the song is an awesome piece of writing and one of the most mature and finished tracks of the bunch. Oh how such a song would have swung had it been cut during Mojo sessions or performed live in the 2000s! It's so disappointing that they never revisit songs like that, giving them a second chance to proove greatness. --- *In the light of this, the most amazing thing of all is that something that sounds like Full Moon Fever could be reached by largely the same bunch of people within two years! I am stunned every time I realize how little time elapsed between LMU and the Wilburys/Fever era. Seriously - just think about it. As much as most things are floating, this definately is where some kind of line has to be drawn in terms of TP creative eras. Whatever the touring with Dylan may have done, whatever Harrison may have told him, whatever Lynne may have showed him, TP seemed to have reached another level all of a sudden, suddenly becoming the mature heavy weight classic rock star he had the ambition to become through most of the 80s. I can hear the trace of this vision lingering extra clear in the one song that perhaps comes closes to showcase what the LMU album could've sounded like if we'd been more lucky - in Love Is A Long Road - to me it feels like a brilliant left over of sorts. But apart from that Jeff Lynne really tore TP's own type of 80s sonic confusion up most effectively and the break/development couldn't be more evident. It's an abyss, and quite dismal at that. At least that I feel prepared to thank Jeff a lot for.

To me, this never was my favorite. Sure a good song though, and certainly a better contender as a keeper than a few of the others that made it on the album. What I take to be Ben's contributions on this song I especially like. Simple, yet effective. Somehow I always thought - at least musically - it would feel the most at home on Highway Companion.