Customer Reviews

Volumes One & Two

5 star:		(24)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I had third-row tickets to see Jimi Hendrix at the Virginia Beach Dome. But of course we had to suffer through some unknown opening act first, a trio called "The Soft Machine".

After the Soft Machine got through with us, Hendrix was an anti-climax! There was Kevin Ayers on bass guitar and vocals, Mike Ratledge on organ (with some extra sounds built in-first time I'd ever heard fuzz organ before), and up front was drummer and lead singer Robert Wyatt. The organ and bass were on a higher level behind Robert, who actually led the band.

They began their set, and played without a break for something like an hour and fifteen minutes, doing smooth transitions from one song to the other so that it came off like a suite of songs. Their musicianship was astonishing! And their music was so unlike anything I'd heard before (or since), that I was absolutely blown away! They quit, and the lights came back up, and as I looked around, I saw others with their mouths hanging open and their eyes wide, just as mine were. There was a moment or two of complete silence as people gathered their wits and came back down to earth. Then a standing ovation! We were completely wrung out.

I didn't know how much of what they did was planned and how much was improvised, but when I bought their first album, I was amazed to hear that the record was a short version of the concert that I had been lucky enough to see. A true psychadelic journey!

Hendrix did the smart thing when he came on. He left the lights on, and started slow, doing an intimate version of "Red House Blues" while smoking a cigarette, giving us time to recover, and slide into his vision of reality bit by bit.

Volume two is a logical extension of volume one. A bit jazzier, a bit more refined sound-wise than volume one, which was a bit on the raw side from time to time. But it's a further look at the same musical vision, and a unique one at that. The two albums work together well as a musical unit.

This is not background music, it is not dance music. It is not music that you listen to casually. It's music that will take you on an emotional journey if you give it a chance. It's somewhat free-form, not adhering to conventional song structures or chord progressions, but they used a lot of jazz and rock elements to make a music vision that was theirs and theirs alone.

If you have time and a reasonable attention span, give the Soft Machine a chance to show it to you. But please don't do as one clueless reviewer did, and judge a body of music from just listening to a few brief clips. That's ridiculous!

After their third album this group lost me. As much as I loved their music, they moved into personal avenues of expression that I was no longer able to share. Some songs sounded to me as if they inadvertantly recorded the time they spent tuning and doing sound checks and put that on the record instead of the songs. But the first two Soft Machine albums, and much of the Third, still shine as gems, as unique today as they were in the late sixties. Nothing like it before or since.

Soft Machine were actually friends of Pink Floyd and played with them on double bills many times. Admired by Hendrix when Hendrix came to England, he had them open for him on his first headlining U.S. tour. Friends of mine who saw them reported that Hendrix was OK, but Soft Machine was amazing.
I actually heard these two albums back about 1971, after I heard Third--Third was (and is) a phenomenal lp, holding a place in the Soft Machine catalogue close to that of Ummagumma by Pink Floyd. It was the summation of both bands' early heavily experimentational periods, and the point at which both began to formularize their sound; both groups put out two more interesting albums but eventually succumbed to repetition/commercialism in 1974. (In the case of Soft Machine, they never pulled off a "Dark Side of the Moon").

Even from their early releases, the Soft Machine were virtuosic musicians in the world of rock. Ratledge's keyboard chops were as good as -- or better than -- his most accomplished contemporaries, Keith Emerson and Brian Auger, and he is the ONLY rock keyboard player who pulled off bringing the most advanced free jazz concepts (Cecil Taylor and Ornette Coleman) to rock, particularly on the first album. As a keyboard player, some of the things on both albums, such as "Hope for Happiness", "So Boot if At All", "Lullabye Letter", "Hibou, Anemone and Bear", "As Long As He Lies Perfectly Still" are incredibly complicated and innovative keyboard pieces and among the reasons I still admire Ratledge thirty years later. (Ratledge's organ sound changes quite radically from the first album to the second, probably because of the amplification they were using. On the first U.S. tour, Soft Machine used Fender Dual Showman amplifiers--pretty hefty power output, but very clean sounding. Later they switched to Marshall amps, which had more power but also more distortion; they were favorites of everone f Wyatt's drumming is as good as Keith Moon's, but he knows what he is doing. Although Kevin Ayers' bass playing on the first is not quite as proficient as Hugh Hopper's on the second, Hopper was one of the finest bass players in rock; totally unique and lightning fast, so Ayers did a creditable job (especially on "Joy of a Toy" on the first lp).

This was a staggeringly good group...great but very odd. But, as one of my friends had said once, both albums are like one "great long song." You should really hear this, if only to hear what really great musicians can do when the fetters are untied. This was such a brief and shining moment in rock history...I am delighted that it was at least captured on vinyl.

Get it...this is a piece of magic captured in a jewel box.

Gary Gomes

These albums were originally issued in the late '60's and were not extremely well known even then. But as a serious music freak of the time, I always rated these along with my top five albums of the time. So you know where I'm coming from, the others were Electric Ladyland (Hendrix), After Bathing at Baxter's (Jefferson Airplane), Live Dead and Anthem of the Sun (Grateful Dead). I consider Pet Sounds, Sgt. Pepper and Satanic Majesties to be precursors of the others and therefore in a different category. I guess they called the category "acid rock." These albums are more loosely associated than the others with that category, but I always thought the comparison a valid one.

Most aficionados know that The Jimi Hendrix Experience was the lead-up band on the Monkees' first U.S. tour, but who was the lead-up band on Hendrix' first tour? Yup, you guessed it, Soft Machine. "Thank you Noel and Mitch, and thank you, Jim, for our exposure to the crowd"...lyrics you can hear on this cd. Unfortunately, their exposure to the crowd did not earn them the adulation Hendrix received, and too bad, because they were probably as original and virtuosic, in their own way, as Hendrix was in his.

This music is a mixture of rock, jazz and electronics, but it's not like anything called "jazz fusion." I guess it's a little like very early Pink Floyd, but much more interesting, and you probably don't need to be tripping to appreciate it. There is much high energy playing on this record, there is much electronic experimentation, some lovely melodies. But somehow the sum equals much more than the parts in this music. These albums work as coherent pieces of music, rather than a collection of songs, although I wouldn't call them a "concept album" either, like Pet Sounds, et al. It is very interesting, very original, intellectually challenging and lots of fun. Kind of like Phish is supposed to be, but I like this better.

If you like the acid rock genre try this. There are no blues songs, and it's a little cerebral, but you'll like it. It still sounds fresh. "Third" is also superb-a double album that is probably even better than these (I know, I'm cheating on my top five list). After that, they got less interesting. But then, so did Hendrix.

If you want to hear how psychedelic rock and jazz will forever be tied by improvisation, if you've been looking at old Family Dog posters and want to know why why why these guys opened for Jimi Hendrix, if you like Syd Barrett but sometimes think his acid nuttiness distances you rather than brings you into the music, if you don't want to listen to Pharaoh Sanders' Karma but want the same challenge and elation, if you want to hear some of the best drumming ever laid down anywhere at anytime, if you need a warm-up before you put on that old Gong record, if all the jazz fusion you've ever heard seems either too brainy or belongs in an elevator, if you just want something really different to listen to but that rocks and you've never heard of these guys or any of the comparisons I've just thrown out...well then, have a listen.

I just got this records separately and I must say that I was very surprised, I was expecting somethig good but not outstanding from Pink Floyd's 'rival' band in the sixties.
Volume 1 is a psychedelic exploration, the good thing is that is not your typical flower album like Satanic Majesties, Sgt. Pepper or Forever Changes, it is instrumental in most part and is more jazzy than rock. Volume Two continues the evolution towards a more experimental approach musically and instrumentally, in which neither rock nor jazz or psychedelia are predominant, is just The Soft Machine Style.

I can understand some good rock fans not digesting very well this music, a reviewer compared it negatively with Jimy Hendrix; while they indeed are from the same period (they even toured together), this music is a very different league: the guitar is not the main instrument, in fact there is very few of it. There is some of rock, more of jazz, weird keyboards and piano, horns freestyling and excellent drumming; this band, they are all great performers and musicians.

The best thing is that Soft Machine were not reaching for commercial recognition, they followed completely their own artistic rules and that makes this band the very few in a million. Music like this is very rarely made nowdays, highly recommended to fans of classic rock (a la Frank Zappa, Pink Floyd, King Crimon) and fussion / jazz (Miles Davis' Bitches Brew, Jack Johnson tribute; Sun Ra) that do not think the hardcore way.

Soft Machine had a very good album - the first - and a devine one - the second. The first album reminds me a lot Syd Barret's Pink Floyd. I'm not sure, but i think that Kevin Ayers shared it with the rest of the band, but still, Robert Wyatt is the dominant member. I have a vynil copy of the album with the great song "Memories", that was the best of it. By the list of Amazon.com, the song was "dissapeared" from the disc. Am i right, or just missed it? Anyway, in my opinion, it's one of the greatest of the British "underground" music of the late 60's, and i give it 5 stars. The second album took the band (or actually, the band took us) for a long musical journey, that no one else reached before or after. "There's a music for the feet and there's a music for the head. This is a music for the head", was writen on the back of the cover, of the old vynil record, so i guess they knew, that this one won't be in "Tops of the pop"... :) I declare without hesitation: 6 stars! The perfect unit ever made by rock musicians! Sadly, since the third album the band turned to irrelevant directions and i lost my interest in "Soft Machine". Few of Wyatt solos continue the greatness of the 2nd album, but the original is the best.

My first ever concert going experience was seeing Jimi Hendrix at the Auditorium Theatre in Chicago. There were some foul utterings by various individuals about the opening act, Soft Machine. I had no idea who they were and didn't really care. It was my first concert and it was Jimi Hendrix.

I don't think I coud have been more surprised when Soft Machine hit the stage. It was simply the most amazing thing I had ever seen. These guys played with total impunity to any of the norms of pop music. Calling them intense would be a drastic understatement. I was impressed by the level of musicianship throughout. This was not a garage band. That they strung their entire set together with no breaks in between songs was simply unheard of. Mike Ratledge's keyboard playing was frantic and Robert Wyatt's drumming was just as wild. Seeing these guys play a set was like having an hour long heart attack. I could see why some people might not like them. It was almost too much to take. Add on to that the fact that they weren't playing pop style music could test almost anyone's limits. This was some bizzare mixture of rock, jazz and psychedelia.

I immediately bought this album and wore it out. It stood up under repeated listenings. There alwayse seemed to be something new emerging from the speakers.

After I bought it a second time I wore it out again. I finally picked it up on CD and have been a happy camper ever since. Almost 40 years after it's initial release it still sounds great to me. The production might be a bit goofy at times but its relentless barage of crazy inventiveness is (in my book) still unsurpassed by anyone.

in rock, it WAS Soft Machine (their piece Dada Was Here from Volume 2, most likely was no accident) though "supreme egoism" is replaced rather by extreme egocentrism (which is not unusual in rock and varies only by level) and total disregard for the audience (at least it applies to their first two records). In case of Soft Machine, it resulted in absolute artistic freedom, they don't strive for perfection in the usual sense of it, some of the things they do appear to be unfinished, but in fact this is their forte. Take the titles of their albums: Volume1, Volume 2, Third, Fourth, 5, 6... it's not a display of originality, it's why-waste-time-on-inventing-a-fancy-title-when-there-are-more-important-things-to-do. Same with their music: it may seem to be raw and incomplete in spots, but it's more like waste-no-time. It sounds very improvisational, but even if it's not, they play it that way. Unquestionably excellent musicians, they sandwich pretty complex compositions between some seemingly simple ones as though they just laugh at you, but the point is how they play it. Besides, what critics called "good humor" is rather jest. So at first listen, reaction may be quite negative, especially after following a repetitive line in We Did It Again for a few minutes. Definitely, it requires a few tries to start making sense out of it and don't take it personally, their approach could be described as let's-play-and-see-what-happens, they play it for themselves and if you like it you can go along. Volume 1 is very good and highly recommended.

Volume 2 is an excellent jazz-rock record, in my view better than Volume 1, and the interesting part is that it can't be split into separate tracks, it's a whole thing, must be heard in its entirety. Plenty of jest as in Volume 1. It starts with jest, both Pataphysical Introduction and British Alphabet (how about the alphabet in reverse in Part II) are just that but they are great and fun. Hibou Anemone and Bear is great, and so is Dada (do they really sing in Italian or it's another joke?) and He Lies Perfectly Still though the latter two are more like songs. Fire Engine is an avant-garde crap (too much of avant-garde in Out Of Tunes too) but it doesn't spoil the feast and is followed by Pig (great), Orange Skin (excellent, take the repeating two notes as the rhythm section and listen to the real action behind it), Door Opens (brilliant) and 10.30 (what a mix of everything!). It needs a few listens to get to it but when you're through with it you will love them. Volume 2 is their most free-spirited record.

it was 1968 or 69, hard to remember after so many years...it was hendrix's 1st. concert in chicago...opening was the soft machine.
wyatt came out wearing swimming trunks & a top hat... i knew i was in for something different. hendrix was good, but he was tired
(or stoned?)...but the soft machine was FANTASTIC!! the music never stopped & there was an incredible light show that looked like green worms crawling in a giant petrie dish.....about 6 months later, i went to see hendrix's 2nd. chicago concert, but also to see the soft machine...at one point in the performance,
the organist, mike ratledge, while playing a lead, hit a single note on his organ that was intense, loud & irritating...he held this note for 5 seconds...10 seconds....i saw people getting up & leaving!! twenty.....more leaving!!....30 seconds....i wondered how long I could handle it!... & finally he resumed his lead.
they were something else!
if you like soft machine I & II, check out volta do mar, at the speed of light or day,...so much like the old soft machine...

Soft Machine was one of the most original bands in an era when originals were popping up everywhere. A bass, organ, and drums trio forsaking the almighty electric guitar was only the beginning of their uniqueness that would continue for years to come regardless of an ever changing line-up. Original drummer Robert Wyatt(prior to his tragic accident and paralysis) was the greatest, most musical skinsman of his time, and he could do lead vocals on top of it.At times, Mike Ratledge would be playing the actual rhythm with Wyatt on top as a soloist. Blows away ELP(same instrumentaion), though very different musically, pop avante/jazz as opposed to classically influenced prog, all done with a sense of humor in the lyrics (the only two Softs albums that had any). Recommended for King Crimson fans who enjoyed the Giles, Giles & Fripp material, only this is way more out there musically. Ahead of it's time, maybe ahead of any time.