Sea Shanties vs Deep Purple In Rock

I'm guessing that everyone who has heard Sea Shanties voted for it (all 10 of us).

Sea Shanties but I really prefer the next one - the self-titled High Tide.  That MFer really rips.

Well the above quote is apt... I now have a copy of SEa shanties to find out what the fuss is / was all about.

Vocally The High Tide guitarist is v.v.v.v. close to Jim. Not so bad considering how badl greta leadguiatrist are at singing. He doesn't spend too much time on vocals.

Equally he did not spend much time or money on production either. Slightly unfair as High Tide were recording their debut while In Rock is Purple's 5th but the comparison is understood as they are both contempoarry heavy rock releases.

Guitar wise the Sea Shanties is most definietly of the heavy prog variety - the proximity to the keyboard driven Atomic Rooster is apt - so I've read and heard 9thinking of Death Walks Behind You.).

Both albums are blessed with exttra tracks. There is a superb melodic minor scale in theGrereat Universal Protection Racket (didn't make the LP for space reasons). This riff is the basis of the climax of Camels The Snow Goose and Focus' Eruption (several times here...)

Fripp once said that violin is not an instrument of heavy metal (referring to David Cross getting sidelined as KC played in 74...) but Simon House goes some way at disproving RF. Having said that the room of expression Lord finds keyboard wise will out do guitar and violin.

I think Purple might've been the more refined all round act. Even though both bands had spent a lot of time touring their material the Purple's production is easier (dense ala LZ 2) while SEa Shanties is well played but a tad, um, agricultural sound wise. Remastering will probably make it sound completely different - not sure if that would work in it's favour or not.

The extra material on Sea Sahnties shows considerable sophistication (Purple's are B sides and contempoary non album tracks (quite vaild for inclusion) while High Tide seem to be riding a crest of improvement in what is quite daringly mainly instrumental writing.

I'd recommend both albums but as this is the only High Tide I've heard then it may be this is the only one (maybe from the recommendations the second one which is apparently stronger in melody but less robust in heavy rock. I'd have to hear to check but the Jim vocals... while good as such seem to show a need for an original singer. Purple have Ian Gillan (still...)

Heh, maybe High Tide should have got Rod Evans (save UK Immigration sending High Tides US members packing).

Weighed up thought and I'd have to say In Rock shades it (vocals, production - violin really should not drown out bass 'n' drums...), slightly more memorable tunes, instrumental variety). With guitar playing, heavy rock approach, progressive rock adventurist ideals it's too close to call. 4 1/2 - 3 1/2 (better sound and 4 1/2 to 4.)

High Tide remind me of a raw heavy band playing in pubs, a lot of darkness, volume, booze, and heavy rock atmosphere whie Purple In Rock is more the stadium thing.

I'd recommend High Tide's Sea Shanties as an example of heavy keyboardless prog (not common) to have in the collection. Sits well with the Andromeda, Atomic Rooster examples - if one is not really needing or wanting a complete catalogue acquisition (not even Purple really here).

Wonder about a comparison between Sea Shanties and the first Sabbath album?

Child in Time

Both, no vote

A remastered Sea Shanties would be the greatest thing ever.

I'll go with Sea Shanties too - a "shade"over the Deep Purple ...

In Rock!

Sea Shanties!

 

Edited by Svetonio - December 13 2010 at 05:48