To address the ticket issue, I figure if the market could bear what they got, and they didn't slouch, they were entitled to it as much as the Rolling Stones or Madonna are. I'm not sure if what they delivered is worth three-digit ticket prices, but I can see how a fan who paid the three digits could leave the venue and feel like it was worth it.
I don't have that kind of dough, but the DVD and CD work well enough for me.
Instrumentally, they're at the top of their game, and missteps are few; if the vocals have slipped a little, it could have been a lot worse, and most of the time they're just fine.
As for the nuts and bolts; the packaging for the CD and DVD are identical; the artwork is in psychedelic poster style, with Cream rendered as their 1960's incarnation. The double-disc CD contains 19 tracks, the DVD has 22 clips (three songs have alternate clips included), and (very) brief interviews with the trio (Baker was the most pessimistic about the chances for a reunion).
No package is perfect; there are no liner notes to speak of, and the current photos of the band have been psychedelicized (Baker is photographed from the back), so you have to watch the DVD to see what they look like. But it delivers everything I was looking for, and exceeded my skeptical expectations by a mile.
Cream: Royal Albert Hall London May 2-3-5-6 has gotta be the most vital sounding 60's reunion in well over a decade. Perhaps it is a nostalgia trip for some; but as someone who wasn't there for the first era, it surely reinforced their legend on me.
Cream will also reunite for four shows at Madison Square Garden: October 24th, 25th, 26th, 2005.
Image Shack hosts my images.
Article comments
1 - Pacze Moj
I had no idea Cream had had a reunion! So, thanks.
As for the vocals, it's a bit of a shame, I guess, but not too many people listen(ed) to Cream for the singing.
I feel fine.
2 - Lono
Great piece: thorough, without too much bias on their legend or the fact that the ticket prices are near insano.
You are right about the ticket prices, though. Folks are paying that to get close seats at U2, who come every single year. The set sounds good. I'll need to hear and see a track or two before I commit to buy, but I'd bet it's worth it.
3 - The Proprietor
The DVD certainly exceeded my expectations, however, I'm still waffling a bit about Clapton's guitar tone. True, it's probably closer to the great "woman tone" of Cream's first go-round than anything Clapton has played in decades, but for some reason it's just somehow unsatisfying to see him playing a Stratocaster through a pair of tweed Twins (there's some debate over whether he was using Twins or Cornell amps at the Albert Hall shows) instead of a Gibson through a Marshall plexi stack. Not that his tone back then was always perfect - there are plenty of reminiscences of some nights on the '68 tour when Clapton was using a Firebird and sounded positively brittle.
4 - uao
I don't have your knowledge of instruments Proprietor, so I really couldn'ttell you what guitars and amps were used without looking it up. But it's pretty interesting what kind of difference the choice in instrument and amp makes.
I did detecta slight difference in Claptone's tone, but I wasn't sure if it was the guitar or his playing.
So I just focused on the playing, which really does manage to do the band right.
Always interested in your instrument commentary; I learn something newevery time.
5 - Captain Kaos
The comment about thousand dollar ticket prices has me stumped. I bought 4 tickets (a box) for these gigs for less than $1000 the lot. Maybe people were paying those prices for tickets bought on the street on the night - or through dodgy agencies, but they were the ticket prices for the tickets from the venue. FYI the ticket prices (legal, rather than illegally bought) were �75 and �125.
As for the the DVD sound, its a pity the bass is mixed so low. As someone who was there on Tuesday night, I can assure you on the night the bass was damn loud. Its a shame that the audio on the dvd was done by EC's producer de jour Simon Climey(I just dont like the Slimey Simey sound - its far too 80's)
6 - uao
I didn't mean $1000 in the literal sense of 'exactly $1000'; I wasn't sure of the exact price, although I'll bet you anything some people did pay a thou to get in; maybe on the street.
I kind of was using it as a round number symbolic of the lack to cheap seats. Sorry if it was misleading.
As for the production of the DVD, it didn't bug me too much, but I was running the DVD through a 200-watt system with an equalizer which may have made the bass sound a little more meaty to my ears than it would on a small playback unit.
I'm glad to hear that the bass sounded good live; I can't think of a group that benefits from a good careful mix, more than these guys.
Thanks for the info, Captain Kaos.
7 - uao
Edit: I did edit the original text to change "thousand" to "three digit"
8 - Rowland Ford
I have noticed that the bass on the DVD sounds at it's best when listening through headphones.
(My opinion only though.)
"We're going wrong"is a standout for me.
9 - rohbear
Was anyone else besides me outraged at the video editing? I was shocked that such a historical event was put in the hands of a video crew with apparently no affinity for music. Shots of each musician during a solo abruptly and painfully switched to another member before the solo's conclusion. Rarely did we get a good shot of Baker's playing.
I admit I was grinning many times while watching, but it was mostly because of what my ears were receiving, not my eyes. Outstanding performance; a crime that it wasn't captured well. This is a rental DVD, rather than one to own.
10 - wanky kill-wah
Yeah, the guitar tone is different than original Cream. Early Cream had the darker Gibson/Marshall sound (and Clapton played a whole line of Gibson's during that time...like he was searching for 'the one'). He began with Gibson/Marshall in John Mayall's Bluesbreakers.
But most I've read agree it was Cornell amps he used. Check out the Clapton Custom 80.
If you look at recent pictures on the web of all the guitar greats, you'll see just about everyone of them that played the darker sounding British amps in their youth, have all switched to Fender, which is typically bright and cutting. My guess is to compensate for their hearing loss thru the years. Blackmore, Townsend, Clapton, Page, Beck...all of them can be found of late with Fender amps behind them, unlike their early days with stacks of Marshall, Hiwatt, WEM, etc.