Search - Shadow Gallery :: Legacy

I think I've put my finger on it--or in it

04/28/2001

(3 out of 5 stars)

"I've given this album a chance, but it just doesn't set my boxers on fire. I think the problem here for many people is that this CD isn't really progressive--it's more of a lengthy classical-rock album where most of the songs could have been cut down to four minutes without any decrease in quality. There aren't many wild style changes-this is straightforward, classical-tinged rock. When I saw that there was a thirty minute opus here, I was thrilled. I expected something very exciting and inventive. I was disappointed to find out "First Light" was mid-tempo throughout, with very little stiumlating music involved. Just when I thought it would rev up and get crazy, it slowed down. The choruses are bland and the solo work (guitar and keyboard) are lackluster. And the six-plus minutes of studio noise followed by an unnecessary orchestral section are a fatal shot in the foot (think gangrene). I wish Shadow Gallery could respond to this, because I'd like to know what they were thinking. It's almost painful to write this, because I loved "Tyranny" and "Carved in Stone". "Tyranny" is one of the best CD's of the decade. Why then did Shadow Gallery fall back a step? It seems like an average effort disguised as something big and special. Who knows, maybe the problem lies with the listener--there are so many brilliant prog bands out there that maybe I've come to expect too much. Obviously these guys are incredibly talented with unmapped potential. But "Legacy" harkens back to the days when they released their debut and were still finding their own sound. One last thought: what makes "Tyranny" so inspired is that the lyrics complement the music for more emotional impact. Here the lyrics don't say a thing to me. Especially "Society of the Mind"--to me, these are not deep lyrics. One or two sentences about Prozac or Ritalin doesn't constitute a profound message. Maybe an entire song exploring the impact of "Quake" and antidepressants?? Otherwise, this "pushing the buttons" doesn't elicit much of a response. It's undeveloped. Oh, oh, the end of "First Light" is playing, reminding me of Vangelis. Please, guys, keep making the fantastic music of previous albums. There are flashes of brilliance on "Legacy", but they're smothered under layers of flab."

Good, but not Tyranny

Michael Tuccio | Jamestown, NY United States | 04/15/2001

(3 out of 5 stars)

"I first heard Shadow Gallery about two years ago when I picked up Tyranny. It completely blew me away!! I was brought up listening to Rush, ELP and Yes. Over time, I've developed a love and admiration for bands like Dream Theater, Queensryche, Marillion and Fates Warning. Shadow Gallery ranks right up there. Legacy continues to show the skill of these incredible musicians, but it's not Tyranny. The instrumental sections are very long, and there's not much happening when you consider some of their older material. My personal favorites on the record are Colors, and the first ten minutes of "First Light." Also, the tremendous vocal melodies from the last record are just not here. They attempt it, but it does not have the same effect. A good record, but SG is going down, not up."

Don't believe everything you read

eveoflove | North York, Ontario Canada | 06/16/2001

(4 out of 5 stars)

"Made in USA in 2001, Serial# MA-9047-2, Playing Time 71:57I must confess I like SG; no, make that I like SG a lot!People have a right to their opinion; they also have a right to share it with others. Others have a right to agree or disagree.I found it, like most people that reviewed SG's 4th album so far, a bit disappointing, especially after a 2-year wait. IMHO, that's because of what happens after 23 minutes or so in the last track(which is why it lost 1 star).Still, SG is possibly one the freshest bands to come out in the 90's in its genre."Legacy" is perhaps somewhat more commercial than their previous albums, but still presents some challenging melodies and arrangements. If you expect the same musical talent and finesse as GWAR or PANTERA, you'll be disappointed. Sure, it's easy to compare this album with their previous efforts. But it shouldn't stop there: one should also compare with the rest of what's out there!SG has a unique blend of metal/prog/neo-classical, intertwining exhilirating musical partitions with some more subdued and, to some, sappy sections of piano/keyboard elements. That's what makes SG SG! It contains some "haunting" sonic textures."Cliffhanger 2" integrates new ideas with some older themes presented on "Cliffhanger" from CARVED IN STONE. Some tracks are more radio friendly than others, but in doesn't mean they're music prostitutes: they too have mortgages to pay.SG is in the same "category" as DREAM THEATRE's "Images And Words", QUEENSRYCHE's "Operation Mindcrime", SYMPHONY X's "V", etc. It's not the same, and it's no better nor worse: it's just in the genre: for people to truly understand whether they should give this album a try, they must know what brand of music they make. Saying "it's great!" or "it sucks!" is useless: one could say that of any album, whether it's U2, SPICE GIRLS, ENYA, MOTORHEAD, DAVID FOSTER, or GARTH BROOKS (just trying to cover as many genres as possible).On its own merits, this is IMHO a good album: perhaps not as inventive as "Carved In Stone" (still 1 of my all-time favorites) or "Tyranny", but still deserves 4 stars, at least in comparison with the bulk of what's being released these days. And that's how any album should be viewed: I should be tempted to buy a 4-star effort over a 3-star effort, no matter how it compares to the band's other own efforts. I prefer some groups over others, and that's what matters in the end: the "worst" SG album might still win over any of _______ (fill in a band you despise) albums.If you like this genre of music, it's a good one in its class..."