Reviews (page 7 of 8)
I was excited to see 6 songs and 36 minutes. My excitement disappeared seeing the tile track was over 16 mins. I did not enjoy this one.
Quite samey throughout. I probably wouldn't listen to it again but I didn't hate it.
More freakin psychedelia. Great. The title track is all you need to listen to, and not even this self-indulgent 17 minute version of it. One song does not an album make, even if it is nearly half of the album’s total runtime. Lame.
There're a lot of people in reviews saying that there's only one good song on this album, but TBH even that feels a bit generous; the title track kind of plods along. A very low two; borderline one.
Aside from “In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida” it was mostly forgettable, but listenable. Didn’t really gain anything out of it. Toss away record.
Probably cool in the 60’s, but to me it’s just boring dad rock. Inagoddadavida is about 16 minutes too long.
A massive hit that goes hard in an album that is forgettable.
That one song was iconic for being long
Just dull
Not my thing sort of rock
The songs weren’t good and the jam didn’t really hold my attention. Seriously, cut out the drum solo. No one needs to hear a drum solo on that. 2 stars just for reminding me about the Simpsons gag where this song comes up.
Plain old boring music.
This album is so lovesick it's kind of overbearing. This sort of super psychedelic, organ heavy music about love is very common and I'm not about to say that Iron Butterfly are reinventing the wheel, it's more just some cool ideas and textures but anything beyond that is just not really there for me. It's just fine but nothing to write home about
jag försökte. men jag tycker inte att det har åldrats med någon vidare värdighet.
Honestly I'm pretty meh on this one. In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida as a standalone track is a psychedelic rock staple that has been re-interpreted and sampled across different genres. However, I don't really feel like I needed the first side of this album in my life. Title track jams, but as an album review this scores low for me. high 2/ 5.
I listened to this while I played video games with my 7 year old son. That’s about peak experience for this album. It’s not bad classic rock, but it’s far from revolutionary. Lyrics are mid at best, the musicians can play alright which is their saving grace. The whole mythology is built around some poorly scribbled lyrics that became a 17 minute psychedelic jam. Okay.
Don't know if I've ever listened to an album that rhymed one word with the same word more. Has nothing going for it other than one great bassline. Lucky not to be a 1 tbh.
Promised more than it delivered.
They just sound like a pound shop Doors to me. The vocalist and the lyrics are truly painful, the organ not a patch on Manzarek (who he’s clearly mimicking in some places). The rest of the band have some moments, but one catchy riff and a heavy rock out on a painfully long song (with a naff untechnical drum solo) does not an album rescue. There’s so much better psych rock out there than this.
Pre-listening thoughts: I’m a few behind while rating this but today’s is Blur and I’m really excited for it. But I told myself before I can listen to Blur I have to listen to this one and Bruce Springsteen (have been putting these off bc I don’t think I’ll enjoy them). Wahhhhhh Post/during listening thoughts: this is not as bad as I was expecting it to be. It’s unbelievably mid psychedelic rock but I’ve heard MUCH worse from this list in terms of psychedelic rock so thank god it’s decent. The guys singing voice isn’t my fav (he’s weirdly Pearl Jam-esque? I don’t like it). The title track doesn’t need to be 17 mins. Hate psychedelic rock for pulling shit like this. Swinging between 2 and 3 stars with this one bc overall, it’s decent but idk. 4.5/10 DID I NEED TO HEAR THIS BEFORE I DIE: no Fav tracks: Flowers and Beads Least fav tracks: My Mirage, the monstrous title track
Another one I remember from my parents' vinyl stash growing up. The vocalist sounds like the poor man's Tom Jones. Musically it's ok, but feels like they're trying for somewhere between The Doors and Zappa and not quite getting there. The title track still cracks me up every time.
Sorta lost its vibe, it was OK, but not what I remembered, I suppose if I was tripping….
Dreary is, I think, the best one-word description. Self-indulgent. Even the title track is a slog, with a weak drum solo and, strangely, an appearance of God Rest ye Merry Gentlemen during the organ solo.
First half was a string of forgettable organ-based psych rock and the only memorable thing on offer is the epic title track on side b. Memorable doesn’t necessarily equal ‘good’ though. It’s memorable for being very long and having a catchy riff. I much preferred the Incredible Bongo Band’s version of it though.
Loooooonnnnnggggg last track.
2 - just some old music that doesn't really appeal to me in style or delivery
This album is just a vehicle for their magnum opus, In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, with a few basic trippy songs filling in the other 18 minutes of this album. And that magnum opus was supposed to be called “In the Garden of Eden” but the singer was so hammered he slurred the lyrics and here we are today. Can we please bring back the 36 minute album? That’s the best thing about it.
If I wanted to listen to the doors I would just do that. The organ killed it for me. Not on replay for me.
Listening to this album: "Just get to "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida" already! Listening to "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida:" Just end already.
Wasn’t very interesting to me, pretty repetitive sound-wise. I thought I would enjoy this more than I did, and would choose other bands/albums of the era before this. Not real inspiring
60's psych rock with mumbling lyrics, and a 17 minute rambling track to close the album with. there I've just saved you 39 minutes
Found this more interesting from a music historical perspective than as a listening experience that I am planning to revisit any time soon. Here you've got a band only a couple of years after the Beatles doing something that with one foot is still firmly in the sixties 'beat' music tradition (those neat little back up vocals for instance) but with the other is exploring wilder, more psychedelic pastures. You can hear them moving towards, say, Pink Floyd and Deep Purple (via the Doors). As an album it too uneven for me and the songs aren't particularly memorable either.
Iconic song, rest of the album is not my taste.
Omg, this bored me. Yes, even the epic title track. Which I must have heard before (because Manhunter) but obviously did not make much of an impression. And to think this was the best selling album of the year in the US. Wild
This album is a mashup of '60s contemporary influences - The Beatlesesque harmonies, The Doors-y keyboards, and the riff-heavy songs structures of Cream. Unfortunately, the whole is less than the sum of its parts. The various elements of each song seem to clash rather than cohere, making the listening experience unintentionally uncomfortable. For example, the track "Termination" begins with an interesting groove but somehow ends up with almost medieval melodies sparring with child-like keyboard noodling before fading away inexplicably, leaving the listener thoroughly unsatisfied. Finally, the title track is wholly unworthy of being 17 minutes long given that it consists of a single riff and some out of place solos. The album does earn an extra star for a nice bass tone.
There was some cool stuff here, kind of doors-esque in some songs. Not a lot I'll come back too but a cool album, in-a-gadda-da-vida is interesting
2.5 stars. The title track has a catchy riff and cool structure but is ridiculously long (17 mins). Other than that it's just some forgettable psychedelic prog rock.
If they try to tell you that side A is worth while, they are lying.
Meh, not enough rock and roll for me tbf
Would not be in any way worried if I never heard this album or any track off it ever again.
meh…
i can’t bring myself to sit through this
Unfortunately this has not aged well, but I enjoyed it back in the day
This is just typical synth
Bloviated organ noodlings with terrible vocals. The Simpsons did it better.
Has its moments, but it can drift off when listening to it. It might feel boring as it is nothing new now and having a 17-minute song, can feel too much! But it did give us the great Simpsons line "this sounds like rock and or roll" So that has to count for something. It's not a bad album, its an okay album, and In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida is a very good song, just can feel too long at times
Suppose the clue was in the band name: way less heavy than I anticipated. Other than the eponymous title track (which largely kicks ass but is preposterously long) I didn't much care for it. Too noodley.
Title track is a classic riffy jam. I could take or leave the rest of the album.
Groovy baby, good song. But by jove, do these records sound awful
2/5
Heard the title track dozens of times but I don't recall ever hearing another song by these guys. After listening, it's obvious why that is. First cut sounds a lot like the Doors.
I couldn’t get past thinking about the Simpsons bit where they play In-a-gadda-da-vida in church and it lasts hours. The 60’s were wild. I did like Flowers and Beads.
One riff. Seventeen minutes. This is what happens when no one says ‘that’s enough
Between Iron Butterfly and The Doors, who ripped off who? The answer? Who cares.
The title track is a brilliant song, but the rest is very forgettable 2/5
How the hell did this sell 30mil copies?!?!
Extra star for the Simpson’s episode where Bart gets everyone to sing this in church
Eh? LKinda generic for its genre and time, there's like 50 other albums just like it
Psychedelics boring.
One decent song that is about 15 minutes too long and I can't even remember the others
The album should have just been the last song to be honest.
Just a little too much psych!
I’m somewhat familiar with the song “In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida,” but I don’t think I’ve ever listened to it in its entirety, and I’ve definitely never heard any other Iron Butterfly songs. However, I’m pretty sure I have realistic expectation of this album heading into it. What better way to spend a Sunday afternoon that tripping audio balls? This album was pretty much what I expected it to be in terms of its sound: heavy organ usage and heavily distorted guitars. The first side of the album was pretty unremarkable. The arrangements were decent, and I enjoyed some of the vocal techniques utilized on “Flowers and Beads,” but lyrically, these songs were all just a bunch of sixties ‘hey girl, I love you’ songs, which I found to be pretty bland. On top of that, calling any female ‘girl’ these days tends to come with heavy implications that she’s underage, so… yeah, that’s not my favorite thing to hear. As for the title track, well, if you’re going to write a seventeen-minute-long song that’s feels like doing drugs, that’s certainly how you do it. The opening and closing organ riff are absolute perfection, and the fuzzy guitar balances it out really well. The somewhat mumbled vocals are great too, and help to create the dark and trippy atmosphere of the song. Can you imagine going over to a friend’s house, and they tell you there’s a song you have to hear, and they throw on “In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida” for you? I imagine the awkwardness in that room would be so present, that you could cut it with a knife. It’s still a great song, but that’s not a journey I’m itching to go on several times. I can appreciate the influence and importance of this album, but for me, the title track is easily the main attraction. Still, the album as a whole isn’t that impressive to me, and that’s why it’s getting a lower rating.
A one hit wonder album to me. The organ was grating on most tracks. Maybe we are spoiled by all the remasters.
Not a lot going on here
To me this is just boring and uninspired rock that goes on and on.
Not really a fan of this one at all. I found pretty much every single before the title track to be almost completely unremarkable. The left and right channel mixing made them almost a chore to listen to as, at some points, it truly felt like each instrument was playing independently and I just happened to be hearing them at the same time as opposed to them being played together as a part of the song. The title track did next to nothing for me too. Never grabbed my attention at all but that’s just me. Don’t really have a reason for it. So yeah not really getting this one at all. Comes off as unremarkable to me although I can see why the title track would be considered pretty important. Never despised it or anything but never really felt like I was listening to anything worthwhile either.
This isn't awful and I appreciate the sound but it isn't great.
Very 1960s rock. Mostly all forgettable except the title track. I really like the title track. I'll probably try and listen to it more often. I think I have it on Vinyl. Good Simpsons bit too.
Honestly I think this album just made me laugh at the fact that this song was a one hit wonder and I genuinely can’t tell why. I feel like I just had this album on in the background and it just went on with me. It was alright but nothing special.
Not gonna lie. If it wasn't for that song, there's not much going on here, and that song is probably about 14 minutes too long. It's like the concert version of your favourite song, where everyone gets a solo, and the singer goes off stage for a glass of water before the big finale. I know it outsold everything in the world or something, but there really couldn't have been much competition. Two really long and drawn out stars.
It was okay, title track is a classic of course
Not very good unfortunately.
This would not be on the list if it weren’t for the title track.
Not what I expected from the album art work although that probably says more about me than them. A bit Door-sy.
It’s an ok psychedelic album. Wouldn’t be notable if it was for the last track
I don't even really like the one song this is famous for.
What’s to say that hasn’t been said in the last 56 years about this album? It’s a period piece. All of it. Then thereis the magnum opus at just over 17 minutes. An eternity when compared to the average song today. It’s a dirge. A minor chord dirge, but it’s the dirge we have and somehow we love it. It’s like that old crispy uncle who repeats the same old stories over and over and over, but he still gets invited to all the family events. We tolerate him like we tolerate In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida.
Quaint artifact. The title track is pretty catchy, though it doesn't warrant 18 minutes. The bass player is pretty dope.
40/100 I know about this album's influence. But I can't help but think "There is other bands doing this wayy better" on every song. Also, just because a song is 15 minutes plus in length does not make it great. In this case, I believe it greatly hurts a record that was somewhat engaging, to have a 5 minute drum solo
Historically significant for some reason! Heavy psychedelia. Side A is dull. And the lead title track is just a jam with a drum solo.
It is obvious that the title track "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida" had a tremendous impact on the future development of hard rock/heavy metal. But the rest of this album is, to be kind, less than mediocre. Abysmal production, lyrics not even worth mentioning, and the music is just acceptable but is smashed to pieces by the poor production. Could have been a 4-star if the first side was anywhere near the level of the second side.
PLEASE TAKE MY HAAHHHANNNNDDD
The backing band is nice but the songwriting and vocals leave something to be desired.
This is mostly terrible, but obviously notable for the ridiculous title track. Never want to listen to this again, but not angry that I did.
It really does show that half of this album was recorded while high as a kite on LSD, doesn't it? All its aimless doodling and running in structural circles do come off as a working of people not quite in tune with the passing of time.
i did not like rhis album
In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida is the only one i knew before. In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida is the only one i know now. one hit wonder album. rest is not bad but forgettable
The title track is a classic of course, but Ingle’s quavering vocal style doesn’t do it for me.
Overall, I thought it was okay, but not very exciting. It was rather certain parts of songs that I liked, and I particularly liked the end of Termination.
Cringy lyrics and endless organ noodling, what's not to love. Some riffs are admittedly pretty good, but I'll be moving on. Thanks, I. Ron.
just didn't like it.
Dit is toch een beetje een doorsnee band die je niet per se opzoekt, maar toevallig even meepakt in de kroeg. Wat doet het in de lijst? We moeten het van het laatste nummer nummer hebben schijnt. Dat mag dan wel heel wat zijn. Kom maar door dan. En eerlijk is eerlijk, als ik dit toevallig mee zou pakken in de kroeg en het instrumentale gedeelte begint, zou ik echt wel even mijn gesprek pauzeren en mijn aandacht op de band richten. Al duurt het nummer wel lang zeg. Ze doorbreken het wel met een wat vager gedeelte. Maar dat zou juist het moment zijn dat ik mijn gesprek weer voort zou zetten. Al met al pakt het album enkele minuten mijn aandacht. Dat is echt ondermaats.
Best Song: In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida. An encapsulation of an era, with a super iconic sound. This is the level of cool that they tried and failed to reach in the first 5 tracks in the album. Sadly, even it succumbs to the prog-rock monster of bloating a cool idea, spreading what was interesting to cover an unnecessarily large area. Worst Song: My Mirage. The light, warbly vocals were not doing it for me. Overall: Functionally two albums: a boring and uneventful first half, full of scattered, forgetful tracks, and then In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida. In my opinion, there is absolutely no reason to listen to the album in its entirety. Go ahead and skip to the last track.
I dunno, for some reason this just sounds dated to me, as theoretically this is something I thought I would enjoy. Hate the vocals as well. only saving grace is some of the riffs in here
Dust off your bongos, and settle down with a niiice doobie fir this album…
certainly didnt have a bad time with this but dont see myself coming back to it anytime soon...
Feels derivative compared to other bands like the Doors and other acid rock and psychedelic bands. The single is ponderous and actually preferred their other songs on the album
Funny how you can tell right away what decade music is from. This is very 60s. I don't think I've ever heard Iron Butterfly. Interesting so far. Nothing earth shattering. But I do like the sound. OH! the song by the same name of the album.In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida I've heard before.
It is obviously on this list for a reason but that reason is lost on me. Didn’t hate it but won’t be reaching for it any time soon.
Sub-standard doors off their hinges. Probably a blast live.
This album was not great. The only song I really enjoyed was the titular song, even though it was quite long. Had some very nice riffs in it. 2.5
It was all right
Let's be real: we're all here for the B-side. The 17-minute long psych rock epic has been heralded for it's biblical length and contributions to the heavy metal genre. The side A songs pale in comparison, it's not even worth mentioning them; they're skippable '60s rock slop. Ambiance-setting organs, primitive drum solos, and crushing guitar solos are what make In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida the legend that it is. And it feels like an amateur performance that they couldn't be bothered to plan better. The Simpsons made a gag out of it where the church organist is tricked into playing the whole 17-minute song, but they neglected to account for the aimless drum solo that account for a good 5 minutes of this song. The only thing In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida has going for itself is the memorable hook, which is likely what most people remember it for. That, and the fact that it's 17 minutes long. My theory is that people misremember the song as 17 minutes of that riff being interpolated in different ways, so it must be good. No, it's just okay. I don't think it deserves nearly as much praise. Even considering it's legacy and influence, I am terribly underwhelmed.
I really wanted to like this. But it didn't have the range I was looking for. The obvious all-timers hold up, but the songs outside of that didn't really grab me.
Meh.
It really catches you while it’s in a rough spot. The mix is strange, the playing feels out of sync, and it starts out with a pretty obvious rip-off of the “Light My Fire” keyboard riff. You just know these guys are C+ musicians at best. When the vocals came in, I immediately went, “Oof, that’s a choice for this dude to sing.” And so, Side A continues on as a messy, mediocre, forgettable slog. This isn't atypical for particular this era of psychedelic 🌼Flower Power🌸 drivel, but this is notably bad. I do get how the fuzz guitars and organ sounds can add a little ✨something something✨, but it’s not done well enough to even feel influential. In fact, I’m hearing a lot of flubbed notes throughout. In many ways, this is the quintessential $1 record, or worse, one thrown into the basement stacks, meant to be forgotten forever. And then the title track comes on. And like, it doesn’t need to be 17 minutes long, but it works. Despite the musicians behind it, it works. It doesn’t save this album or validate it or elevate it to the status of an essential piece of art to listen to before you die, but it saves it from an eternity of basement mildew by giving it something worthwhile. Unfortunately it’s not worthwhile enough to make it worth anything close to legitimate praise.
That's 36 minutes of my life I won't get back.
2 stars for the title track, but there’s not much else worth listening to here.
some of the guitar work is nice but thats about it
I've always hated the 60s organ sound in rock. I don't know who came up with it or why more than just that one guy thought it was a good idea. I feel like the only reason anyone listens to this record is because of the last song; it's kind of like a rite of passage I guess. It's an ok 17 minute jam but still not as good as any of the other sort of jam bands of that era. The rest of the album is pretty generic 60s psychedelic pop rock that's not really worth the time to listen to again. I think this record is on this list simply because of the title track and it sort of being novel at the time it was released. Giving this one a 2.5 rounded to 2 because of the damn organ.
Apart from the gimmick of the 17 minute track (which does have a killer hook) there's not much here. Iron Butterfly in all its names is a mid tier act from a wave of physchodelic rock music. I get their success but don't think it's endearing. I don't hate it but I can't give out half stars so here's the 2.
There's a Taylor Swift song where she sings the lyric "Now that we don't talk I don't have to pretend I like acid rock." I imagine this was one of the records she tolerated, because that's how I felt. Highlights: realizing The Doors would be a great palate cleanser after this
The novelty is long gone.
Run of the mill psych rock, only track worth a damn is the title track, too bad you have to get thru everything else for it.
Ei jääny mieleen joku vartin mittanen biisi, joka toimi on/off
2.5 the title track was the only song that stuck with me
Boring and tedious. Really didn't enjoy this but it wasn't the worst thing ever.
The title track is good, but the rest is just kinda fine. A lot like the Doors. The recording on this also does not sound great. The drum and organs solos on In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida are cool.
Sounds like The Doors sometimes
Like them.
Most of it sounds like Herman’s Hermits covering The Doors. In a Gadda Da Vida is the standout, and that’s a Poundland Sunshine of Your Love. Not sure how this made the list.
Not very good.
This really didn’t age well. Plus it’s not very good.
Side A - low point, far too much organ. Side B - high point 17 minutes of sludgy stoner pre-metal.
In the Garden Of Eden by I.Ron Butterfly is basically only famous for the title track, which is almost half of the album and, despite it being a 36 minute album, a single 17 minute track makes it feel like it lasts longer :D I didn't really enjoy the psychedelic sound of the first 4 songs, I expect you had to...be there to get the most out of those. Are You Happy is more my think, and then the first 6 of 17 minutes are good before it loses its way with a pair of poor drum solos, some generic church organ, and a repetition of what we had at the start. Keep it at 6 minutes and it works, but you don't get the gimmicky factor that made it what it is. Plus we got a GOAT Simpsons moment out of it, so I'll give it a solid 2.
Definitely benefits from coming straight after that dire Syd Barrett album, but it's still pretty straight down the line psychedelia proto-prog (can psychedelia be straight down the line?), with most of the bad of this kind of music and not a lot of the good. 2/5.
Couldn’t stay interested. Sounded like one big song lol
The only decent song on here is 16 fucking minutes long. You could’ve told me this was a Cliff Richard album and I wouldn’t have questioned it.
Wow is that song long.
Oof. Elevator music salvaged by one kick-ass riff that will be stuck in my head for a week.
Classic Album apparently, best selling of 1969 says Wiki. Afraid as usual I can't enjoy progressive rock, songs to long and repetitive. Can listen to minimal music for hours and hours but prog rock freaks me out. 2 stars for selling so many albums.
Personal results of this daily listening list: - developing a genuine aversion for classic rock - coming to the conclusion that the drugs in the 60’s must’ve HIT to make this type of music culturally enjoyable
Although the main song is super long, thankfully the rest of the album is not, in-a-gadda itself, I really like the last few minutes, really gets going, but as an overall album, less fussed
More 60's psychedelia. Please make it stop.
Three minutes of coolness, stretched to 17 with a bunch of other acid rock keyboards added.
In the Garden of Eden - 1968 Sunshine of your Love - 1967 At least I get The Simpsons reference now
I didn't hate this but I didn't really like it either
Hahaha I never noticed the riffing on God Rest You Merry, Gentlemen around 11:20 of the title track.
all the songs sound the same to me
Starting to formulate the opinion that it's incredibly difficult to make good psych rock. It's either fantastic and very impressive, or horrendous - no in-between. Spoiler alert, this didn't hit the mark but hey, at least it was a short listen. 4/10.
One of those albums where they, the The Beatles did on many an occasion, took stereo sound to extreme lengths, where nearly every instrument is placed in the far reaches of your aural capacity, except the bass that just grooves along somewhere near the middle. I've never been a fan of 60s music that has, say, the drums only in one earphone (for example) and the wah-wah infused guitar in the other, its so disorientating, and annoying of you need to take one earphone out to talk to someone quickly during one of the many drum solos. Anyway, this is the longest 33 minute album I've ever listened to, mainly because the 17 minute title song *never ends*... Such a drag. And it's not even that good outside the god tier riff. Hell, Nas got more use out of that riff as a sample for "Hip Hop Is Dead" in 2006 and that only uses like 6 seconds of it. I'm yet to 1 star anything (and I've already gotten "Kollaps" by Einstürzende Neubauten), but this came *really* close, it's like 1.5 stars on a good day.
Some real 60s shit, I think I needed to be in LSD. The first 5 songs are a complete waste of time, but in-a-Gadda is a classic though so I’ll round to 2 stars.
“Hey Marge, remember when we used to make out to this hymn??”
2.4
I have a general distaste for this style of psych-rock for sure, but this one really grated - annoying vocals, songs either too meandering or not developed enough, only a few choice lyrics. More like Iron Butt. One and a half. Fave track: Termination
I actually sat through the whole thing. Sometimes 20 minute trippy and sprawling rock songs are exactly my kind of thing (see Dogs or Echoes) and I was hoping this would be the case. Unfortunately, this fell short for me. It got boring and tedious. I could tell from early on with the first few tracks the organ sounds would get annoying and I couldn't engage much with the rhythms or vocals. One and a half. Fave track: Flowers and Beads
album is carried by the title track but it did not need to be 17 floppin minutes
A fairly mundane side 1 is saved by a 17 minute semi-banger on side 2. Rating: 2/5 Playlist track: Most Anything You Want Date listened: 09/11/23
I could get hints of what it influenced but in and of itself it didn't do much for me, bit slow and ploddy, not a fan of the production either
Not my thing at all
Super weird to see super early butt rock. Also love the hard rock use of guitar without distortion. Really enjoyed Are You Happy but In-A-Giddy-Da-Vida had way to much vocal fry for my liking. Too much butt rock. Added one, skipped one, probably won’t listen to again.
It's Ok I suppose. Really more of an artifact of its time than anything else but nice to hear side 'A' even if it's a bit fluffy. The inescapable 17 minute title track is cool I guess if you think of it as proto-Sabbath. From my understanding, it was called 'In-a-gadda-da-vida' because the dude couldn't physically say In the garden of eden...That LSD must have been some wild nonsense.
This is another one where they is one good(ish) song and the rest are very average.
Should just be the one track and that track should be 1/2 as long
"Those natives step beyond. Release the mortal patterns" The album felt like it was over just as it started. I was pleasantly surprised to hear something beatle-y instead of metal like I was expecting with the name Iron Butterfly. No stand out tracks, the last track (namesake for album) was 17 minutes and felt like a fever dream. I think termination will go on the playlist i guess. 2/5
I......hate......Iron Butterfly
Ei voi antaa ykköstä levylle, josta tulee näin vahvasti mieleen Spinal Tap. Lisäksi he sävelsivät riffin.
Sounds like British invasion. Early Rolling Stones.
Enjoyed the title song, rest of the album, for me, was just okay. Maybe acid rock isn’t for me, but I’ll see if I ever dip back in the genre. Decent album.
Enjoyed the occasional bass embellishments here and that. Overall a bit dry. Also the song titles are weird - I can’t tell if it’s giving hippie concept album vibes or just dumb.
I was broken from my writing stupor by some extremely tasty guitar licks. Unfortunately, that signalled the end of the album, the rest having entirely failed to permeate through the filter erected by my trancelike state. Despite being 6 minutes into the final song, it still had plenty of time left to introduce some funky percussion and choral organ moments returning to its main theme in almost the roundaboutest way possible. This final song, accounting for a whopping 47.4% of the total playtime of the album is a self indulgent one-hit wonder of psychedelic rock, blues, demonic licks and angelic organ passages that surprisingly did not bore me despite the length. Excellent if you ignore the terrible lyrics and cringey singing. Album rating: 2/5 Song rating: 4/5 OK update I just listened to the song again and I don't know what I was on yesterday but it is not what I cooked it up to be. Still a listenable song but too drawn out, aimless, and random. The song drops to a 3.
Couldn't find the album off the bat only the titular single. The single sounded one way but the album gives a very different impression, particularly Flowers and Beads.
Ok moody
Iron Butterfly hits some good riffs but they don't seem to understand that less is more. The vocals and lyrics are distracting. The majority of the LP sounds like a joint venture between Herman's Hermits and King Crimson.
basic rock here, nothing really special or memorable
Bit boring
If I didn’t know better, I would have thought this was a fake band in some square’s interpretation of what acid rock sounds like, like the band playing in the background of a hippie freak out episode of Dragnet or something. Actually, I know there is an episode of Dragnet like that and I’m going to check it out in case that music is better than this. Giving this an extra star for the drum solo.
The only reason In-A-Gadda-Da-Vidda got any airplay was because DJ's wanted a long song to play while they needed to use the restroom or nail groupies. That being said, I'd find this passable if I was stoned.
In a gadda is a classic. The rest of the album is better than I remembered. But still not great.
ok, my instant reaction was this is the kind of whacky stuff that many of us first heard on all those soundtracks of vietnam war era Hollywood films that came flooding out in the 1980s - way out psychadelic road rock. I got into those for a while, but I dont recall ever hearing of this. We are in woodstock territory here. Not sure when I will next be in the mood for that... Or how this is different or better than the ones that were successful- sound very similar. If "in-a-gadda-da-vida" is meant to sound like siganture anthem - the noodling is fun and familiar vbluesy, but then its a bit overdone and verges on rock opera.... oh my.
Sounds fine.
Boring
I know it's old but this one seemed a bit dated to me.
Short not so sweet
Fine at the start. Got worse.
I don't get it. Supposed to be one of the greatest rock ballads of all time?
Not really may thing. The title track is interesting but I do find it shocking how well this album sold back in the day. 2/5
Archetypal late sixties rock, with a prominent organ sound. Don't like it. Like a much inferior Doors - but without the great gunes, poetry or Jim Morrison.
Gets boring after a few songs
The production on this is wacky, the singer is mid, but that bassist goes off. Giving it a 2. Probably won't ever think about this album again.
Aside from the titular track, the album was pretty weak.
This one was a huge disappointment. Knowing and liking the single edit version of the title track, I was eager to dive into this one. The first five tracks are just too far on the jarring, dissonant side of psychedelic rock for me and lack interesting songwriting. Really bad production absolutely doesn't help either. Then comes the title track and indeed, the familiar beginning is pretty good, despite the much worse than expected production. But then, two thirds of the track are nothing more than filler. Certainly not the worst album on here, but rounded down from 2.5 stars for the disappointment value.
An album just over 30 minutes in length it’s still about 15 too long
I listened to it. Don’t remember any of it. Not sure if that’s good or bad.
Ugh exhausting. It is a short album but one song is almost half the album. The songs before the Title song are just meh. The Title song is entirely way too long and everything about it is completely unnecessary. The only reason this album is not getting a 1 is because the Simpsons have a great bit involving the Title song.
Meh, psychedelia mixed with church organs and a guy who can’t sing. Better than Clapton though!
Pretty typical sound for that era. Nothing stands out above anything else from then.
Hey it's the one from that simpsons episode! Kind of a boring album though
Heard it before?: No Enjoy it?: Not really Favourite song: didn’t have one
Overall, not very good. I really like the title track on its own but in the context of the album it isn't even worth it to wait for it. This seems like Meddle by Pink Floyd but worse.
It´s very easy listening, but not very exiting.
Glad this was a short one. The music sounded okay-ish, but also extremely outdated. However, what really ruined it for me were the incredibly stupid lyrics.
One golden riff does not compensate for the overly long title song and unremarkable remainder.
Decent psychadelic rock. Not much more to say, nothing I haven't heard before. Good jams, gets a bit long and lyrics are lacking at times but just OK all around. Last song is by far the best, and despite its much larger length compared to the rest of the project, is most memorable and most packed with interesting ideas and overall fantastic melodies. Brings the whole project up, but I can't go higher than 2 to 2.5 for the whole.
Как-то музыкально ничего не могу отметить, послушал и послушал. Ремастер абсолютно не впечатлил, всё ещё жуткое стерео, которое иногда неплохо так смещается по панораме местами прикольные текстуры ритмические, но не более
Удивительно, но если слушать радио версию заглавного трека, то он очень крутой. А если слушать альбом, то сходишь с ума))))
У-жас-но. Я очень хочу, чтобы альбомы 60х-70х поскорее кончились, потому что я скоро получу глухоту на одно ухо, сто процентов. Трек на 17 минут не понят. Иногда звучит прилично, как минимум вокалист в ноты попадает. Но нет, стерео меня убивает.
Я перед последним треком: ну не оч вкусно, но пролетело быстро, значит не надоело, в целом можно и на 3 замахнуться. Последний трек не оставил выбора. Но все таки не 1, потому что ну это не отвратительно
Not my kind of sound.
J'ai pas trop écouté mais c'était un bruit pénible en fond
When I think of Iron Butterfly, I think of Iron Maiden and this is definitely not that. This album has 6 songs and sounds like The Doors. Flowers & Beads was a good groove. Otherwise, I didn't make a strong connection to any of the songs, including the final 17 minute self-titled track. It sounds like The Doors, and I don't like The Doors.
Iron Butterfly found one very good riff and groove. I'm not sure if there's anything else here worth sticking around for, though.
I saw a version of Iron Butterfly at a Dutch rock festival in 2004. It had 50% of the 'classic' lineup on the boards - by which is meant the dudes that recorded this album. They were good! Anyway, I own a copy of this because anyone who has ever picked up an electric guitar or tried to murder a blind woman loves the riff from the title track. The rest is pretty turgid, bog-standard heavy psych. I really don't listen to it much, and revisiting for this app kinda confirmed why.
It feels like they haven't quite figured out what genre they want to play so they try to be a bit punk and a bit Rock and Roll but they are not quite ready to let go of their love of pop. The main vocals sound a bit like a mix between Cher and David Bowie and the backup vocals sound like they are going for a the Byrds vibe.
The title track is a classic. Way, way, way too long but it gets stuck in your head. The rest sucked. It gets a 2 rather than a 1 just because of the title track.
Interesting for it's time, outdated now
Has some good stuff, is short and half is one song
meh
Kinda fun
Zo'n 60s band waarbij de bassist eigenlijk liever een solo gitarist wilde worden, maar als zo gemakkelijker aan de bak kon. Zo zonde dat die prutser met zijn eindeloze gepriegel al die best aardige nummers helemaal verknald.
De titeltrack kende ik wel. Erg cool! Verder vond ik het niet zo boeiend.
Dit was weer zoiets dat ik heel hard draaide, maar toch niet hoorde. Alleen de drumsolo ergens aan het einde viel me op.
Begyndelsen af psykedelisk rock, lidt outdated, laaaangt titelnummer
This album was a cool first listen and it had some interesting moments, but I don’t find myself coming back to any of the tracks at all really. Each song has something to offer but most of them lost me at some point. I think this comes down to my personal taste because I can see that there really isn’t anything wrong with any of the songs, this just isn’t what I typically listen to.
Fluff, the garden of Eden song goes on way too long, prolly enjoyable if on a shit load of acid
Side one sounds like generic Grass Roots-style 60s rock, though Are You Happy does have more notable psychedelic flourishes. Then there's side 2, which is good if you like drum solos. The most shocking thing about this album is that this band still tours, though the oldest current member joined in 1995.
Close to being a solid listen but still a misfire. Attempts to be radio-friendly Beatles on the first half while aping Cream and the like in the second, resulting in a weird mishmash of tones and tracks. As for the title track, it doesn't offer enough melodic meat to justify its length – I absolutely love long, anthemic tracks, but this one is just too much gristle to be an enjoyable listen.
The title track is a loopy acid rock classic, stretching out for 17 delirious minutes. Sadly, nothing else on the album even remotely measures up-Iron Butterfly weren’t bringing much to the table that other musicians weren’t already doing.
It's generous really as the organist and bassplayer are not bad to listen to. The vocalist! It's like he listened to Jim Morrison and took all the wrong things. Also incredibly influential which is a bad thing.
Fuck it, flowers and beads is fire. Solid digestible album. jk everything else was kinda boring
Not my jam but I respect it.
Ihan siisti meininki mutta ei tarjonnut sen kummempaa.
Kinda hated this. It went from cliche lyrics and thin production to indulgent superjam. The way he sings really bugs me, it's like the original Creed voice or something.
They may have been one of the more commercially successful acts of the 1960s, but their contemporaries did it better. Most of these songs are bland psych-rock. It doesn't feel revolutionary in any way. Finally, the title track sounds like a jam band mixed with a shitty Elvis impression. That might be some people's idea of a good time, but it's not for me. Best Songs: Most Anything You Want, Termination, Worst Songs: Flowers and Beads, My Mirage, In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida
my general feeling of this is that i don't like it, but if anyone puts up a 17 minute track i feel compelled to give it the full listen.
An infamous album due to its long organ song. It was fine at best.
Skipped my way through
Trudde detta skulle falla i smak, men den gang ei
Now I know what that Simpsons joke is about.
They should have called themselves The Mediocre Doors.
These hippies! Not my thing.
I love the title track because why not. The rest isn't bad, but loses points for have the exact same mix on every song.
Classic rock is classic, but I enjoyed this more as a Simpsons gag than an album.
Sounds like The Doors and I'm not the biggest Doors fan. The first 5 songs are basically just filler. There is nothing memorable about them and they are absolutely eclipsed into the shadow realm by the title track "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida".
03/23/2022 Not for me, but also... what the fuck? A 17-minute long track? Absolute insanity. Good for them!
All very unmemorable
ещё бы stereo звучание подвезли
The title track is a pretty iconic psychedelic rock anthem, but the rest of the album doesn't quite stand up and sounds horribly dated today.
Pretty boring, actually
The title track is soooo good, but I’m pretty underwhelmed by the rest. 2.5/5
Meh
2/5 not my liking.
Not as good as other psychedelic albums of the era. In fact, I get the feeling that by the time Iron Butterfly made this album, psychedelic music was just another aesthetic that could be employed. There is nothing terribly original about this music. The singer sounds like he’s doing an Elvis impersonation the whole time, and the title track is 17 minutes of self indulgent noodling.
I'd rather be listening to The Doors at this point. Half of this album was the title track. The Mars Volta all of a sudden seem less special. Can I have an album from this millenium soon please?
Yeah but nah.
It was meh.
Pretty lame, actually. The one song is ok but the rest of the album is forgettable
Ever had acid reflux hit you just before digging in to a highly anticipated meal? A little taste of vomit hitting already primed taste buds? Quick, gimme something to wash that down. "Flowers and Beads" was that acid reflux. I was kind of looking forward to "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida," but nothing before it excited me and "Flowers and Beads" actively turned me off. Iron Butterfly replaced their most of the band for this album (their second). One new guy, Erik Brann, was a 17-year-old guitar prodigy. (A 17-year-old who couldn't even decide how to spell his stage name.) And for a band that had a big role in inspiring heavy metal music, the guitars are completely unspectacular and take a back seat to organs too much of the time. Brann left the band soon after this, disappointed they didn't want to move their sound in a heavier direction. Can't say that I blame him. And then, if you can slog through those first five tracks, "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida" kicks in with a great crunchy guitar intro before singer Doug Ingle's voice comes in and messes things up. It didn't use to bother me as much on this song, but that was before I had to sit through five far inferior songs. At least this listen gave me an excuse to finally look up what this song means. Only to be left disappointed again. It was supposed to be "in the Garden of Eden," but organist-vocalist Ingle wrote and sang it for the band after drinking a gallon wine, and that's what they thought they heard. Hard to say what I cared for less - Ingle's put-on deep bellowing, or our dog's incessant whining for who-knows-what through the whole album. Maybe she just doesn't like Iron Butterfly either.
Huh, I thought Iron Butterfly would be heavier. More guitar driven. Disappointed.
Don’t dig this psyche stuff. Might have been impressed the first time I heard it but it’s all the same.
1 song at a time it would be ok but overall it's pretty boring. The hazy, organy style is too overdone.
The title track is still phenomenal, but the rest of this record doesn't do much for me.
Reminded me of the Doors...
Nja. A-sidan är vanlig psykedelisk rock. Ganska tråkig - för basic. Som en dålig version av The Doors med smöriga kärlekstexter à la tidiga Beatles. B-sidan är en enda 17 minuter lång låt, In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida (säg "In the garden of Eden" snabbt och slarvigt), som tydligen är vad Iron Butterfly är kända för. Och visst, den är det bästa på albumet. Den börjar dock som vanligt, med en enklare, kanske lite mer rockig och metal-låtande del, innan en lång instrumental brygga med bra gitarrspelande och FRAMFÖR ALLT ett intressant och annorlunda trumsolo. Detta är enda gången då det känns som jag lyssnar på något som är eget, som är lite mer utmanande. Bästa låt: In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida.
I'm certain this title track is still playing on Q102.1 in 1981. You'd certainly need to be in the frame of mind to listen to it all the way through, and you'd need to have a lot of concentration to perform it. Although the middle third seems to be drums and organ music that doesn't lead the song anywhere, followed up with just a lot of someone scratching a cat across their guitar. Yahoo music played 6 ads during the duration of this song. Non consecutively.
I mean...yeah its In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida....but i don't have to like the album
Psychedelic rock, suppose u could say its similar to The Doors. But it isn't The Doors so I'm not that much of a fan, just seems like a copy. Last track was a classic riff, be coolif they're the ones that first invented that. 2/5
If it was a rating for one song in the album, a 5. But it's for the whole album so ...
Sounds like 60s brit pop with way too much organ.
Generic rock overall uninteresting.
Ruhiger 60er Rock. Gut zum im Hintergrund laufen lassen.
Blah
Meh
Podría pasar sin ellos
Quite boring, not bad, just boring.
Fairly average heavier 60s rock - similar to Doors, but far inferior.
Has not aged well.
Pretty standard across the board, nothing exciting.
Not a fan of that 60s organ sound. Nothing special.
Just made me think of the Simpsons. What a looong song. Decent enough background music.
It was fine? The last track is obviously the star of the show but overall I was hoping for more.
Naa
Flashes of brilliance but for me largely unremarkable (besides the obvious title track with a killer bassline).
Un disco que me dio mucha hueva, no regresaría a él y me suena como a todo un popurrí de esa época. Medio rock, medio psicodélico, esas voces medio distorsionadas, en coro, etc. No, no. 5/10.
The title track is truly not brief. From memory, the singer had skolled a ridiculous amount of alcohol when the bass player was transcribing the lyrics for ‘In the Garden of Eden’- hence named the album title instead. Overall not a great album, but garden is a great jam
Ok 2
2.5
Short album containing not much
Very psychedelic, one classic song that should only be 7min not 17.
Not really sure what this was
The drum solo is nice, I guess. I get why people are into it. The rest is entirely forgettable. Best track: In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida
Mediocre masturbatory boomer music
I know the title track but never heard the rest... could be cool, we'll see. Wasn't really as cool as I'd hoped, just kinda jam-band hippie stuff. Title track has never been a huge favourite or anything, but pretty indicative of the rest anyway. 2/5.
★½
For the best bit of the album to be the final 30 seconds of a 17 minute song?
One song, This whole album is one song that everyone knows, and that’s it. The rest is just… dirge.
p145. 1968. 1 star. Proof that one classic riff does not make for an essential album. This sounds like a poor Doors tribute band, without the talent or songs. "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida" is a great single, but the extended version here is an abomination.
not as good as Joni Mitchell’s Blue
Just awful. Yuck. Hated it. Zero stars?
This album is a mess. The vocals are poor and too much organ. They are trying to be a heavy Doors but the Doors suck. No one needs to hear a 16 minute version of Ina Gotta Da Vida.
I will never understand why Iron Butterfly's In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida is one of the highest selling albums of all time, the title track can't be that good y'all lets be honest here. I enjoy 60s Psychedelic Rock like many others here, but I am man enough to admit when it is bad and Iron Butterfly's In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida is exceptionally mediocre and unremarkable. I understand that this project is important due to how many records it sold and how popular it was for its' time but by god is this project an absolutely nothing burger. I didn't even like the main title track and only really walked away with a liking towards the track Flowers and Beads. If this is your thing then I am very happy for you, but for myself this is just a project on a checklist for me and meant nothing to myself. Glad this is over and done with because it was worse than I thought it would be...
2/10 sound like elvis singing what they think is "heavy rock" but im heavier then this wierd ahh band they got like 3 versions of In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida that sound so bad that even if the story behind it will be good it wont make the song better
this shit sucks
Just droning 60s psychedelic rock. The only positive i can offer is that the keyboards sound like the Doors. Oyher than that the title track is catchy but unnecessarily long
I hated how track one, Most Anything You Want is mixed. Listening with earphones on means all of the bassy low notes are in your right ear and all the high notes and backing vocals are in the left. It made it feel like my right ear was on the verge of popping throughout the full length of the song. Then track two started and I realised we were going to have every song with some instruments tracked very far to the right and others very far to the left; at least that one wasn't uncomfortable. I don't think I'll ever understand the thought process that leads to an a-side made up of mostly 3 minute ditties and a b-side that consists of a 17 minute single song. Although given my previous complaints about things feeling unbalanced, it seems weirdly consistent in its inconsistency. I quite like the lead vocals, but actually really like the backing vocals in comparison. There's a lot of needless noodling in guitar, organ and bass form, throughout though, which I complain about all the time. You can't deny the riff in the title track though - that's a great hook. Not good enough for a 17 minute track obviously, but a great hook. Not really sure why that song briefly ended up turning into "God rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen" in the last third either. Another album I can't say I particularly enjoyed: 1/5
Meh
Experimental early prog rock. If thats not enough to put you off then listen to the mercifully short album
Inte ett av 1000 album man måste höra innan man trillar av pinn. Etta kanske är lite hårt men måste MARKERA.
The reviews here seems quite similar, that the title track is the standout song, and the rest has dated poorly I'll go one further and say the whole thing is a product of its time, and has no place in my 21st century listening library I'm also developing a serious aversion to BS lyrics - you really think I'm going to be mulling over possible hidden meanings of In A Gadda Da Vida? No! That was nothing more than drunken mumblings of someone about to pass out Rejected!