Happy Trails

2 stars. was hoping for cowboy ballads based on the cover.

Classic rock and roll - didn't do a lot for me.

Gear: Meze 109 PRO Artwork: 🐎🤠👋 Mix: 🐎🤠👋 Musik: 🐎🤠👋 Wertung: 🐎🤠(👋)/5

non so cosa mi spinga a non dare una stella. veramente. c'è qualcosa di (molto) vagamente salvabile, anche se non riesco a capire cosa sia.

Non so cosa mi trattenga dal dare 1

I ate some delicious spicy ramen noodles for dinner tonight so I was actually good on noodles ... unfortunately this album delivered almost nothing but noodles. noodles in this style, noodles in that style. unending noodles. a strega nonna pasta pot of noodles. 🍜

A country western light rock album entry

Best Song: Who Do You Love Pt. 1. Certainly the most "alive" part of the album. Worst Song: Where You Love. There's barely any song here. It's just random noises, mostly. Overall: Is it just that I lack the experience/vocabulary for this old prog rock? What makes this album noteworthy over any of the others? From my naive listening, it doesn't go in any particularly interesting direction, it doesn't seek to maintain focus on a particular theme to do something cool with it, it just kind of dithers around for a while and then moves inexplicably on to a new thing. I'm sure if I was in the same (psychoactive) headspace as the musicians I'd have a better time, but this album imply sounds boring to sober ears.

Not really my "jam"

Half the album is a single 25m-long jam with bloated noodly solos over 2 chords. If you're not a superfan of 60s psychedelic bands (or high) this gets old pretty quick. The rest of the songs are mostly equally uninteresting jams (save for a short metal-esque bit in Maiden (appropriate)), ending with a weird cowboy tv show theme w/ bad vocals. Pass.

This album is on the list but nothing by Bo Diddley? Really?

I started off liking but then got confused. It has some interesting jams, but I didn't really see how it connected or how it was really an album. It felt like some guys that are trippin and just playing their instruments. Don't get me wrong they are talented, but I just didn't get it as a collective piece. Which at first isn't a big thing but after looking into the album more the reason it is popular because of what it is as a collective album. I liked Mona and Who Do you Love - Pt. 2, but I didn't get how those really connected with Calvary or Which Do you Love.

Didn't care for this much. There's a term for this type of guitaring that I reserve for only when it's truly deserved. "Wankery"

Didn't really like it

This is a hard album to figure out. On one hand there’s some great musicianship. But most of the vocals I don’t care for. It feels meandering for most of it. It’s not aggressively terrible. But there were long stretches I zoned out completely and forgot I was even listening to an album. 2.5/5

2 stars for this jam. 5 stars for the jar of Guava jam I just bought, so good.

Some cool moments on the A side and in Cavalry, but the most part this is just an album of sound and fury signifying not much of anything, with lots of (improvisational, from the sound of it) instrumentalization that goes nowhere in particular.

I think this album needs some context. Guitar work is pretty sick sometimes. Didn’t know this is where “who do you love” comes from.

Rolling stoned.

bo dawdly

Boring, that's all I have to say about it. I expected some nice cowboy tunes, but instead got run-of-the-mill prog rock. Nothing awful, mind. Just unremarkable.

Rambling.

If I were 22, stoned and at the Fillmore, this would be divine. As I'm not, it's just an artifact.

Bleh. A bland, 30 minutes of riffing on Bo Diddley, followed by little of interest.

Bunch of pointless noodling for 50 minutes with no direction. It's like sitting down and listening to the guy playing a guitar at the subway. I guess it's better than the Grateful Dead album I had, but I would still throw rotten tomatoes at them and call them stinky.

The last track is unironically my favorite, not only because it's the only track that delivers what it should deliver, but also it's the shortest one. This is in stark contrast with the rest of the album, composing of excruciatingly long instrumental noodling. Psychedelic people doing this should have known that it only works when it is interesting.

This was just a rambling mess of guitar wankery. I don't mind a bit of guitar wankery, but this was just pedestrian.

Dated.

okay

some highlights but too self-indulgent

They obviously need more LSD.

When the Lone Ranger looking album turns out to be a Psychedelic, you gotta go with it. Not horrible but I wouldn’t seek it out. The band is technical and stiff, they need to loosen up and have some fun.

Started as solid blues-inspired psychedelic rock (great!) which devolved into a long winded jam session. Not my thing.

As far as jam band rock goes, it’s good. As a whole, I grew bored to tears with the riffs on the blues classic.

Just ok for me, nothing stood out.

Not bad but meandering and ultimately kind of goes nowhere.

More prog. Wasn't awful but not what I was in the mood for

2/5

An unknown album from this era and it's alright. But ultimately I don't really get on with instrumentals

Nope. Boring noodling. Why?

I wouldn’t call this one an album, it’s really like a handful of really long songs. It’s not bad or anything, the jam band thing just really wasn’t ever for me. Maybe they’re significant, but I couldn’t tell you why.

hmmm more rock psychadelic rock its ok

I just can't with the jam band stuff.

Not for me

They’re good at what they do, but they only do that one thing for nearly an hour. It’s a good groove at first, then you let it fade to being background music, and when it inevitably hits your conscious thoughts again you wonder very strongly, “How the fuck am I still listening to this same song??” Then you realize it’s track 7 and you were roused from ignoring the music because the six track thematic opening ended. That seems like good news, but it really is somehow still the same song, just called something else. This list is way too 60s heavy. Not every band making 14 minute improvised songs needs to be heard. I would argue most of them absolutely don’t need to be. Like it has its interesting moments, but they’re interspersed with such long periods of absolute dross that the payoff isn’t worth it. Makes for good samples. Makes for decent music in a movie scene. As a whole listen, though? Only if you have the required narcotics.

As someone who generally loves '60s-'70s jam band rock, but had never listened to Quicksilver Messenger Service before, I was pretty excited to listen to this album, and I was all ready to contradict all the other bad reviews. But... they're right. This album is just kinda meh. Kinda boring. It just drags on. Some interesting guitar here and there, but not much else. Maybe I just don't like acid rock? Would much rather the Allman Brothers or Grateful Dead for extended jam tracks.

Jammy background noise.

It’s a mood, great to put on in the background, but it didn’t terribly impress me. I don’t think it particularly stands out against their contemporaries.

Yeah… definitely not my jam. Struck me as second-rate Doors knockoffs but missing that Door’s spark of kooky mysticism and general dark mystery. Came off as just endless long-form psychedelic noodling. Maybe they were better live.

Snoozefest

Meandering

Pretty bad honestly. I hate music that goes nowhere and it sounds like they don’t know where the music should be going either. Went in with high hopes. Rating: 1.9

Interesting enough, doubt I'll listen to it again though.

- On the one hand, I like the sound. I would argue that it is a generic psychedelic rock sound, but this is probably because Quicksilver Messenger Service is foundational to that sound. - But the first half of this album is one jam session that goes on for 30 minutes...I am admittedly done after five have passed. - It may be important. I found it boring.

I enjoyed the first half. A continuous development on a classic song over 5 movements that always monitor their virtuosic playing with the knack for hooks? Sure it somewhat loses its focus but count me in. The second half, however, nosedives in quality. The track mona was pointless and indulgent with no intrigue whatsoever. Then the album completely goes off the rails with the 13 minute cavalry which will leave you with absolutely no recollection of what happened even at its grandiose runtime. Then the album ends with a miserable county pastiche cover which is the records title track. This second half completely derails a great start to the album and sadly leads the album to exemplify everything wrong with 60s psychedelia. Too bad.

60s hippie music…

Gillar man gitarrer så är det här skivan för dig.

Mäßiger Psychedelic Rock.

some good instrumentals but not my thing

"album vo hüt bitz rotz?" - luca denn freu ich mich doch ufs album, wo zumindest funny usgseht han gfunde ich tun albumcover au rate und das isch HARD, ich liebe zeichneti albumcover und weg de rote schattierig han ich gmeint s ross isch es GÜGELI who do you love findi schomal guet und de übergang zu when you love findi sehr geil schad hets mit dem "...love" nöd ganz durrezoge hahaha jaa momentan isches sehr es guets morgealbum sber chanmer au vorstelle, falls das gitarregedudel jz no 45 wiiter so gaht, chönnts au alt werde oke vlt wirds das ja aso moment ischs basically eis lied will d übergäng merktmer nöd oke luca langsam chan ich dier nachempfinde wiso hend mier in letschter ziit iwelchne bandprobe müsse lose? isch ja cool und alles hie und daa aber joa mona findi wieder chli besser, s het chli meh struktur? vlt hani das au s gfühl wegem gsang oke fürs 13 minute lied gits es 2 ich han kei bock meh

Bizarre….

Nurdle - nowhere near baked enough to enjoy this, and not sure I would want to listen to it even if I was

Needed to be tripping on LSD to enjoy

This reminded me of lots of different bands: Grateful Dead, Allman Bros, the Doors,Steve Miller band, CCR… and I kept thinking I would rather been listening to those bands instead. Liked the A-side treated much like 1 long jam, B-side definitely more disjointed. Added ‘Who do you love pt 1’ to my list as I enjoyed the first half more. Unfortunately this album is quite forgettable for me, even though I didn’t hate it

Decent guitar stuff on here. Psychedelic jam band - meh.

I have, at this point, completed 730 albums. Long gone are the days where each morning provided promise of something exciting and new. I now trudge blindly through the endless desert sands of indistinguishable guitar riffs, noodled by equally-indistinguishable men, that dominated the late 60s and early 70s. I hear nothing. I feel nothing. I yearn for water. But there is only Happy Trails.

This type of music is not my cup of tea at all.

At the start of the album it sounded like this might be a unique 60's rock sound, but eventually it kind of just veered into jam band territory and I quickly lost interest.

Didn't think I needed a 25-minute interpretation of Bo Diddley's \"Who Do You Love?\" and I was right. 1.5/5

#95. This shit ain't it. If you're gonna put out an album that's some drawn out live jam band bullshittery, you should at least play your own songs and not some terrible cover of someone else's song, yeah? I think its pretty obvious why no one has heard of this before. What's less obvious is why/how it made it onto this list. 2/5: nah Song added to playlist: Maiden Of The Cancer Moon I've created a playlist on Spotify that consists of the best and/or my favorite song from each of the albums in this book. This list can be found here if you are interested: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/7MAXDGLWlwLkFLb8veGfkA?si=FqkQQPgZTFWG0jAUJXLFZA&utm_source=copy-link

Albums like this make me wonder about the criteria for inclusion on this list. Does an album have to be popular? Influential? Innovative? Good? Who knows, because this is none of those.

Sounds like teenager, garage band, self indulgent shite.

Waste of time

If enjoy long drawn out guitar jams, shapeless song compositions with endless self indulgent guitar noodling, this is the album for you! I would have to be drunk (or stoned) out of my head to really enjoy this, but I'm not sure it would help unless you were in the mood. You have to admire the effort and clearly these guys have talent, but can't understand why this would be considered essential? Happy trails...on to the next!

Promising start then monotonous twanging.

Not my thing but was a very interesting listening.

Some good songs mixed with some plodding ones where they seemed to be having fun but I wasn't. Maybe groundbreaking at the time?

This album feels a little noodly and not in a cool jazz way, in the way that 4 guys in their garage noodle together. There are some cool parts but it is overshadowed by the guitarist's less than interesting improvisation

Oh good more wonky live bullshit from a non-canon 60s American band. We’ll see if I get through this one. I can’t do it. These fucking sloppy, self-indulgent guitar solos are killing me. Time to listen to Leonard Cohen instead.

not good enough

Decent quality of sound, but not really remarkable

Thunka thunka thunka cow boy music.

kinda boring rock-n-roll

It's fine. Not bad music, but there is no reason this album should be in the book. This is an excellent example of those who chose these albums having fond memories of the band and it influencing their decision on whether to include it. Dropping acid and making out with a girl at a Quicksilver Messenger Service concert, that has to make the band a must-listen? Right? Awful name for a band, bad cover and just generally boring, inconsequential music. They are a jam band who covered blues very competently. Throw a rock and you may hit a similar band.

I found this album quite tough going. It starts off with 20 odd minutes of instrumental music which just sounded a bit repetitive. I don't know where the album was heading and it just kinda meandered with not a great deal of spirit. I saw other reviews which gave it 5 stars and I'm baffled by that. It may have been trying to be quirky and a bit alternative but I just didn't see, or more importantly, hear it.

Le service Quicksilver n'est vraiment plus ce qu'il était... Le fartage de la planche est complétement bâclé, la wax mal aposée, et que dire de la qualité de la pose d'aileron... À fuir

Aika tylsä, vaikka ihan lupaavia loppu-60-luku-elementtejä oli. Instrumentaalisuus oli omaperäistä, tai no ainakin askelta muita edellä. Ihan kivoja fantasiamaisia melodioita. Mutta: tylsä lopputulos.

ganska meh

Very samey, not a word I know

Not a fan of this one I'm afraid. Sounds like a jam band, and I do like them, but this one was just quite rambling and all over the place.

2/5 Really nothing to say.

It felt like one, very long, song.

The extra long jam session of Who Do You Love was fun. That long track in the second half really dragged. I don't know, it was fine

Hippie rock

Kinda jammy but not the worst thing

Does some interesting stuff but gets a bit annoying after a while.

Ik denk: leuk, weer zo'n jaren zestig-bluesrockbandje, maar al snel ontaardt het in kunstzinnig-psychedelisch gesnor. Had voor mij niet gehoeven. De boodschap komt niet bepaald met de snelheid van kwikzilver aan.

This was incredibly dull to the point that I kept forgetting I even had music on because I completely tuned it out. Really bland and generic.

This is a classic psychedelic rock album that I always had managed to avoid, as I thought it would be boring. This happens to be correct. The music is not bad, but the album is a struggle to listen to in one go. Won't play again in the future (necessary condition for a +3 score).

This feels like an endless jam in which all band members are allowed to display their skills. I guess they had a good time but I don't care.

If you read the track titles, its like who, when, where, how, which (do) you love? And it seems like the answer is the name of the next track- Mona. Music is good, however, half of any track is only instrumental. It's almost like the lead singer forgot to sing and remembered only towards the end that he had some lines to sing. Nice, but will I listen to it again? Maybe not

2.75

Niets om over naar huis te schrijven, dus dat doe ik dan maar niet.

Lekker jammen met zijn allen!

Over half of this album is the same song just played slightly differently each time. Almost a quarter of it is a single song/fever dream. Maybe I just don't get it. Track highlight: Maiden of the Cancer Moon

Interesting album. It didn't keep my attention as much as it should have. There's alot of nice noodling on guitar and good musicianship, but overall when I was done with it, I was happy enough. It's a high two. 2/5

This was okay, but not really feeling it.

Concept album about love and happy trails I guess...

52/100

Listened all the way through anticipating the part I had to hear. Finished none the wiser. Definitely could have done without the cover of Happy Trails. Ouch.

forgetable album. here the same style but better. i guess ca la inspiré du monde. 4.5/10

It's hard to get too excited about a 26 minute psychedelic jam band cover of a Bo Diddley song. This is an album that needs to be considered in the context that it was originally performed. It may have been significant at the time for helping to establish the genre, but doesn't hold up compared to some of their contemporaries like the Grateful Dead and Jefferson Airplane. Not a terrible album, but not one that I'd return to.

Not too bad, not too good.

Meh

This felt like one quick song followed by 45 minutes of jams. It was probably meant to be enjoyed live at Woodstock tripping balls in 1971

Eka biisi lupaili parempaa mitä toimitti. Perus yksi kerta riittää, kiitos.

Tämäkin ihan ok, sen suurempia tunteita herättämättä meni taustalla ajaessa

basically butt rock of its time. hippy dippy jam shit. pretty cohesive at pretty compared to a lot of Dead stuff but still pretty boring and forgettable. Moana was probably the dumbest track for sure…..very butt rocky. can i make luurv to you once in a while 😎 gee so creative LMAO. the title track was cute.

So much better stuff came out of San Francisco in the 60s this just ain't it

It was kind of bland.

Alright at times.

Average hippie bullshit

Some amazing moments, but kind of buried in there.

psychedelic tinged blues rock with a jam band sensibility. while they’re very talented, not my thing.

Great instrument playing, bit repetitive, kinda boring by the end.

:))

I enjoyed it - but don't need to listen to it again.

Alright alright

I don't like live album cover bands, and these guys are clearly just an imitation of The Grateful Dead. Not a bad imitation, but an imitation none the less. I really don't have much to say other than they played well, but that's not much. I don't really have anything to go off so how could I rate them. I enjoyed listening to the album so I guess they got that going for them. Want to give them a one, but I know they don't deserve that low. 2/5

This was kind of boring. Loads of potential but it never goes anywhere

Was not in the mood for this. You could’ve told me it was Grateful Dead and I would’ve believed it. Not sure why it needs to be in the list.

[Vince McMahon getting excited, falling out of his chair meme] "1969 release date?" "Live album?" "Recorded at the Fillmore West?" "A jammed out Bo Diddley cover takes up an entire side of the album?" But seriously folks, this is mostly a sea of tedium. The odd tasty lick or interesting improvisation cannot redeem the meandering ebb und flud of this overcooked turkey.

Side one: who do I NOT love? Side two: Moaner Overall: Unhappy trails This is what I would describe as ‘noodling’ but not sure if that’s the correct application of the word. I mean - it’s inoffensive but just so boring! Not horrible but tedious listening to all those flipping guitar solos!

I'm at a bit of a loss on this one. I took a minute just now to read the AllMusic review, which was a solid five-star write-up (yes, out of five), which didn't clear things up for me. Well, I guess it answered the "would anyone out there actually rate this a five-star album?" question. I guess I'll see if any of you are in the same boat. I'll say this, I never lost patience with the record. With a band like the Grateful Dead, which kept coming to mind as this rolled on, I do find I get agitated — not enjoyable for me. With this, I didn't go there, exactly, but I was struck by the general disinterest in adding structure to the proceedings. It was loose to the point of rambling, and had I not been tasked with listening to it, I don't think I would have stuck around to hear more after the first song and a half. There were moments that flowed, some noodly passages that transcended, but they were the diamonds in the haystack. Most of it just drifted innocuously out of the speakers and filled space. Did I like it? I don't know. I don't expect I'll listen again to try to discern that. So this is two stars, but that doesn't reflect a dislike for the material so much as an inability to connect with whatever was motivating this band.

Not my jam

Je vais faire comme si j'avais rien entendu

médiocrité décadente

Didn't grab me. Not clear of significance for it to be on the list.

This is just mostly white men guitar jamming on a blues scale without any song, or structure, or both whatsovever. I don't get what is supposed to be psychedelic about this one. Or good, for that matter ... 1.5/5

Pretty standard blues album - nothing memorable about this. When Craig McLachlan does your song better you know it’s average.

Shit

Meh

Heard it before?: No Enjoy it?: had some interesting accoustic elements but it’s not something I see myself revisiting Favourite song: Track 6 - Who Do You Love Pt.2

Not bad but I got annoyed with some of the run on songs

Way too long with not a lot going on

Good live record. Nothing really stuck with me though. Like the psychedelic feel. Eh

Its alright. Lots of noodling. Not sure why it's on the list.

Eh, this is both good and bad at the same time. Talented musicianship, just lacks substance.

Happy Trails is the second album by the American band Quicksilver Messenger Service, and it was partially recorded live at two different performances in 1968. This album was well received and was later certified gold in 1992. It's a psychedelic rock album that incorporates honky-tonk and western music - which would eventually evolve into the genre country. Much of the album are cover songs of Bo Diddley songs, which the band loved playing for audiences. This old school jam band could play anything with their high spirits, and it would never become boring or pretentious. My imagination was able to wander while listening to this great album.

Proof that San Francisco had the most powerful drugs in the late '60's, since one would need to be under their influence to appreciate this. Not for nothing, but Van Halen's all accapella version of Happy Trails tops the one here that closes the album.

This felt like one long jam session that someone recorded.

Background music from Woodstock

Jam band noodlings

This starts off OK, feels like a nice entry to what'll turn into a Creedence Clearwater Revival type album, but loses all it's energy pretty quickly and never really gets it back. It's too long, too meandering, and too boring to get anything higher than a 2. It's fine background music and not actively unpleasant, but nothing more.

Started off ok but just trudged along. Not my bag

Ei hetättänyt liiaksi tunteita. Ihan ok

Ihan jees, mut eipä jäänyt paljoa käteen.

A real oddity and not in a good way. Quite a slog, hard to find the purpose of it all.

Not terrible, but not terribly interesting. 65% riffing on 'Who Do You Love' and 35% noodling guitar.

17 year old me would have liked this. 56 year old me? Not so much. Mostly pointless, self-indulgent canoodling with a few interesting moments mixed in. 2 stars.

Not bad, but also not much in the way of variety. The lack of variation in their songs, and the fact that they sounded a lot like the free-form style of the GD, just had people deciding to just listen to the GD.

I didn't skip any tracks, but then again I didn't really listen to it as it just blurs into one amorphous supermarket rock jazz sound blob. Blended into the background of my work and didn't interrupt.

Boring bluesy psychedelic music

Overlong psychedelic 60s rock

Þetta er eins og extended síð-sjöunda djamm session. Lítt merkilegur söngur og lagasmíðar. Ekki beint leiðinlegt en allt nema eftirminnilegt.

Fine jam session

This took far too long to get anywhere even remotely interesting. Not for me

Nope

Ágætt í bakgrunni.

Too much noodling - this one should have stayed in the 60s

More 60s naval-gazing. Pass.

Did not finish.

Second listen. Still not getting it.

Dumb jam band noise

Boring. A full album of the boring parts of other albums.

Psykedeliskt så det förslår! Bandet (med 7 nuvarande och 21 gamla medlemmar) lever SJUKT MYCKET på det här albumet (glid in på deras hemsida och kolla). För lite syra i mitt liv för att verkligen uppskatta detta dock

bunch of hippie nonsense

Jam band album. Not very good. Probably fun to see live but the album is underwhelming.

The first half of the album is just a way too long live version of a meh song. The extended almost silent live portions with shouting are just so bad. The second half of the album redeems it a bit, calvary is nice

Too jammy for my tastes… like the doors if they were drunk and couldn’t be arsed!

I accept that this was probably an important album in the "white men appropriating blues" genre genre and who does not love that? However, it also feels like the album that launched a thousand jam bands so it can burn in hell.

All the songs sounded the same. The best song in the whole album was the last one

By the track listing, it would seem like this is a concept album or something. This is another band I've never heard of, and it's becoming abundantly clear that the acclaimed and inspirational albums in rock are not those that I generally know about. Let's give it a try. Who Do You Love - Ok - we have a rock record here. The name and the album artwork led to believe I was in for more rock-a-billy stuff. When the vocals come in I hear Jim Morrison style singing for sure. This is 1969, so they were contemporaries. When/Where do you Love - Jamming songs. Lots of avante-garde guitar. It's all liver performance, so it seems to be performance art equal to typical album music if not moreso. Side 2 is kind of the same thing. One traditional rock song followed by some experimental jamming. Like Grateful Dead meets Jethro Tull and Iron Butterfly. There's talent with this band, but it doesn't really lend itself to album listening to me.

I'm quite partial to a good instrumental but you better make sure they're pretty next level if you plan on making an entire album of them. This didn't.

Not a fan of psychedelic rock

Okej musik, men är riktigt trött på den här typen av musik

never ever heard of this -- no ideas about it... not doing anything special for me; blues-inspired stuff that is sort of jam-band-y probably 2/5 unless it gets better in songs 4-10. it didn't. sort of quiet white-guy bluesy jam band stuff. Forgettable.

somebody give me a fugees album or something

Track 3 was a low point, but for the most part it was an inoffensive psychedelic rock album to have on in the background.

A lot I didn’t like but Mona was great wasn’t it!

Yawn

Background music

a bit arty for my liking. too much jazz in with the rock

Not unlistenable but pretty indulgent. Not sure I'll come back to this.

Live-Platte; wäre ich gern dabei gewesen, trippin on Acid 69 in San Francisco. Andererseits, wo ich tatsächlich dabei war, zB 96 trippin on E bei Underworld hat’s mir auch super gefallen, da kickte die Musik auch mehr. Aber schönes Cover hier, gefällt mir!

Noisy, unstructured, and not charming at all

Endless jamming. Nexttt.

sometime when the groove works, it really goes. then... most of the time... it's just a bunch of psychedelic noodling.

there's better psychadelic rock

Oookay?? Not what I was expecting given the cover art! Think Doors lite, without Jim. Mainly instrumental 60's rock. Ok, but nothing mind blowing.

More of a Richard album than a Jeff album

1969. Key Songs: Who Do You Love Pt. 1, Cavalry

just ok - all sounded the same

The 25-minute Bo Diddley "cover" jam sesh isn't doing it for me. Long, meandering crap. Doesn't sound terrible for a live album I suppose. The content really just isn't for me. The second half of the album is more long, meandering jammy crap. It's capped off by a half-assed out-of-tune "Happy Trails". Good riddance. A live album has to be REALLY good for me to enjoy it, and this definitely isn't that.

This is so not my kind of music. Listening to a jam concert you didn't go to, is much like listening to noises of a long lasting copulation that you didn't partake in. No matter how good the actors/musicians were, it just isn't the same as being there. And listening to guitar noodling for an hour, almost totally deplete of hooks, is such a chore. Such. A. Chore.

I’ve never enjoyed jam band albums. It does absolutely nothing for me. “I’m going to play the same three notes with nothing else for a full minute in a song, people are going to love this.” Sure, maybe there’s the occasional little riff or interesting bit in there. But it’s so infrequent. This album is no exception. I had high hopes based on the album art. Thought it could be some Marty Robbins type thing. Would’ve hugely preferred that.

Would happily never listen to this again.

I wasn't a young adult in the 1960s, and I don't have any desire to take drugs, so these long-winded acid jam bands are never going to do anything for me.

Starts off with a decent cover of Bo Diddley’s who do you love, and that’s about all this album has going for it. It’s a psych jam cluster fuck. Incoherence abounds.

Incredible! This is one rare album that masterfully treads a fine line between annoyance and boredom. Seriously: why should I care about listening to a 50 mins long jam of some guys who are neither very skilled musicians nor have particular interesting ideas, instrumentation, energy, or whatever? I guess one could enjoy it a little more while being there in person and being *very* high...

Some spacy guitar work that sprawls all over the place and adds up to…not much?

I have no idea what the hell I just listened to. The Album Cover is a complete Red Herring if what awaits the listener. Most of the bands on this list I have at least heard of, and have some basic awareness of what’s coming when I cue it up, but this was a complete unknown. I think in the end I’d have preferred it stay that way.

😴😴😴

This album must be where spinal tap got the inspiration for "Jazz Odyssey "....1/5.

Happy trails you, Quicksilver Messenger Service, may we NEVER meet again.

That sucked really bad.

Genuinely so confused. Love a good jam session but almost an hour with the same medley. Felt like I was going insane

Shitty Bo Diddly

Still not a fan of jam bands. Although this was particularly boring

England lost to Argentina last night there's nothing that could have made me enjoy this

Jimi Hendrix's poop

this is not very good. Pass

The warning that I received, you may take with however many grains of salt you wish, that the brown acid that is circulating around us, is specifically not too good. It's suggested that you do stay away from that; of course, it's your own trip, so, be my guest. But, please be advised that there is a warning on that one. That said, I did enjoy the Van Halen cover at the end.

At one point my ears tuned this out and I forgot I was listening to anything. There’s no saving an album after that.

There's about nothing I hate more than stoner jamming.

Dated.

This sucked

Mostly sounds like the psychedelic middle sections of Whole Lotta Love and Dazed Confused but for 90 percent of the album. A bit much for me.

A lot of noodling, and not a lot else.

I know the band name, but can't say I've ever heard a song by them on the radio. This album is older than me, if it's great why haven't I heard it mentioned or played somewhere? Did these guys help pioneer the jam band sound, is that why this is on here? I read this was recorded live, and it sounds like it. I do like the intro to their version of Bo Diddley's "Who Do You Love Pt 1" but it's an interpretation of a classic so many others have covered. There's a lot of noodling around and losing direction, like a jazz band, on this recording - "Where You Love" is a meandering mess with no point. The first 6 songs have scant lyrics and are just garage band jamming, capped by the unnecessary "Who Do You Love - Pt 2". Then you get to the 7 minute "Mona" and the 13 minute "Calvary". If this was a live show, I was headed for the door by song 6 and skipping the last 4 songs. This was boring stoner jam band shit. Van Halen does the best version of "Happy Trails", no comparison. I was happy to see this album end. 1 star, zero redeeming qualities. There's a reason these guys were never a household name and this album has no place in the Top 1001. I made a point of listening to their Top 10 on Spotify. I knew "Fresh Air" from the radio. "Pride of Man", "It's Been Too Long" & "Dino's Song" were examples of what they were capable of, "Happy Trails" is a lowlight by comparison.

Absolute dross

If I have to sit there listening to like 5 grown adults doing absolutely f all for 20 mins I'm not bothering with the rest. Concerning how many times it's already happened

I listened to this all the way through but only just getting round to rating it and can’t remember it at all.

Tampouco me gustou.

Äntligen lite redigt oljud.

Tråkig

If I were to own this record, side 2 would never get played Then need to also skip most of side one To be honest, only the first track actually needs playing, as the rest seems like improvisions derived from that I dont actively hate this, but I would be happy to live out the rest of my life without needing to hear this again

This is quite possibly the worst collection of music I have ever heard. Terrible recording, boring music. This doesn’t represent the genre well at all

I hated this. It was mostly instrumental. It wasn’t good.

Rubbish

I have no understanding why, firstly, Greil Marcus stated that this was the finest recording to come out of the San Francisco scene, and secondly, why the 'who do you love' suite (based on a Bo Diddley riff) goes on for 27 minutes on TWO chords. It's a live album from that 'Fillmore' period when guitar improvising and getting high were synonymous. It's very Woodstock but give me some tight and meaningful Creedence any time over this meandering drivel.

meh

Well this was way worse than I was thinking it would be. If I'm going to hear endless jamming, give me some like good jamming.

Is this another fairy album? I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but in a medieval maiden kind of way. Update: not a medieval fairy album, just a bland rock album, why is it on this list. Every time I thought Calvary was ending, it still had 3 minutes left. Happy trails could not be more pitchy. 1*

When I saw the track listing I thought, interesting, six different tracks with similar titles, I wonder what they'll do with those concepts. It was a single jam track divided into six tracks. I've never been sophisticated enough to appreciate a jam band, it seems like the sort of thing that is only interesting in the moment. I can't imagine putting this record on for repeated listens. For a band with the name Quicksilver there's nothing quick about them.

Los álbumes instrumentales no son lo mio

Why is this on the list? It’s not even close to the definitive version of Happy Trails, and then there’s a bunch of random jazz noodling. 1⭐️

Nej, detta var inget bra. Möjligen för insatta musiker för herregud.... Det var gitarronanerande i evigheter. Denna delen av 60-talet tycker jag var jobbig, den psykedeliska av personer höga på acid typ. Jag fick stänga av efter ett tag, pallade faktiskt inte denna röriga ljudbild. Dock kan jag förstå att musikerna är sjukt duktiga. Musiken är bara inte för mig.

Meh

Mindless filler for album 741, a brutal blow to my determination. Just go listen to The Doors instead. 1/5

50 minutes of absolutely fuck all

70’s classic rock that was one note, did NOT turn on my love light …

0/10 bekannt 3/10 Beste Songs: who do you love (pt.1), who do you love (pt.2), maiden of the cancer moon Versteh ich nicht

I love jamming but it needs structure and rhythm and this doesn't have it. Pointless live album for the 1001.

Not for me

Fucking hell. All these Americans complaining about this list being British centric (which it isn't - they just need to look at the stats) seem to be silent about the slag heap of late-sixties' US psychedelic dross that runs through this list like a tab of brown acid shits. Boring noodling, shitty lyrics masquerading as something deep but only a brain fried 14 year old would really think they are and the kind of improvisation a toddler would have when bashing on pots and pans. This album is so tedious I doubt even a heroic intake of drugs would make this seem enjoyable. It might be a 2 star but I'm so fucking sick of these terrible bands that it's getting a 1. Fuck off US 60's psychdelia. You were shit then and you are shit now. Best Tracks: Who Do You Love (Part 1); When You Love; Mona

Wow they weren't kidding when they said this was just an excessively long blues noodling session. Devoid of any substance or meaning or relevance.

Jamming out and noodling is underhated as a genre. Made me angry the longer I went on and I didn’t make it to the end.

sounds like a bad cover band that plays 1am sets at the worst bar in america

Knew within the first five se ones I’d be bummed. there’s a problem when I’m hoping for a country album

Psychedelic rock is up there with singer/songwriters in genres that make me want to be deaf

Just really not my thing. I'd never heard of this band, so wasn't familiar at all with their music until I looked up the info. I have to admit that I went in a bit biased, as any time I see an album where the whole first side is just one song, I know it's probably going to be tough for me to listen to. Sounds to me like so many other jam bands. I don't hear anything extraordinary with this album.

errr… maybe it's a good album if you like instrumental music

Livealbum

Not a fan. Not the Dead and for the most part just a lot of warm up band sounds.

A 20 minute cover of a song I already don’t like, sub-tier impressions of The Doors, a band I already hate, and endless noodling when it, and excuse my possible foolishness here, when it sounds like you’re already not particularly proficient at your instruments!! There is a part in one of these songs that builds up to all the instruments dropping out, and you expect an epic drum fill, and the drummer just does the most basic fill I’ve ever heard. I could do it, and I don’t know how to play drums. I almost laughed out loud. It’s all just navel gaze-y and, honestly, pathetic! Not good at all, shouldn’t be on this list, shouldn’t even sniff this list. One of the worst things I’ve listened to for this project. I literally got engaged yesterday and the endorphins from that should have had me loving ANYTHING I listened to and this WAS SO BAD, I was like “nope, one star.”

Enough with the psychadelic jam bands on this list! The hippies are all aging and dying off; let their crappy music die with them. 1 star.

Who Do You Love Bo Diddly ,cover guitar intro rocks but ... When You Love 5 minute jam sesh is 4 minutes to long; I am sleepy now. Then 6 minutes of Where You Love...ugh. thank the goddess that How You Love was only 2 minutes. And so on.... Listened before? N Saved tracks? N Favorite tracks? ⭐ Ambivalent but NO

But why, though. The highlight was the "low battery" warning from my earbuds. The low point was definitely the title track. Oof. Listened before? N Saved to library? N Favorite track(s): N/A ⭐: Hated it.

No idea what was going on here. Sounded like an average high school garage band.

Not for me. Boring, discordant in many places, out there without any structure. Pass.

Rarely have I had such a disconnect between the impression raised by an album cover and the actual music. I was expecting half an hour of jolly cowboy songs, but I actually got a 25 minute extended jam where they take Bo Diddley’s Who Do You Love (a proper 2 minutes 30 seconds banger) and drag it out into a drug fuelled 25 minute jam session wankathon. Side two isn’t much better, but at least they close the album with a version of Happy Trails. I’d much rather have had a whole album like that, to be honest.

Obegripligt rörigt Blues Jam med psykadeliska inslag. En etta

not my style!!

I can only imagine this degree of guitar wankery and aimmless/tedium are far more enjoyable if you’re high on lsd. If there is a redeeming element it is the surprise of discovering what i assume is the original version of Mona, which was covered by Henry from Neighbours in his short lived foray into pop stardom. Any nostalgia is quickly (more precisely slowly over an excruciating 13 minutes) ground away by Calvary. Ending the album with what sounds like a drunk in a western bar says it all.

I would rather listen to Craig McLachlan’s version of “Mona” for an hour than this album.

I mean.. frankly... what the fuck? Not as bad as the Liars album, or Trout Mask Replica, which I still hate with a firey passion but this was shit. 1/5

No thanks

point4.

Some very accomplished jamming to be sure, but stellar chops and tight grooves alone do not a classic album make.

Not sure what the point of this album was

This seems like a jam band situation, which is not really my thing (2 tracks in). ... it's still going. I might not make it all the way through. This doesn't seem like essential listening to me.

Aimless self-indulgent noodling. Total waste of time.

Atrocious snoozefest

How can something this indulgent sound so goddamn dry?

It isn't that the trails are *un*happy, as such... let's just say that this album is 'not my jam' 😏

Not for me. 1/5

psychedelic rock is not for me glorified guitar solo

Full disclosure - psychadelic rock is not my thing and I don't think it ever will be my thing. Generally, if I don't appreciate a genre, I'll at least try to recognize that an album that typifies can be good even if it's not for me though. This is not the case with Happy Trails. It's boring and monotonous. Pretty much everything has a droning sameness which I guess if you're high is fun? But if you're not, it's just boring.

I’m not keen on the Grateful Dead, so I was probably never going to enjoy their non-union Mexican equivalent.

Not bad, just boring. Late 60's psychedelic jam session.

Good guitar solos Very instrumental

This is several thousand leagues below what I expect of a good 1001 album or even a Quicksilver Messenger Service one. It starts off with very lame, twungy Bo Diddley riffing and collapses into the most pointless, cobwebby King Crimson Moonchild style instrumental noodling, wall-staring and thumb twiddling. The entire record ends up mainly being a grotesquely stretched out jam version of that one Bo Diddley song plus a corny minute long cover of Happy Trails. It’s all about as revolting as the clash of witchy green lettering and garmonbozia yellow on the god awful album sleeve.

What the fuck.

Strange band.

Wrong list, this was meant for 1001 Albums I Never Wanna Hear Again.

Barely finished, super rag tag. discombobulated

"Happy Trails", le deuxième opus de Quicksilver Messenger Service, sorti en 1969 et enregistré en grande partie en concert, est souvent cité parmi les reliques importantes de l'ère psychédélique de San Francisco. Après un écoute attentive – voir une deuxième si on a le courage de s'infliger une telle épreuve plus d'une fois – cet album se révèle être une expérience particulièrement ardue, un monument qui finit par lasser plus qu'il ne fascine. Le principal problème de "Happy Trails" réside dans sa structure même. Conçu comme une longue suite live occupant la majorité de l'album, avec le fameux "Who Do You Love? Suite" s'étalant sur plus de 25 minutes, l'oeuvre sombre rapidement dans une démonstration de virtuosité certes présente, mais terriblement vaine. Les guitares de John Cipollina et Gary Duncan s'entremêlent, s'étirent, vibrent et trémulent à l'infini, mais sans jamais réellement construire quelque chose de mémorable ou d'engageant sur la durée. On assiste à un déballage technique, une sorte de compétition interne où chaque musicien semble vouloir prouver son endurance, oubliant au passage l'auditeur qui, lui, décroche bien avant la fin du premier quart d'heure. Ce qui aurait pu être l'énergie brute et captivante d'un concert se transforme ici en une bouillie sonore interminable. Les jams s'éternisent sans véritable direction, tournant en rond sur des motifs répétitifs qui finissent par user la patience la mieux trempée. On a l'impression d'entendre les mêmes phrases musicales revenir encore et encore, légèrement variées, mais jamais transcendées. L'effet hypnotique recherché se mue en une torpeur pesante, un sentiment d'être piégé dans une boucle temporelle où la fin du morceau semble une délivrance inaccessible. Le choix de reprendre le "Who Do You Love?" de Bo Diddley comme pièce maîtresse, pour ensuite le déconstruire et le réassembler en une multitude de segments aux noms ésotériques ("When You Love", "Where You Love", "How You Love", "Which Do You Love", "Who Do You Love - Part 2"), aurait pu être une idée audacieuse. Malheureusement, l'exécution manque cruellement de concision et d'impact. Les transitions sont souvent laborieuses, et l'ensemble peine à maintenir un semblant de cohérence narrative ou émotionnelle. On passe d'un segment à l'autre avec l'espoir d'un regain d'intérêt, mais cet espoir est systématiquement douché par une nouvelle démonstration de guitares bavardes et peu inspirées. La deuxième face, avec des titres comme "Mona" (une autre composition de Bo Diddley, étirée elle aussi) et le "Calvary" instrumental, ne parvient pas à redresser la barre. "Mona" souffre des mêmes maux que la suite précédente : une longueur excessive et un manque de substance mélodique qui rendent l'écoute fastidieuse. "Calvary", bien que plus structuré et possédant une ambiance cinématographique western intéressante, arrive trop tard et ne suffit pas à sauver l'ensemble du naufrage. Il offre une couleur différente, certes, mais après avoir enduré la première face, la fatigue auditive est telle que l'on peine à l'apprécier à sa juste valeur. On se surprend à regarder le temps restant sur le lecteur, espérant la fin de ce qui ressemble davantage à un test d'endurance qu'à une expérience musicale enrichissante. On pourrait arguer que cet album est le pur produit de son époque, où l'expérimentation et l'improvisation étaient reines. D'autres groupes de la même période, comme le Grateful Dead, ont également produit des œuvres live foisonnantes et improvisées. Cependant, chez ces derniers, on trouvait souvent une âme, une construction, une sorte de magie collective qui justifiait les longues plages instrumentales. Avec "Happy Trails", cette magie opère rarement. On reste sur le quai, observant un train de musiciens qui s'amusent entre eux, sans véritablement nous inviter à bord. L'album est donc un témoignage d'une certaine scène, d'une certaine approche de la musique live, mais en tant qu'objet discographique destiné à une écoute domestique, il rate largement sa cible. Il est l'archétype de l'album que l'on respecte pour son statut historique plus qu'on ne l'aime pour ses qualités intrinsèques. Il est long, oui, désespérément long. Et chiant, pour quiconque recherche un minimum de structure, de mélodie accrocheuse ou simplement d'efficacité dans la transmission d'une émotion. En conclusion, "Happy Trails" est une pièce de musée sonore qui a mal vieilli et qui termine avec la note de 1 sur 5.

No. I'm sorry but why is this on the list. Who is this for. There is other stuff out there that is *like this* but crucially *better than this*. Why would you listen to this instead of that, unless you had some nostalgic connection to this. This is the sort of music I would hear playing on the speaker as I walk around a secondhand record shop in a seaside town somewhere random in the UK and then I leave the shop and I never think about that music ever again.

Pas tip top, après la première chanson qui est ok ça devient un calvaire pendant 40 minutes. Mon train était en panne, ça n’a sûrement pas aidé à rendre l’expérience plus agréable.