Band:
Ulf Christiansson – Guitars & Lead Vocals
Peter Carlsohn – Bass & Backing vocals
Michael Ulvsgärd – Drums & Back. Vocals
Discography:
Jerusalem (Volym 1)/Volume 1 (1978)
Volym 2/Volume 2 (1980)
Krigsman/Warrior (1981)
Vi kan inte stoppas/Can't Stop Us Now (1983)
In His Majesty's Service - Live in USA (1985)
Dancing on the Head of the Serpent (1987)
10 Years After (1988)
Klassiker 1/Classics 1 (1993)
Klassiker 2/Classics 2 (1993)
Prophet (1994)
Classics 3 (1995)
Volym 3/Those Were The Days (1997, Early line up of Jerusalem recorded songs that never was recorded back then)
Volüm 4/R.A.D (Volume 4) (1998, Early lineup of Jerusalem continues recording "oldies")
Live - På ren svenska (1999)
Live 2006 In His Majesty's Service DVD (2008)
Guests:
Info
Released 14/6-2011
Reviewed 27/7-2011
Links:
jerusalem.se
myspace
Yeah… I almost forgot. That small Irish band I was talking about is evidently called U2, in case any of you might know about them? Well, as I listened to them I realised that Jerusalem on this album mostly sound like they did on their early albums, right up to the multi million selling album 'The Joshua Tree'. I realise it's a pretty stupid thing to say since probably no one has heard of U2, but the sound of Jerusalem is quite a big rock with a cheap production. The guitars have all kind of effects and distortions that makes them sound grand and alive but the production stab them in the back and makes it sound remarkably less satisfying than the case with U2 after they got the bigger productions after 'The Joshua Tree'. Musically I can't see any shortcomings in the band - they really go beyond and back with an experienced touch in when to increase or lower the tempo and amount of sounds to make the music more interesting.
On the production side it's quite thin except for the guitar effects. No "odd" instruments has found their way in to the production and no one is being virtuosic with their instruments burning away instrumental masturbations that's completely uncalled for. The vocals are also good and for someone that's 62, Ulf Christiansson has a remarkably fresh voice and it actually reminds me quite a lot of a younger and more raw Bono (the vocalist in U2, you know - the Irish band I mentioned earlier). Unfortunately his voice cracks a bit when he goes up in tones and he also seems to have serious problems taking out the tone, which makes him a perfect candidate to play Tarzan in the next movie (oooohiohiohiooohh).
To get serious for a little while, there's a more important point to make than to joke around about U2 and Tarzan films. The one about religion. As a city, Jerusalem has always been an important religious city. For Jews, Christians and Muslims. The band, on the other side, are mostly Christian (or 100% to be more specific) but thank God they don't make that much of a fuzz about it. Much appreciated. I have a rule when I review albums and that is this rhyming phrase: "When religion is leading the music I reject it like a piece of garbage". OK, perhaps not so rhyming, but point made. I don't want prophets of crusaders shouting religious messages to crappy music, I want good music and then you can sing about whatever. Too many Christian and Satanist bands doesn't realise this. They think everyone cares so much they forget the music suck and then go on about their message like some kind of a politician. But as I said, the music Jerusalem plays is not that infected by their religious hidden messages, sure take it in word by word but without sacrificing the soul and "goodness" of the music.
Speaking of "goodness" - how good is 'She' really? Well, kind of alright I would say. They're not U2, regardless of how much thies try to be the Irish with the way they sing and play the guitars. But they are pretty good. U2 are, regardless of what I said earlier, one of my absolute favorite bands and since Jerusalem are so similar to U2 they might just catch a few bonus points because of this. But the fact is that the music is well played, songs well written and production is good enough - but a bit low budget if you listen carefully. However, the biggest issue with this album isn't any of those things. It's the length. This album is at least a quarter too long. At least 4 songs too long. Probably more if I should be honest. It's not that any of the songs suck, but it's very seldom for an album with the same kind of music can be interesting for 70 minutes. I feel that this album is going almost as much too long as the contradictions in Jerusalem has been going on. Jerusalem has been traced back to 4000 BC and since the city started to form there's been contradictions and wars in some way. I guess more than me are getting sick of hearing about Israelis and Palestines having it at each other. The same way as this has been going on way too long, this album goes on too long. By the tenth song or so, I just feel "Come on then! Get a fucking ending to the shit!" (not literarily of course since I don't think the album is shit). And by then it's been 50 minutes and 20 of them still remains.
Overall I'd say 'She' is a good album. Absolutely approved for most audiences. But seen on the big picture with plusses and minuses and all other kinds of "ands" it's not that much more. Perhaps a nostalgic trip for people that liked Jerusalem back in the 70's and 80's when they still had some kind of common interest movement. And perhaps also to you who liked U2 better on their first albums, before the major success. If you don't feel you are any of these - this isn't bad music and you don't have anything to lose by clicking the video down below and listen for yourself to get your opinion.
HHHHHHH
