The Never Ending Pool

Thanks for your views, Stefan - an interesting read, as always. I agree with much of what you say. Your description od the band as 'solid' is especially pertinent - solid, but the music lacks drama. I actually think this band works best on the quieter songs (Moonlight, Horizon, Shelter), and that Freeman plays to his strengths on these. The more up-tempo songs have a tendency to plod.

The approach of this formation seems to be the weaving of repetitive motifs in and out of the songs. When this works, it can be really good - the band sounds like a rhythmic unit, the players' contributions riccochet of one another. In this respect, I think this band reached its peak in Spring 07. Now, it seems that the motifs are too often simply copied, rather than fully integrated into the sound.

The 'solidity' of the band sound, the lack of drama - could this have something to do with the rather strict positioning of each member on stage? The too-strict allocation of a 'job' to individual members? (Denny - all the solos; Donny - do what Bob does on keys; Stu - chords). In a recent interview, Bob said something about not wanting his band to be a 'gang,' and I wonder whether the music doesn't suffer a bit as a result. As to the lack of semi-acoustic material - perhaps Bob doesn't think his keyboard playing would work in such a context, or maybe he feels his (much-damaged) voice would be too exposed. I sometimes think the voice could be part of the reason for the same-old-same-old pool of songs, too - are there some songs now that Bob simply wouldn't risk singing?

As Stefan says, Bob seems to be enjoying himself (most of the time). And - after so much hard work and so many great performances with so many different bands over so many years - perhaps that's what's important now.

Like JudasPriest, I think new players or a changed repertoire could bring about an improvement in the shows. But, for Bob, is it really worth the hassle?