GALLOWS POLE — And Time Stood Still (review)

GALLOWS POLE — And Time Stood Still album cover

Album · 2013 · Hard Rock

2/5 · 2013-08-07
Kev Rowland

Apparently these guys were formed as long ago as 1977, and when they were called Angelina they had a number one hit single in 1980 in their home country of Austria at which point they changed their name to Gallow’s Pole. Since then there have been the normal line-up changes, but band leader Alois Martin Binder has been there since the very beginning. This is their seventh album, so one would expect them to really know what they are doing by now, and there is no doubt that they can play and that the production is very good indeed, it’s just a shame that the songs just don’t work at all. What we have is a band that wants to be really heavy, but also wants to very melodic, with a singer whose voice is probably best described as ‘different’. The result is something that is actually the worse of all worlds, as they are too heavy for the style of music they are trying to develop, and too slow to be a traditional metal outfit while too melodic to be anything but soft rock.

The first time I played this I kept waiting for something to change, as there is no way that a band that has been working for well over thirty years should produce something as bad as this. The second time I played it I kept berating myself for forcing myself to play something that wasn’t very good at all. I would be lying if I said that I made it all the way through a third. The best part of this album is the artwork – don’t play it, just look at it.

more than 2 years ago
Permalink
Report #287559

Share this review

Review Comments

Post a public comment below | Send private message to the reviewer

Please login to post a shout

J-Man wrote:

more than 2 years ago

If you think no good music has been released since the arbitrary year of 1990, you simply haven't been listening.

adg211288 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

@jack daniels,

If you so enthralled with the band/album how about writing a positive review for the release rather than posting remarks that are obviously designed to bait a response from other members?

If you want to offer the reviewer a constructive argument then be our guest but so far I'm not seeing it. Modern artists still write songs. It may be true that the band has influenced other artists but that doesn't automatically make them immune from making a bad album. Perhaps the names Metallica and St. Anger ring some bells? And the only fact I see here so far is that two people have a difference in taste. Claiming the reviewer (and by extension anyone else who likes anything newer than 1990, apparently) doesn't know what good music is is hardly going to help the album's case.

jack daniels wrote:

more than 2 years ago

this guys are writing songs. i understand that it must be very strange for you because in "modern" music they don't do this anymore. this band has influenced a lot of musicians during the decades even famous ones. the fact that you don't know what good music is doesn't change anything. but it's not your fault because since 1990 there has'nt been any. so, you're not to blame.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Most innovative album in the last ten years? Don't make me laugh.

J-Man wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Something tells me that you're a member of the band, Jack Daniels.

jack daniels wrote:

more than 2 years ago

well, hehehe, sorry guy. if i would be you i would listen again! this is the most innovativ album in the last ten years. i would say this is the ALBUM OF THE YEAR! unless there comes something better which i doubt.