Blue Cathedral

  • Record Label: Sub Pop
  • Release Date: Jul 27, 2004
User Score
7.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 28 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 21 out of 28
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 28
  3. Negative: 7 out of 28

Review this album

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jasonc
    Aug 20, 2004
    9
    To start off, I'd like to say that I think this is an absolutely fantastic album, and is definitely one of my favorites of the year thus far. With that said, caution certainly must be taken when approaching this, for me thinks the target audience is rather selective. Best descibed as long psychadelic jams that give you the distinct impression of a flash back to an acid trip you had To start off, I'd like to say that I think this is an absolutely fantastic album, and is definitely one of my favorites of the year thus far. With that said, caution certainly must be taken when approaching this, for me thinks the target audience is rather selective. Best descibed as long psychadelic jams that give you the distinct impression of a flash back to an acid trip you had in the seventies. Guitars range from the pink floydian to sludgy doom, all the while accompanied by psychadelic waves emanating from a variety of instrumentation, taking the mind on a schizophrenic journey through different styles. From slow atmospheric meltings to lazy summer jammings to cacophonous rockings. This is deffinitely a record to listen to at full volume with an open mind. Not to say you needed to be alive in the seventies to appreciate this (I wasnt), just that there's a strong sense of hommage to that era. But at the same time it works within the context of modern experimental psychadelia, paradoxiacally sounding current and nostalgic at the same time. No small feat I say! Recommended to fans of the the psychadelic-folk movement in the states (san-fran and beyond) and for those with a fondness for the weird and -dare i say- absurd. Brilliant. Expand
  2. markf
    Aug 12, 2004
    8
    This is a pumped-up psychedelic prog/jam/metal blast from the past "recreation." Of course, it doesn't actually sound like any of the late 60s/early 70s bands that it may occasionally seem to emulate, and that's a good thing. It actually seems to be more innovative. There's even elements of jazz and blues buried within the intense freakouts or sometimes even up front in the This is a pumped-up psychedelic prog/jam/metal blast from the past "recreation." Of course, it doesn't actually sound like any of the late 60s/early 70s bands that it may occasionally seem to emulate, and that's a good thing. It actually seems to be more innovative. There's even elements of jazz and blues buried within the intense freakouts or sometimes even up front in the quieter passages. I was really pleasantly surprised how much ground it covers. I grew up with Cream, Hendrix, Steppenwolf, and Grand Funk Railroad, and their spirits hang over this but definitely do not possess it. If you liked any of those, or even Queens of the Stone Age or Icarus Line, I think you'll like this. (That instrumental even sounds inspired partly by Yes!) Expand
  3. WillO.
    Aug 16, 2004
    9
    A great combination of many 60s/70s psychadelic freak out bands and abrasive hard rock. They wear their influences on their sleeve, but have enough talent and originality to make it work really well. It's definitely a lot to take in at first, but overall it's a really fantastic listen. I'd give it an 8.5 if possible, so I just rounded up.
  4. DonW
    Aug 20, 2004
    9
    It would be great if people like "Greg P", giving this album a score of 0, had at least heard the album in question before rating it. If he has, he should try to level a better criticism at Comets on Fire than calling them a "no name band". Every band has to start somewhere, right? That they've moved up to Sub Pop is quite a step for them, and I actually found it a little surprising. It would be great if people like "Greg P", giving this album a score of 0, had at least heard the album in question before rating it. If he has, he should try to level a better criticism at Comets on Fire than calling them a "no name band". Every band has to start somewhere, right? That they've moved up to Sub Pop is quite a step for them, and I actually found it a little surprising. They're a great band, though, and I hope they continue successfully. This is a great album that only gets better with repeated listens. Despite the obvious ties to some somewhat disparate '70s influences and a "kitchen sink" approach that may seem a little unfocused at first, it's really a wonderfully fun, coherent, and heavy record. The free-form sax and the heavy riffs recall a Stooges - Funhouse vibe, and the quieter moments have a somewhat proggy feel. It's one of my favorite records of this year, and the band's best one yet. Expand
  5. JakiLiebezeit
    Aug 6, 2005
    10
    It's seems like people either love or hate this album. But just for the record, i'm right.
  6. DevinB
    Aug 16, 2004
    9
    Greg is a perfect example of everything that's wrong with the music-buying public today. Way to embarass yourself, dude. Yeah, the critics who spend their entire lives understanding music and listening to more of it than you could possibly imagine are clueless, but you, who have never listened to anything that's not force-fed to you by the clearchannel machine, know what's Greg is a perfect example of everything that's wrong with the music-buying public today. Way to embarass yourself, dude. Yeah, the critics who spend their entire lives understanding music and listening to more of it than you could possibly imagine are clueless, but you, who have never listened to anything that's not force-fed to you by the clearchannel machine, know what's going on enough to give a band you've never listened to a 0. Totally awesome, man. Incidentally, this band DOES have fans, and I'm one of them. Also, sub-pop being the label that spawned Nirvana among many other historical greats, they're hardly "no-name" or even entirely "indie." Also, Comets on Fire''s blend of psych-rock, muscle, and brains kicked my ass. A solid 9. Expand
  7. rickg
    Aug 17, 2004
    8
    Yeah, right Greg P. And I bet you've never heard My Bloody Valentine Loveless or any of german krautrock CAN's early stellar releases (1969-1974 in particular). You're the clueless one.
  8. CraigL
    Aug 18, 2004
    10
    Less straightforward than their speedfreak self-titled album; way more sprawling. Possibly their best, and definitely the mega awesomeness.
  9. NathanA
    Aug 27, 2004
    10
    awesome.
  10. Asbjorn
    Aug 29, 2004
    10
    Great music! They mixed some of the best music from the 60s and 70s to an unbelievable daring and cool sound.
  11. PhilG
    Aug 18, 2004
    8
    Greg P, so a band who doesnt have a mainstream following is instantly not good? I didnt realize fans are the key to a bands musicmanship. This album successfuly blends many elements from the 60's and 70's psychedelic era. While most remeniscant of floyd's few albums right after the departure of syd barrett, it also adds to the mix progressive, and metal which is mostly Greg P, so a band who doesnt have a mainstream following is instantly not good? I didnt realize fans are the key to a bands musicmanship. This album successfuly blends many elements from the 60's and 70's psychedelic era. While most remeniscant of floyd's few albums right after the departure of syd barrett, it also adds to the mix progressive, and metal which is mostly heard as a backdrop to the singer's distorted voice. The strong point to the album is heard on the many instrumental tracks. These shine, and show a band who play their instruments with talent very hard to find in modern music. The only gripe I would have with the album would be the singer's vocal choices. Its not that his voice is horrible, but his choice in using distortion on the mic and a slight echo effect actually turn his voice into a sound effect, too muffled to make out lyrics and too distorted to detect his real voice. These unnessesary effects make the vocals on certian tracks sound almost identical to each other. Fortunaly vocals can be ignored when the instruments start flaring, and when they start going you find a unique band with a knack of taking you for a trip. Only if its just for 50 minutes. Expand
  12. ChrisC
    Feb 15, 2005
    8
    This is good instrumental music that I hated at first but has grown on me immensely. As judging by some of the other reviews, it's the kind of album that takes time and scares off casual listeners -- and that's never a bad thing.
  13. XianB
    Feb 13, 2006
    10
    Comets On Fire is the greatest rock'n'roll band on earth! And Jaki is jus right, even if it's not him.
  14. Alex
    Aug 26, 2006
    9
    Dense sonic noise not for your average pop fan, Blue Cathedral is some truly psychedelic music backed up by fierce instrumentation. If Led Zeppelin or Cream had made it to see the Shoegazing era, they may have recorded an album like this.
Metascore
84

Universal acclaim - based on 17 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 17
  2. Negative: 0 out of 17
  1. This album just may signal the beginning of an exciting new era in rock music.
  2. Mojo
    80
    This time [COF] have tempered their voluminous superfuzz with scenic bliss. [Oct 2004, p.101]
  3. Uninhibited and hushed in all the right places, it’s safe to say that Comets on Fire have hit their stride.