In hindsight, it’s very easy to show off about all the huge bands you saw before they were big. Of course, they weren’t necessarily that good when they were starting out, and I seem to have been in two minds about this one. The gig was On This Day (almost), on 30th November 1979, their second appearance at Eric’s that year.
It’s funny to remember that “keyboards” (aka synthesisers) were so controversial for a while.
SIMPLE MINDS / PORTRAITS
Eric's, Liverpool
Melody Maker, December 15, 1979
THE Portraits are the sort of band you enjoy for the length of one song and dislike for the rest of the set. Their appearance belies their sound, shabby English dress disguising flashy heavy pop with a very American flavour. The "Old Grey Whistle Test" version of new wave.
Simple Minds, on the other hand, are the sort of band you begin prejudiced against and end up wanting to like.
On stage the "art school" influences are less noticeable than on record (Jim Kerr's slightly mannered voice is closer to a Tom Petty pick-up than a Howard Devoto sneer) and despite the dramatic lighting (or lack of it) their stage presence is unassuming and self-effacing.
The most striking first impression is of a lot of keyboards. Each song seems to start with one of two customary keyboard openings (dramatic chords or bopping). Apart from this, they sound like everyone who has ever used keyboards in a song, but at least they managed to avoid sounding like Gary Numan for all but one song. That's one bag they won't get pushed into. There's more warmth, sympathy and effort here.
The sound is strung unfashionably full (with a very traditional excess of guitar), carefully arranged with every component in its place. It's almost too perfect, the tight structures leaving no room for relaxation or adaptation.
The problem with this sort of band is that they are neither sufficiently nostalgic nor sufficiently adventurous. Innovation doesn't come from importing the latest trendy sounds (keyboards) into an existing framework. The framework's got to be re-examined, too. The sound of Simple Minds (and others too obvious to enumerate) has the modern ambiance, but without the risks or the excitement.
That was the initial impression, but it's gradually eroded as the set progresses. The predictability of the opening numbers gives way to compulsive rhythms. Soon the tension creeps into the songs, which become more disjointed. "Naked Eye" is ungainly, "Bells" stops and starts, the first of the long songs, playing with structured and alternating sections.
At least they're trying hard. It's not startling, but it's a start.
Thanks for this article, which I think reflects the dichotomy of Simple Minds - 'shabby English dress disguising flashy heavy pop with a very American flavour' which nails it.
I have an admiration and uneasy fascination for Simple Minds and play their first few albums regularly. There are not many bands that can beat them for persistence, recording 6 albums before major success with 'New Gold Dream'. Side A of 'Sparkle in the Rain' is perfection and perhaps up there with Side A of 'Combat Rock' by The Clash? Side B is a mixed bag, much like Side B of 'Combat Rock'
These working class lads from Glasgow, do have a propensity for bombast at times which is difficult to ignore, but so are 'Waterfront', 'Up on the Catwalk', 'Love song' and 'I Travel'.
Really interesting to see a first impressions piece of a band who subsequently (perhaps despite themselves) became a massive stadium band. Thanks again.
Fun to see this review of Simple Minds during their infancy! I saw them many times during their 80s arena incarnation.