Since there isn't really a Berlin Trilogy............ I just acquired the RCA Japan cd of "Heroes" and while listening I wondered which of his two 1977 Berlin albums do forum members prefer? For me, I like Low way better. You?
Both 'Low' and 'Heroes' are essential for me, but 'Low' ranks in my Top 3 Bowie Albums, so that Album is my Pick for this Poll. Since, my first bought Bowie Album was 'Black Tie, White Noise'(which I love despite that take not shared by most Bowie Fans apparently), there is no bias based on dates of release of his earlier Albums on how I rank them. Having bought the 'Singles' 2 CD Set around the same time as getting 'BTWN', I then went back to buy 'Statiom to Station', which remains my Favorite Bowie Album to this day, and his 5 Albums run from that 'Station to Station' through 'Scary Monsters' is tops for me, then 'Ziggy Stardust', 'Aladdin Sane' and '1. Outside'(another Collaboration with Eno like was done for 'Low', 'Heroes' and 'Lodger'. Back to 'Low', I thought I read there was a 2003 or 2004 Tour Stop where Bowie played the Entire 'Low' Album as part of that Concert(or possibly also other Concerts on that same Tour), so hoping after these 6 New BLA Releases(1995-1999), that Concert also eventually gets an Official Release. Since 'Heathen' also is one of my Favorite Bowie Albums, having a Concert with most of those Songs and the Complete 'Low' Album would be awesome(assuming I recall reading correctly that 'Low' was played during a 2003 or 2004 Concert).
The 3 Eno albums are all excellent in their own right and each has a different feel. Taking all things into account, objectively, I would say Low edges it as the iconic Bowie/Eno artifact. However, over the last 35 years I've actually had more listening enjoyment from Lodger (at least I did before TV got his mitts on it, ha ha!).
I really love them both to the same degree, so I am not able to vote. It's like prefering one of your children over the other.
Low Even though I heard the entire "Heroes" album shortly before release Low is more dear to me. Folks say David was low when he recorded it but Low has always been a positive album I never get tited of listening to. I absolutely love playing it - it's right there in the spotlight after pressing Play or when you drop the needle - and that revolutionary drum sound ! It has a great combination of short powerful pop/rock songs, combined with the instrumental tracks on side two. Excellent TMWFTE album cover photo and well chosen background. Ricky Gardiner deserves a trophy for his guitar work on this one. "Heroes" to me is the moody cousin, the monochrome artwork only emphasizes that. It's stone cold, Fripp adds eery sounds and the instrumentals are equally more moody, even depressing. Sense Of Doubt was used for many documentaries about nuclear reactors, anything behind the Iron Curtain etc at the time. The album has nonetheless grown on me in recent years, but it needs the right mood to enjoy. Final track is killer and announces a different direction. They are both classics.
== I also love the period of Station to Station to Scary Monsters. Along with The Idiot and Lust for Life is a very productive period for a recording artist. Very hard to beat David during this time. He painted a new canvas.
I love both albums but if I had to choose I would go for "Heroes " the songs are on side one are more developed, side two's instrumentals are just as haunting as the one's on Low and the whole album has a fuller sound to it. I also don't mind The Secret Life Of Arabia as the closer. Still comparing Low and "Heroes " is like comparing 18 and 24 karat gold,it's still gold at the end of the day!
Station to Station: feels edgy, despairing. Someone looking to escape before it's too late. Low: actually seems more positive, albeit with a serious hangover. There's new energy. A new career in a new town. Heroes: is gloomier, colder, for the most part but I imagine that's more to do with channelling the atmosphere of 1977 west Berlin, rather than reflecting Bowie's internal mood. Lodger: more playful and eclectic.
I prefer both, and maybe there was a Berlin Trilogy....because at the time "Lodger"was recorded (Montreux) bowie was spends a lot of time in Berlin
Having owned Heroes at the time, I played it a lot but later sold it. (Probably overlistened to it at the time.) And so in more recent years I always imagined that I preferred the cooler but murky-sounding and maybe less familiar Low. Then, going back to Heroes in just the last six months, I realised that Heroes is a clearer recording, that I seem to prefer the song-writing, and that the soundscapes on side 2 were quite exquisite. However, simultaneously I also realised that the dense previously murky-seeming synthetic sound of Low opens up considerably when played through a better amp/speaker combination – and becomes quite breathtakingly elegant on side 2. So, now I really do prefer both.
Jeepers – that's difficult. Heroes is my favourite Bowie record. However, I would agree that Low is overall the stronger of the two, even if side 2 of Heroes achieves more of what I think Bowie and Eno were aiming for. Both records create their own particular worlds in any case.
I voted "Heroes" knowing full well that it wouldn't be the popular vote. I do absolutely adore Low but I felt at the time, as I still do, that "Heroes" took that blueprint to the next level. Joe The Lion, Blackout and The Secret Life Of Arabia are among my favourite Bowie songs. I couldn't say as much for Low apart from Be My Wife. I never play either albums anymore, prefering my All Saints Redux and my own Bowie 77 comp for the non-instrumental tracks. Whatever: The Idiot/Low/Lust For Life/"Heroes" - talk about a sweet spot for David!
"Heroes" The songs are better, more chaotic and feature Bowie's vocal histrionics in all their glory. The Instrumentals are also more experimental and flow better. Low, is no slouch though.
I voted for Low. The song Heroes is better than any of the songs on Low, but Low is the better album.
