Jean Michel Jarre's credentials shine brighter than most and with sales of 60 million albums and titanic concerts to up to 3 million people, so they should. But is the basis of his fame the spectacle that he shrouds his music in or the actual music itself?

‘Aero' just strikes me as a series of sounds, which is what I assume music to be, but as Eric Morcombe so eloquently put it ‘All the right notes but not necessarily in the right order'. Ok, so it's in 5.1 surround sound but that alone certainly does not constitute a groundbreaking album. I reckon that hearing a couple of plates smashing in 5.1 surround sound would be impressive but is that music? What exactly constitutes a musical revolution? Radiohead deserve the accolade of advancing music with innovative experimental and wilfully uncommercial music, but does JMJ?

When I heard Oxygene back in the late 70's I was impressed, carried along in the tide of hype that surrounded JMJ but now I find myself having to question the basis for his celebrated status. The album may work as a film score and already feels better when accompanied by the French actress Anne Parillaud's expressive eyes on the bonus DVD, but I do find myself believing hardcore drugs are also called for.

As far as musical advancement is concerned it's no ‘Kid A' more like ‘A Kid'.


But make up your own mind by clicking on the streams below:

Aerology Windows Media Lo
Aerology Windows Media Hi
Aerology Real Media Lo
Aerology Real Media Hi

Equinoxe Windows Media Lo
Equinoxe Windows Media Hi
Equinoxe Real Media Lo
Equinoxe Real Media Hi

Rendez Vous Windows Media Lo
Rendez Vous Windows Media Hi
Rendez Vous Real Media Lo
Rendez Vous Real Media Hi

Oxygene 4 Windows Media Lo
Oxygene 4 Windows Media Hi
Oxygene 4 Real Media Lo
Oxygene 4 Real Media Hi

LATEST REVIEWS