From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@ecto.org To: fegmaniax-digest@ecto.org Reply-To: fegmaniax@ecto.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@ecto.org Subject: Feg Digest V5 #178 Fegmaniax Digest Volume 5 Number 178 Monday July 28 1997 To post, send mail to fegmaniax@ecto.org To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@ecto.org with the words "unsubscribe fegmaniax-digest" in the message body. Send comments, etc. to the listowner at owner-fegmaniax@ecto.org FegMANIAX! Web Page: http://remus.rutgers.edu/~woj/fegmaniax/index.html Archives are available at ftp://www.ecto.org/pub/lists/fegmaniax/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Today's Topics: ------- ------- Stuff (no RH Content) That Bit in Agony of Pleasure What's the p-value, Kenneth? RE: That Bit in Agony of Pleasure Does humor belong in music? (vaguely tangential Robyn content) Soft Boys gig? Re: negative correlations Re: Soft Boys gig? Re: Does humor belong in music? (vaguely tangential Robyn content) Re: Does humor belong in music? (vaguely tangential Robyn content) Re: Does humor belong in music? muzic Re: Glastonbury/Diversity etc. Re: Does humor belong in music? Why not Queen Elvis? Re: a very small introduction Re: negative correlations Re: Why not Queen Elvis? Re: Jingoism Re: muzic UK vs US ------------------------------ From: TROYD1_at_REF@westatpo.westat.com Date: Fri, 25 Jul 97 09:13:28 EDT Subject: Stuff (no RH Content) Eb said: *But while I'm here, I'll say again that EM's upcoming The *Lateness of the Hour is probably the best record I've heard all year. [EM = Eric Matthews, while E = MCsq. -Dan] Gotta disagree aboot EM's newest. Sounds like the overbearing work of a guy who has too many yes men around, constantly telling him that he's brilliant. I thought his first album showed promise, but this is a disappointment in my book. I was fortunate enough to hear an advance tape of a band called Syrup USA, which features the singer from the Swirlies. That has my vote for best thing I've heard this year, though, admittedly, I haven't heard nearly enough. Re Elastica: Why has it taken so long to put out a second album? Who are they, Fleetwood Mac? Boston? Get to work, already! Dan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 09:28:08 -0400 Subject: That Bit in Agony of Pleasure From: grahampenn@juno.com (Graham C Penn) All this talk of "hidden" tracks made me think about the backwards intro to "Agony of Pleasure." I'm sure someone with the vinyl version has figured out what this is. Any help for a CD owner on this one? Graham (Half of the big dot in Gainesville, FL) _________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ From: TROYD1_at_REF@westatpo.westat.com Date: Fri, 25 Jul 97 09:27:06 EDT Subject: What's the p-value, Kenneth? >This is easy. We have everyone's votes from the 'best RH album' >mouldering in a vault somewhere. All we have to do is run a Pearson >correlation on the dates of issue, against Randi's new "when I first >saw RH" dates. Null hypothesis is that there is no correlation, >alternative hypothesis is that there is a positive correlation (so I >would say it was one-tailed). Might want to do a two-tailed as well to see if there's any correlation, whether positive or negative. Concerns: Is our sample large enough? As the sample is self-selected, I'm afraid the results would not be generalizable the list as a whole, nor to all Robyn Hitchcock fans. Still, it would provide a data point for future research. Some anecdotal evidence in support of the null: the first RH album I heard was Invisible Hitchcock (it was 1987), and while I still like it, it would probably only rank somewhere in the middle of my favorite RH works (though I gather that's much higher than most on the list most would put it!). My faves are IODOT, BSDR, UM, Eye, and Fegmania, by the way. Dan (whose pace of two posts in one day may rate him a Hobbit persona, yet) ------------------------------ From: "Chaney, Dolph L" Subject: RE: That Bit in Agony of Pleasure Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 09:51:17 -0400 Well, I've done no hi-tech analysis, but it sounds distinctly like "ruof eerht owt eno". A backwards count-off. Dolph ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 09:59:13 -0400 From: Natalie Jacobs Subject: Does humor belong in music? (vaguely tangential Robyn content) >PS: James sez "W4elcome to the REAL world, Natalie... come on in, the >water's luverly..." Yes, but it smells funny. :) >PPS: the 4 is silent. My God, that means I'm only 2 years old! I had a small revelation on the way to work yesterday. . . They were playing "It's the End of the World as We Know It" on the radio, and I thought, "Wow, REM were much cooler when they had a sense of humor." Then I started to wonder whether there was an inverse correlation between humor and super-mega-stardom. I mean, how many BIG SUPERSTARS can you think of who actually have any sense of humor, wit, or irony? Most really popular artists I can think of are the most pompous, humorless asses on the face of the earth - think Bono, or Sting, or, yes, Michael Stipe. Then I ran down a list of my favorite artists, none of whom are particularly popular, and all of whom have a pretty keen sense of humor, from the bitter wit of Elvis Costello to the crazed dada of Captain Beefheart to our very own Robyn. My question is: do artists lose their sense of humor when they get popular, or do they get popular when they lose their sense of humor? n. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 97 08:15:00 -0800 From: Russ Reynolds Subject: Soft Boys gig? Hmmm...surprise appearances by Andy and Kimberley in recent days...do I smell a Soft Boys reunion gig? -rr FOR SALE: hundreds of little tiny fragments of a "Velvet Underground" album cover. And one stupid bird. Or will trade both for a new "Velvet Underground" album cover. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 16:28:19 +0100 (BST) From: M R Godwin Subject: Re: negative correlations I think the widespread enthusiasm for negative correlation coefficients is fundamentally misconceived. It would require an alternative hypothesis that the more recently you discovered RH, the more you liked his old albums, and conversely, the older the fan you were, the more likely you are to like the new stuff. Is this at all probable? As for the alpha to use, the usual 95/05 rule is OK with me, but as it's small numbers I wouldn't dismiss any results in the 90-95% region out of hand. But regardless of the alpha, if I got an R which was worse, than, say +0.56 or so, quite frankly I'd chuck the results in the bin. - Mike ("Radagast the Bird-tamer") Godwin PS And don't give me any of that "When do I use Spearman and when do I use Kendall?" stuff. I never got any sense out rank correlations in the first place. Bah! - MRG ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 16:44:24 +0100 (BST) From: M R Godwin Subject: Re: Soft Boys gig? On Fri, 25 Jul 1997, Russ Reynolds wrote: > FOR SALE: hundreds of little tiny fragments of a "Velvet Underground" album > cover. And one stupid bird. Or will trade both for a new "Velvet > Underground" album cover. Going cheep? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 97 08:41:00 -0800 From: Russ Reynolds Subject: Re: Does humor belong in music? (vaguely tangential Robyn content) Nat typed: >My >question is: do artists lose their sense of humor when they get popular, or >do they get popular when they lose their sense of humor? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 97 09:27:00 -0800 From: Russ Reynolds Subject: Re: Does humor belong in music? (vaguely tangential Robyn content) Nat typed: >My >question is: do artists lose their sense of humor when they get popular, or >do they get popular when they lose their sense of humor? and then I replied (for some reason this reply didn't end up in the post): I think they get popular when they are able to disguise their sense of humor. I've never been able to figure out why the general public enjoys a good novelty tune by, let's say. Wierd Al, yet shuns artists who have a general sense of humor about their work. I'd say Elvis Costello and Squeeze were probably two of the most successful. I personally enjoy laughing, so when I hear music that is both structurally pleasant and funny, I like it. Near as I can figure other people don't enjoy laughing as much as I do. To me that makes even less sense than not enjoying sex, as laughing not only makes you feel good, but given the right conditions you can do it dozens of times in the same night. Plus you can do it in public without getting arrested. -rr ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 11:42:51 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: Does humor belong in music? >>My >>question is: do artists lose their sense of humor when they get popular, or >>do they get popular when they lose their sense of humor? > >I think they get popular when they are able to disguise their sense of >humor. Aw come on, folks. You're WAY overgeneralizing. There are lots of superstars with a sense of humor, both within music and without. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 11:21:55 -0700 (PDT) From: misplaced joan of arc Subject: muzic Hi fegs! It seems that a lot of people are feeling let down by the MAINSTREAM music of the 90's. Recall back to some of the mainstream crap that came from previous decades, then reconsider. All are pretty brutal, if you ask me. I have a theory (groan, here she goes) about mainstream 90's bands and why they are putting out such poo (every decade has it's own, unique reason). Major labels have been wearing this "alternative" mask and are trying to prematurely "make" another U2 from bands that are idea-less, but willing to sell their faces and asses as being the next "alternative to the norm." One example: A few months ago, I saw this opener band called _That Dog_, who were VERY young and their music was insipid, but it could be argued (not by me) that they had talent and could potentially figure it out, if they kept at it. However, they bragged throughout the show, that they had just signed with GEFFEN and to look for their album at your neighborhood Virgin Megastore. I was floored! I think they may have put out an album before, on a small label, but still, this band was not ready (musically) for stardom. They'll never figure it out now - they are 100% "alt-rock" poster children, prime candidates for the one-hit wonder bandwagon in the sky. I've seen this happen to so many bands and it's sad. Good bands too! Conclusion: major labels are pure evil. Fugazi says: "Never mind what they're selling; It's what you're buying." I think a good way to approach bands in the nineties, is to go by record labels and/or producers (I know, labels-labels-LABELS!). For good ones, there's Matador, Merge, K Records, Minty Fresh, I could go on. True, a lot of these labels have merged with the evil majors, but they still tend to seek out genuine acts and each label seems to have its own flavor (somewhat). I think most of these labels have compilations that may give some insight to new talent. Still, though, there's some bands who use this small label identity to get to stardom. I read somewhere that Smashing Pumpkins had already signed with whatever major they are with now, when they put out their first smash album "Gish" under the guise of a small label. I though that was pretty sneaky and it got them the alternative status that they wanted. Hmmmm. Well, thanks for enduring my mutter. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 12:46:47 -0700 From: Nick Winkworth CC: "Bonde M'Teko" Subject: Re: Glastonbury/Diversity etc. On Wed, 23 Jul 1997 14:40 fiona zinovieff scrawled in the mud... [...snip...] > can mash your brains with the orb, dance like banshees to system 7 > ( steve hillage was part of Gong in the 1970's)... Whoah! Is this a new Hillage vehicle? (I was a *huge* Hillage fan at one time - and I don't care who knows it). I thought he'd stopped playing. Tell me more! > ...chemical brothers...van morrison...ani difranco...david byrne... WOW! Sounds like quite the line-up! I wasn't going to enter this particular conversation, but... At the risk of sounding jingoistic (I'm an ex-pat Brit); I have always found the UK to be a more vibrant source of new music than here in the US. Mainstream America (and I think that's what Terry is talking about here) is always slow to catch on to anything new and is more wary of change than the UK. How else could Country music stations hold the dominant place they do? On the other hand, sometimes the UK goes too much the other way - fads seem to come and go with alarming rapidity. Formula radio stations are the real scourge of innovation in the US however. (If someone is tuned to the "Lite rock of the 60's and '70s" station how will they *ever* hear any new music - even if they'd like it if they did?) Exciting, imaginative, great new music is always there if you're prepared to look for it (and it sounds like most of us on this list are), but when we talk about whether the 70's were better than the 90's or whatever we are really only comparing the music that was commercially promoted. When times are good and people are generally optimistic about the future they're more open to adventurous new music. If the mood is more depressed people are more conservative - and look to the past. At least in the 90's it is easier to find music in your chosen speciality. More labels, more distribution methods. It's easier to satisfy minority tastes. Personally my reaction to changing times has always been to change the main genre I listen to - depending on where the innovation is happening. First it was "progressive rock", then folk, then jazz/rock, african, techno.. and so on. (I missed 70's disco, for example - I think I was listening to Gong... ;-) !). > I'm off to WOMAD this weekend to be more impressed by the diversity - > Megadog dance tent, Ravi Shanka and of course Robyn on Sunday. Wish I was there... Rambling on from not-so-muddy California ~N PS I'd be interested to know who they grouped Robyn with. i.e. who's before and after. PPS It's good to see so many new contributors to the list. Keep it up! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 13:54:51 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: Does humor belong in music? >Eb wrote: > >> Aw come on, folks. You're WAY overgeneralizing. > >Aw come on, Eb. WHO CARES?!? Sheesh, get a grip. I wasn't the one ranting about humorless superstars...obviously, there are others who worry about this issue a lot more than me. Smelling a whiff of persecution, Eb ------------------------------ From: dsaunder@islandNet.com (Daniel Saunders) Subject: Why not Queen Elvis? Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 14:00:24 -0800 Anybody have a clue why Queen Elvis wasn't reissued by Rhino along with all the others? Daniel Saunders "Must be the approach of lightspeed I see / Ends before the starts What it's like in prison, / And the good and bad reasons for laws The excuses, then the outcomes, then the cause." - The Loud Family ------------------------------ From: dsaunder@islandNet.com (Daniel Saunders) Subject: Re: a very small introduction Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 14:00:24 -0800 > **Aha, here's my chance to advance my Robyn Hitchcock imprinting theory: > **in my experience, the first few RH albums a person listens to becomes > **special favourites regardless of quality. > > Ah, I hate to break your theory apart but in my case it doesn't apply > (but maybe I'm the exception that proves the rule ;-)). First RH album > I heard (after the SB box set) was Eye which I loved at the time but in > retrospect, is pretty mediocre at best IMHO (some great stuff mixed with > some really filler). I wasn't till my 5th RH album (Element of Light) that > I finally struck pay dirt - and that was over 2 years later :-) Hmph. Anecdotal evidence. I'm afraid that doesn't hold water in my book. :) Daniel Saunders "Must be the approach of lightspeed I see / Ends before the starts What it's like in prison, / And the good and bad reasons for laws The excuses, then the outcomes, then the cause." - The Loud Family ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 14:04:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Refugees on 45 Subject: Re: negative correlations > > I think the widespread enthusiasm for negative correlation coefficients is > fundamentally misconceived. i am not sure that all of the graduate students have chimed in on this stats thingy. (esp. those who are dealing with their 'methods' courses). :) .ch[r]i[s] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 17:26:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Bayard Subject: Re: Why not Queen Elvis? On Fri, 25 Jul 1997, Daniel Saunders wrote: > Anybody have a clue why Queen Elvis wasn't reissued by Rhino along with > all the others? probably b/c the Evil Ones (A&M) wouldn't release their death grip on the material of his they co-own-- even if it IS out of print! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 14:35:03 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: Jingoism Nick wrote: >Whoah! Is this a new Hillage vehicle? (I was a *huge* Hillage fan at >one time - and I don't care who knows it). I thought he'd stopped >playing. Tell me more! I don't think he EVER stopped. He's been making ambient records for quite awhile now. Under more than one name too, I believe. >At the risk of sounding jingoistic (I'm an ex-pat Brit); I have always >found the UK to be a more vibrant source of new music than here in the >US. Mainstream America (and I think that's what Terry is talking about >here) is always slow to catch on to anything new and is more wary of >change than the UK. Blah. Personally, about 75% of the new music I like is American. I think most of the new popular British bands are complete fluff. Mansun, Kula Shaker, Bluetones, Black Grape, Bush, Cast, Dodgy, London Suede, Ocean Colour Scene, Reef, Sleeper, Space, Morcheeba, Sneaker Pimps and of course Fluffy...zzzzz. Here today, gone tomorrow music -- soon to be just as obsolete as Revolver, Chapterhouse and the LAST wave of trendy UK bands. And I haven't heard ANY new UK ambient/high-tech artists which impressed me beyond Seefeel. Not even FSOL or the Chemical Brothers. Overall, I probably own about equal UK and US music. But my UK passions are heavily concentrated in the '60s and '70s. >On the other hand, sometimes the UK goes too much the other way - fads >seem to come and go with alarming rapidity. No kidding! And the bands come and go just as fast. And yet you say the UK is a better source of new music? Or were you talking just quantity rather than quality? Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 14:37:31 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: muzic Joan of Arc wrote: >It seems that a lot of people are feeling let down by the MAINSTREAM >music of the 90's. Recall back to some of the mainstream crap that came >from previous decades, then reconsider. All are pretty brutal, if >you ask me. I once saw a list of the top-selling singles of the oft-glorified 1960s. It was pretty horrifying. I think "Hey Jude" was on the list, but most of the songs were things like "Theme From 'A Summer Place.'" Eek. >A few months ago, I saw this opener band called >_That Dog_, who were VERY young and their music was insipid, but it could be >argued (not by me) that they had talent and could potentially figure it out, >if they kept at it. However, they bragged throughout the show, that they had >just signed with GEFFEN and to look for their album at your neighborhood >>Megastore. I was floored! I think they may have put out an album >before, on >a small label, but still, this band was not ready (musically) for stardom. >They'll never figure it out now - they are 100% "alt-rock" poster children, >prime candidates for the one-hit wonder bandwagon in the sky. I've seen this >happen to so many bands and it's sad. Good bands too! A) That Dog have THREE albums, all on DGC B) The band IS finally getting some commercial airplay now, after their first two records essentially flopped. They earned it -- they persevered! C) While I do like all of the That Dog records, their new one (Retreat From the Sun) is ENORMOUSLY better than the first two, and in fact would rank in my favorite half-dozen records of this year so far D) Furthermore, I gushed about this record to the Elvis Costello list, and as a result, at least four people on the list bought the record, loved it and thanked me profusely >Conclusion: major labels are pure evil. Bias...blanket dismissal.... And you know, I sure wouldn't call Minty Fresh a dependable label to buy. Personally, I don't have too much respect for anything on that label except for Komeda. And it's kinda funny you dump on That Dog, when anything nasty you say about That Dog could apply equally (or moreso?) to the Cardigans. Papas Fritas and Veruca Salt aren't exactly "bands of substance" either. I've traded in Papas Fritas, Cardigans and Legendary Jim Ruiz Group CDs, myself. And the Veruca album is strictly borderline. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 14:46:55 -0700 From: Eb Subject: UK vs US Checking the old database, I see I own about 50 albums released in 1997. Of those, NINE are UK records (not including the Pete Ham compilation). And of those nine, the Bis, Supergrass and Spiritualized records are the only ones which I would really stick up for. Eb, who's coincidentally seeing Supergrass play tonight ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The End of this Fegmaniax Digest. *sob* .