From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V7 #108 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Sunday, March 22 1998 Volume 07 : Number 108 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: SH/Chat Questions [Eb ] temper, temper [Danielle ] Re: temper, temper... [dmw ] Re: SH/Chat Questions [nicastr@idt.net (Ben)] Re: temper, temper... [Terrence M Marks ] Re: temper, temper... [tanter ] Re: SH/Chat Questions [Bayard ] enharmonics and such... [Mark Gloster ] Re: enharmonics and such... [Miles Goosens ] Re: temper, temper... [Terrence M Marks ] Re: SH/Chat Questions [Eb ] Re: temper, temper... [tanter ] Mostly irrelevant, but what the hell (contains fashion advice, however) [] Re: SH/Chat Questions [nicastr@idt.net (Ben)] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 17:47:06 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: SH/Chat Questions Bayard wrote: >my thinking is, better to provide something good to Mike beforehand than >to just post some kind of sourpuss blowoff after the fact. I didn't see the submitted questions "before the fact." I assumed they would be more interesting than that. >> Entertainment Tonight-type queries. But if I HAD to ask something, I >> suppose I might ask about his shaky relationship with producers, and why >> his albums so frequently fall victim to poorly chosen producers. And why he >> hasn't learned to avoid this yet, after 20 years. Yeah, it's not a nice >> question, but that's what comes to mind. Or perhaps something about what >> we've discussed at length here, regarding the difficult tug-of-war between >> a veteran artist "maturing" yet "keeping things fresh." > >Those would have been good, you should have asked them. Well, like someone else said, he rarely gives sincere answers anyway. Just hides behind that ironic snideness.... Eb ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 15:50:35 -0800 From: Danielle Subject: temper, temper Eb wrote: >I'm part of some vast brainf*ck conspiracy on the Internet, and I didn't >even know about it!! Don't play dumb with me. I know she's your alter ego. ;) (Incidentally, why not just say 'fuck'? We all know what you meant.) Ben wrote: > What a dick. My, how well-reasoned. You thought that little insight was worthy of an entire post? > You're the music biz type, you must know how to handle > musicians better than us mere mortals. Jesus. Is it any wonder Eb didn't want his vocation splattered all over the lists he's on? Danielle, back and cantankerous PS Quail, count me in for the gathering. But James and I would probably want to ride a yellow-eyed penguin, if that's OK with you... don't trust those platypi... ;) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 01:54:52 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: temper, temper... On Sat, 21 Mar 1998, Eb wrote: > Oh, OK. Yeah, I'm familiar with this school of thought. La Monte Young, and > all that. But jeez, I say that Eb equals D#, and you reply with a just for the record, playing apologist to no one, the "well-tempered" scale in common use in western music today is a fairly recent innovation as our history goes, if fairly old as far as recorded musical tradition goes. certainly by the time of bach's _well tempered clavier_, for example, it was well-established, but any of the medeival melodies still hanging around -- "greensleeves" f'r example -- predate it. so it's really not a la monte young type of thing at all. young is into mathematical sequences of tones, and his "well-tuned piano" is a completely different beast from speaking of "temper." ...but for practical purposes, certainly on any "C" instrument like guitar or piano, D# and Eb are indeed played the same way. like y'all really care. but anyway. - -- d. - - oh,no!! you've just read mail from doug = dmayowel@access.digex.net - - and dmw@mwmw.com ... get yr pathos at http://www.pathetic-caverns.com/ - - new reviews! tunes, books, flicks, etc. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 02:08:25 -0500 From: nicastr@idt.net (Ben) Subject: Re: SH/Chat Questions >Bayard wrote: >>my thinking is, better to provide something good to Mike beforehand than >>to just post some kind of sourpuss blowoff after the fact. > >I didn't see the submitted questions "before the fact." I assumed they >would be more interesting than that. > Weather or not the questions were up to the Eb standard (something I believe only Eb is capable of reaching) is not the point. There's really no reason for you to be so critical of them, especially in your trademarked snobbish way. Give it a rest for once. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 03:09:56 -0500 (EST) From: Terrence M Marks Subject: Re: temper, temper... > Oh, OK. Yeah, I'm familiar with this school of thought. La Monte Young, and > all that. But jeez, I say that Eb equals D#, and you reply with a > "Nonsense"??? Quite a haughty overstatement, that. You should've come back > with "Well, yes. But actually, if you adhere to renegade theories of well > temperament instead, the notes *wouldn't* be the same." Something like Well, the "nonsense" wasn't meant as a put-down. It was more of a haughty, British affection. "well, you're mildly wrong" doesn't have quite the same ring to it. And well-temperament was, until 1880, universal, and I think that music would do well to bring it back. (Though I think they ought to give Eb and D# separate keys if they do. Makes more sense that way.) > that, with a bit more sense of perspective. I didn't earn a "Nonsense." Ok. Sorry. > > >(All classical music sounds the same to me) > > Ouch! And you're preaching about music theory? > I bet there are folks who could go on for hours about guitarmaking, using different woods, body widths, pickups, etc, but couldn't personally tell the difference between a rosewood strat and an alder strat. I bet there are folks who know all about atomic theory, but can't tell molybdenum from osmium. Terrence Marks normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 08:22:21 -0500 From: tanter Subject: Re: temper, temper... At 03:09 AM 3/22/98 -0500, you wrote: > >I bet there are folks who could go on for hours about guitarmaking, >using different woods, body widths, pickups, etc, but couldn't >personally tell the difference between a rosewood strat and an alder >strat. I bet there are folks who know all about atomic theory, but can't >tell molybdenum from osmium. Or chocolate from cocoa, or Wordsworth from Coleridge, or Arnold from Hardy, or Churchill from Roosevelt or boys from girls! Marcy ;) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 12:27:19 -0500 (EST) From: Bayard Subject: Re: SH/Chat Questions > I didn't see the submitted questions "before the fact." I assumed they > would be more interesting than that. the point is, a contribution to the issue at hand would have added more value than simple andy-rooney-like fussiness. > Well, like someone else said, he rarely gives sincere answers anyway. Just > hides behind that ironic snideness.... I think he would have given sincere answers to your questions. And for the record, I assumed his _glass flesh_ thank-you was sincere, just noncommittal. wishful thinking? perhaps not, who is to say what emotion is expressed in a text-only chat? (I have to say I like _GF_ miles better than _surprise your pig_ and _beyond the wildwood_, but of course i'm biased ;) dan yelled: Subject: enharmonics and such... The truth is, I don't think Terrence's representation of the classical tempered system is a wacko or whacko rare theory. I believe that this is completely accepted in strings and voice- though it doesn't always work perfectly with fretted or other tuned "definite pitch" instruments. For sake of moderation, in general conversation Eb is an enharmonic of D# (is pretty much equal to). In classical theory, be thankful Eb that Eb is considered sharper than D#. I suppose that is part of yet another subtle dig at Eb's enharmonic netpal. - -Markg ps. Quail: you came to California when I was in Colorado. Are you afraid I would send the tigermonkey after you? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 11:57:40 -0600 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: enharmonics and such... At 09:39 AM 3/22/98 -0800, Mark Gloster wrote: >For sake of moderation, in general conversation Eb is an enharmonic of >D# (is pretty much equal to). In classical theory, be thankful Eb that >Eb is considered sharper than D#. I suppose that is part of yet another >subtle dig at Eb's enharmonic netpal. I think Eb's twin brother (sister?) may be Mr. B Natural, which should produce an instant shudder among you MST3K fans... :-) later, Miles ObRobyn: I had a dream a few weeks ago where I had just woken up and my wife asked me "have you graded those exams yet? Aren't they due today?" I suddenly remembered that I was teaching a course in Fegmania, and that I had forgotten to grade the class' final exams, and I had promised to give back the exams in two hours! Sure enough, I looked in my bookbag, and there were blue exam books from many of you -- Mark Gloster, Bayard, Woj, Eb, James Dignan, Quail, Susan. I began imagining the disappointed looks on your faces if I had to tell you that your exams weren't ready yet. So I opened up Quail's exam, went straight to the "name your five least-favorite Hitchcock songs and explain their faults in detail" question (saving the "creative Fegfiction essay" for later), and went to work... ====================================================================== "If a million people say a stupid thing, it is still a stupid thing." -- Anatole France Miles Goosens outdoorminer@mindspring.com http://www.mindspring.com/~outdoorminer/miles ====================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 15:46:40 -0500 (EST) From: Terrence M Marks Subject: Re: temper, temper... > >using different woods, body widths, pickups, etc, but couldn't > >personally tell the difference between a rosewood strat and an alder > >strat. I bet there are folks who know all about atomic theory, but can't > >tell molybdenum from osmium. > > Or chocolate from cocoa, or Wordsworth from Coleridge, or Arnold from > Hardy, or Churchill from Roosevelt or boys from girls! > Or Stork from butter. Terrence Marks normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 14:12:20 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: SH/Chat Questions Bayard: >Like each of us, Eb has an unwritten obligation to do a brainscan before >posting (what's up with the USENET xposts?) to determine signal-to-noise. Firstly, the phrase "signal-to-noise" *never* fails to make me snort. It's impossible to use that phrase without sounding like an anal-retentive goof. Secondly, the list is slow slow slow right now, and I hardly think that two comic-relief Usenet posts will cause Feg Civilization to crumble. And I know that at LEAST one person got a kick out of them (and no, I'm not talking about Danielle). Mark: >The truth is, I don't think Terrence's representation of the classical >tempered system is a wacko or whacko rare theory. I believe that this is >completely accepted in strings and voice- though it doesn't always work >perfectly with fretted or other tuned "definite pitch" instruments. I never said it was "wacko." Or even "whacko." MUST this debate persist? Caveat emptor: I'm having a monumentally awful weekend, which shall undoubtedly continue to resonate in my life for many weeks and months to come. This is a baad time to start an argument with me. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 18:26:49 -0500 From: tanter Subject: Re: temper, temper... At 03:46 PM 3/22/98 -0500, you wrote: >Or Stork from butter. Or _Titanic_ from _The Towering Inferno_!!! ;) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 14:11:10 -0800 From: Danielle Subject: Mostly irrelevant, but what the hell (contains fashion advice, however) Auckland power crisis and general slackness on my part notwithstanding, a few things need to be said about the last fifteen or so digests. Well, not strictly 'need', as such. But I'm in a garrulous - and slightly less cantankerous - mood. A few days back, the Great Quail wrote: > Also, I would like to suggest that the following attire be pronounced > unacceptable: any glow in the dark badge whatsoever, small wrap round > eye masks of any sort, and, most of all, iridescent body stocking and > so-called "superfeg" jocks. And I thought Eb's shirt was bad... if this is the required dress for us, can I respectfully abstain from becoming a full-blown feg just yet? How the hell am I expected to coordinate that outfit with the right accessories? Quite frankly, none of the handbags in my collection are appropriate, and my mind boggles even *trying* to think of the matching gloves and shoes... is there a 'girlie' feg outfit, for those of us with slightly more traditional tastes? ;) Michael K. wrote, among other things: > incorporate the new tax rate into the way you fornicate I'm still giggling a lot at this whole mini-thread. Just thought you ought to know. And James, this is from something like three weeks ago, for which I apologise, but it's gotta be said. I'm perfectly willing to concede that Dave Dobbyn's work is patchy. Cool Bananas? *Urgh*. But when he's good he's very very good indeed - witness his work with Froom and two of the Attractions on Lament for the Numb. And *you* should be consigned to hades for mentioning Jon Stevens. That appalling 1980 cover of 'Montego Bay'! 'SING out...' ;) (Incidentally, why don't we ever have these discussions on NZ-POP? No, scratch that question. We both know why.) Danielle NP An old Goon Show. Tee hee. :) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 21:06:00 -0500 From: nicastr@idt.net (Ben) Subject: Re: SH/Chat Questions >Bayard: >>Like each of us, Eb has an unwritten obligation to do a brainscan before >>posting (what's up with the USENET xposts?) to determine signal-to-noise. > >Firstly, the phrase "signal-to-noise" *never* fails to make me snort. It's >impossible to use that phrase without sounding like an anal-retentive goof. > Uhh... (insert phrase along the lines of "look who's talking"/"takes one to know one", etc.) >Caveat emptor: I'm having a monumentally awful weekend, which shall >undoubtedly continue to resonate in my life for many weeks and months to >come. This is a baad time to start an argument with me. > >Eb After Bayard's recent post, I am unable to read anything from Eb without hearing it in the high-pitched whine of Andy Rooney. Ouch! ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V7 #108 *******************************