From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V7 #347 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Sunday, September 6 1998 Volume 07 : Number 347 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: critics too (0%RH) [Ben ] Re: Did Eb write this? [Ben ] another post with Eb in the subject line [Eb ] Re: another post with Eb in the subject line [Ben ] Re: another post with Eb in the subject line [zolarox@juno.com (Debora K)] Weller vs. Marks- it's a forfeit! [amadain ] I'm going to ramble [zolarox@juno.com (Debora K)] Re: another post with Eb in the subject line [Eb ] Re: Weller vs. Marks- it's a forfeit! [Terrence M Marks ] doing the du [Marshall Joseph Armintor ] 100% Zep [Miles Goosens ] Re: another post with Eb in the subject line [Miles Goosens ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1998 19:48:39 -0400 From: Ben Subject: Re: critics too (0%RH) tanter wrote: > album, I tend to have the opposite opinion when I hear the music. It seems > to me that a lot (not all, Eb!!) have an agenda before they hear something > or when they're writing about a band that has nothing to do with an > objective review. I basically stopped reading reviews and I either go by This is a good point, and one reason that I would give more weight to a reviewer's opinion of a new/unknown artist rather than an established one. They couldn't have any preconceived ideas about an unfamiliar artist, where as when a well known artist releases a new album, it is always compared to their previous work... ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1998 20:02:54 -0400 From: Ben Subject: Re: Did Eb write this? Debora K wrote: > >From Mr. Debora, reporting from Seattle, home of the mice... and > waiting, waiting for Mr. Nick Cave to come to town (On Letterman the 10th > of Sept.) > > Cut: Rush Biography > This raises a queston for any critics/Rush-bashers (one in the same, correct? :) )... How do you explain the enormous success of such a band that seems to embody all that is totally uncool in rock? Also, Rush seems to be an example of a band that illustrates the odd difference in the opinns of musicians and critics. As the posted bio mentioned, Rush is a band that has a lot of adoration among musicians, both professional and amateur. But I don't think I've ever read a positive review of a Rush album. What's the dilly-o? P.S. my favorite Rush album is "Signals" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 17:33:04 -0700 From: Eb Subject: another post with Eb in the subject line Ben: >How do you explain the enormous success of such a band that seems to >embody all that is totally uncool in rock? I dunno...how do you explain the enormous success of Celine Dion? The answer is easy: diff'rent strokes. Anyway, I'm not sure that I would quite call Rush's success "enormous," at this point. What/when was their last platinum album in the States? >Also, Rush seems to be an example >of a band that illustrates the odd difference in the opinns of musicians and >critics. As the posted bio mentioned, Rush is a band that has a lot of >adoration among musicians, both professional and amateur. Ah, the proggie debate once again. I don't think any critics deny that Rush has technical musical skill. But critics are looking for something more than that. Many musicians (particularly ones in the mainstream vein) aren't. >But I don't think >I've ever read a positive review of a Rush album. What's the dilly-o? Well, speaking personally, nothing irks me more than bands with grand agendas and schemes who aren't nearly as clever as they think. Rush falls into this category. I don't have any strong hatred for Rush, however, because the gap between pretensions/talent isn't nearly as great as the gap found in, say, the Verve. Still, I feel like I outgrew Rush in about 9th grade, and I never looked back. A lot of their stuff sounds darn silly, when you step back and take a look at it. I think a good chunk of Rush's success can be traced to the proggie mindset - -- there are folks who have a strong need to feel like they're more sophisticated and educated than the unwashed masses, and bands like Rush provide an easy route toward this comforting self-satisfaction. Folks like this ENJOY that their fave bands aren't on top of the charts...gives 'em an elitist feeling of being in-the-know. A pompous King Crimson fan once sneered at me something to the effect of "It's good that there are stupid people who like pop music -- it means there are less people at King Crimson shows." Uh-huh, whatever you say, buddy. As long as this sort of willful arrogance exists, bands like Rush will find an audience. Eb, who won't rest until NMH and Rufus are multi-platinum ;) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1998 20:55:27 -0400 From: Ben Subject: Re: another post with Eb in the subject line Eb wrote: > Anyway, I'm not sure that I would quite call Rush's success "enormous," at > this point. What/when was their last platinum album in the States? > I don't know what their record sales are like, but they must be up there, considering how they can tour stadiums (and I assume make a profit). And they are a name that everybody knows, even people who don't listen to music much, and how many "proggie" bands can you say that about? (Genesis doesn't count :) ) >Also, Rush seems to be an example > >of a band that illustrates the odd difference in the opinns of musicians and > >critics. As the posted bio mentioned, Rush is a band that has a lot of > >adoration among musicians, both professional and amateur. > > Ah, the proggie debate once again. > > I don't think any critics deny that Rush has technical musical skill. But > critics are looking for something more than that. Many musicians > (particularly ones in the mainstream vein) aren't. > Really? I think most musicians can appreciate music regardless of it's technical skill. But I didn't have other prog-rock musicians in mind, I think that there are quite a few musicians who like Rush who make music far from the progressive thang. > >But I don't think > >I've ever read a positive review of a Rush album. What's the dilly-o? > > Well, speaking personally, nothing irks me more than bands with grand > agendas and schemes who aren't nearly as clever as they think. Rush falls > into this category. I don't have any strong hatred for Rush, however, > because the gap between pretensions/talent isn't nearly as great as the gap > found in, say, the Verve. Still, I feel like I outgrew Rush in about 9th > grade, and I never looked back. A lot of their stuff sounds darn silly, > when you step back and take a look at it. Therein lies the appeal of Rush! Like Kiss, Hawkwind, etc. their "greatest" work is something along the lines of a musical comic book, extremely childish but entertaining as well. For me, I like listening to Rush for the same reason I would watch a cheesy 1950's sci-fi film, it's pure entertainment. I think most folks who listen to Rush do not spend time pondering the wisdom in Neal Pert's lyrics! I have to say, I do find folks that take Rush *seriously* quite frightening. But then, anybody who takes any music that way, be it Bach, Rush, The Grateful Dead, or NMH :) is scary! > elitist feeling of being in-the-know. A pompous King Crimson fan once > sneered at me something to the effect of "It's good that there are stupid > people who like pop music -- it means there are less people at King Crimson > shows." Uh-huh, whatever you say, buddy. As long as this sort of willful > arrogance exists, bands like Rush will find an audience. That's a funny comment, because much of Adrian Belew's work is very pop oriented! I think (and hope) that the kind of people who take music so seriously are a dying breed. "Ouch! I just fell on my 8-sided dice!" n.p. "Zen Arcade" (and you just *know* Bob Mould must have some Rush in his collection!) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 20:14:52 -0600 From: amadain Subject: Re: Did Eb write this? >critics. As the posted bio mentioned, Rush is a band that has a lot of >adoration among musicians, both professional and amateur. But I don't think >I've ever read a positive review of a Rush album. What's the dilly-o? Well, I dunno, verily I cannot tell you. I loathe Rush. I have amateured at being a critic and sometimes amateured at being a musician :). I personally think it's that a lot of critics do tend to be more interested in -writing- than chops. I don't know how to quantify that. My guess would be though that many of your critical types tend to prefer two things- first of all, lyrics which have some real personality, some human impact- a lot of proggy type bands do not write anything that has a personal feel to it as they are too busy writing scholockola lyrics about dwarves and trees (this is my main objection and probably the main reason I prefer the Who to Zep). I think the other reason is that song writing and song structure often tend to fall by the wayside as we are treated to endless displays of speed virtuosity. If you feel that communication is an important part of the whole reason for music's existence, as I do- and I'm talking about the music here, not just lyrics- then you might perhaps feel that things that seem to be there solely so that others can marvel and go "WOW, he plays trills REAL fast! He's as good as some CLASSICAL guy!" are somewhat extraneous. Which is another sticking point with me actually, is the way that bands like Rush (though they are by no means alone nor are all progressive bands subject to this form of madness) often seem to want to prove that they and by extension rock and roll are "AS GOOD AS" other forms such as classical and jazz. They try to do this by aping and borrowing, usually from the Romantic composers. This poor stepsister attitude rankles some and I am one. One of the many reasons King Crimson stands head and shoulders above the herd IMO was that they never displayed this attitude. Love on ya, Susan no, I don't like Dream Theater either ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 18:31:00 -0700 From: zolarox@juno.com (Debora K) Subject: Re: another post with Eb in the subject line Rush is behind Kiss and The Beatles as the most consecutive 1 million records sold by a band (is that gold, or silver or something?) I'm tellin' ya, we're a core group, and snatch it up once it is released. After that, the record sales plummet. Fine with me, as I'm usually able to secure tickest in the first few rows whenever they decide to tour again (Mrs. Debora loves Rush too, bless her). As a music critic, Eb really lost it here. Love 'em or hate 'em, Rush had a rather large impact on music. Long live Ged, Alex, and Neil. I'll get off the toilet now.. Mr. Debora _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 20:23:23 -0600 From: amadain Subject: Weller vs. Marks- it's a forfeit! >That's the stupidest thing I've heard in a while. If it wasn't for the >lack of correlation between intelligence and rock stardom, I'd have >trouble believing it. Oh, I don't know. Paul Weller strikes me as a fairly intelligent fellow. But intelligence and -sense- don't always go together, this is for sure, and being intelligent also doesn't mean you won't have personal weak points such as over-sensitivity to criticism :). >> And I bet he gives you a better >> fight than Mr. Rose too :). > >Which is chief among the reasons that I'd rather fight Axl Rose. This I can't argue with. If you are going to have a fight mainly concerning critical opinions, I'd also venture to suggest that while Paul Weller has given the world some schlock, he has also given the world a lot of very wonderful music- Rose has inflicted a lot more bad music on the world and no good music, so he may be more worth one's while, philosophically speaking :). Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 18:54:53 -0700 From: zolarox@juno.com (Debora K) Subject: I'm going to ramble Eb once wrote me, and said he'd never really listened to the band. I don't blame him, as many of us are turned off by Geddy's screeching vocals, Neil's Ann Randian lyrics, and Alex's strange, strange guitar work. Let's get down and dirty. Geddy Lee: Find a bass player who can do this kind of stuff, and I'm sold. Who's better? Plenty of jazz guys (I used to study Al Dimiola (sp?)) for sure, but in the rock 'n roll biz? Flea, Steve Harris, John Entwistle for sure. But Ged sings (badly, in many places), plays keyboard (does it with his feet in concert), and wears black jeans. Nice hair, too. Alex Lifeson: King Lerxst. Plays bass pedals when Ged is busy on the keyboards. He's a strange one. Any guitarists out there who want to copy his stuff, it's weird!!! Good shredder at times, but for the most part takes a back seat. He is just like a good drummer should be, knowing went *not* to play. Neil Peart: Pratt. The bringer to all that is good and cool in the world. Sometimes, this guy drives me nuts with his playing . I can't follow it on occasion. He does this and that and gets crazy with the xylophone, electric drums (he has 2 kits, and stage magic allows him to play them both), bell tree, cowbells (love dem drum solos), and ugggg..... I'm getting crazy here. Mr. Debora (who's next?) _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1998 18:35:36 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: another post with Eb in the subject line Debora K. > As a music critic, Eb really lost it here. Zzzzz. Well, if as Ben says, no critics like Rush, I guess they ALL have lost it, then.... ;) > Love 'em or hate 'em, Rush had a rather large impact on music. Substantiation, please? What albums in the Billboard top 100 are sodden with Rush's vast impact? I suuuure don't hear Rush mentioned as an influence much, outside of the deteriorating hard-rock/prog realm. And personally, I think the only reason Rush and Primus get compared so much is that they're both trios with a weirdly nasal bassist who's a skinny geek. On purely musical terms, the common ground is minimal, beyond a general emphasis on "flash." Eb ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 22:25:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Terrence M Marks Subject: Re: Weller vs. Marks- it's a forfeit! > Oh, I don't know. Paul Weller strikes me as a fairly intelligent fellow. > But intelligence and -sense- don't always go together, this is for sure, > and being intelligent also doesn't mean you won't have personal weak points > such as over-sensitivity to criticism :). I bet if Charlton Heston or Frank Sinatra threatened their critics you'd be just as willing to defend them ;) Of course, I've said a lot of stupid things in the past, so I suppose I shouldn't be too hard on Mr. Weller. > If you are going to have a fight mainly concerning critical opinions, I'd > also venture to suggest that while Paul Weller has given the world some > schlock, he has also given the world a lot of very wonderful music- Rose > has inflicted a lot more bad music on the world and no good music, so he > may be more worth one's while, philosophically speaking :). I promise that if I go crazy, Axl Rose will be on my "to kill" list right below the guy who draws "Marmaduke", ok? Terrence Marks normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1998 12:39:22 EDT From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Seriously, folks In a message dated 9/5/98 5:57:01 PM, Ben wrote: <> Um, why? And how seriously is 'so seriously'? How could you like Bach without taking it at least a little bit seriously? "Oh, that nutty Bach guy - -- those Goldberg Variations just crack me up!" - -----Michael K., who probably takes music just a bit too seriously(?!) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1998 10:28:48 PDT From: "Daniel Barkhouse" Subject: Re: another post with Eb in the subject line >I think a good chunk of Rush's success can be traced to the proggie mindset >-- there are folks who have a strong need to feel like they're more >sophisticated and educated than the unwashed masses, and bands like Rush >provide an easy route toward this comforting self-satisfaction. Folks like >this ENJOY that their fave bands aren't on top of the charts...gives 'em an >elitist feeling of being in-the-know. A pompous King Crimson fan once >sneered at me something to the effect of "It's good that there are stupid >people who like pop music -- it means there are less people at King Crimson >shows." Uh-huh, whatever you say, buddy. As long as this sort of willful >arrogance exists, bands like Rush will find an audience. I seem to find that Pink Floyd fans also indulge in this kind of arrogance. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1998 13:26:38 -0400 From: tanter Subject: major celebrity death Kurosawa. :( Marcy ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1998 17:07:04 -0500 (CDT) From: Marshall Joseph Armintor Subject: doing the du >>no kidding? i've never noticed that! i thought bob mould was gay, >>though? >>funny thing about that record. this friend of mine, that, like BREATHED >>husker du, was convinced that it was "gang control" rather than "data >>control." i was like, "huh? 'a nine-digit number, for every living >>soul. that is all they talk about at *gang control*'????" It's a line in their "cover" of the Gilligan's Island theme. The complete lyrics: Well, Gilligan's island Is where I wanna be I wanna fuck Ginger Underneath a palm tree Get the Professor To make some good drugs for me Oh Gilligan's island is where I wanna be The astute Du-head will note that it's Grant Hart who does the vocals on this track, not Bob. I suppose people should know Bob Mould's gay, but Bob himself is kind of annoyed that some people in the media take him to ask for not having a higher profile as a gay man. By and large, he's indifferent to the attention it brings him, and is proud of his sexuality, but doesn't think he owes the gay community anything as such. I tend to agree...however, this has more to do with Bob being a shy person rather than being reflective of queer politics. I've been through this with more than a few of my less broad-minded friends...I think I'll eject before I hit the wall on this topic. :) marshall np Hendrix, BBC Sessions (funniest moment: the instrumental pulverizing of "Sunshine of Your Love." More proof that the dude was NOT of this earth.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1998 17:09:38 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: 100% Zep At 08:14 PM 9/5/98 -0600, amadain wrote: >My guess would be though that many of your critical types tend to prefer >two things- first of all, lyrics which have some real personality, some >human impact- a lot of proggy type bands do not write anything that has a >personal feel to it as they are too busy writing scholockola lyrics about >dwarves and trees (this is my main objection and probably the main reason I >prefer the Who to Zep). Now wait a doggone minute! Very few Zep songs could be described as "about dwarves and trees" -- there's the Mordor reference on "Ramble On," "The Battle of Evermore" (in which Sandy Denny contributes great vocals which redeem it from schlockola-land IMO), parts of "No Quarter," maybe a few others here and there. But most of them are about sex, spirituality, sex, dying, sex, coughing, and sex. And by HOUSES OF THE HOLY and my favorite, PHYSICAL GRAFFITI, Plant's lyrics were as often self-mocking as not. Got no problems with anyone preferring the Who (heck, I may even prefer them myself), but Susan's complaints would seem more accurate if lodged against Gabriel-era Genesis, Yes, ELP, and the more "prog" end of the '70s spectrum. it's babe i'm gonna leave you and back again, Miles ====================================================================== "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, 06 Sep 1998 17:14:28 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: another post with Eb in the subject line At 05:33 PM 9/5/98 -0700, Eb wrote: >I don't think any critics deny that Rush has technical musical skill. But >critics are looking for something more than that. Many musicians >(particularly ones in the mainstream vein) aren't. Eb doth hit the proverbial nail on the head here. Many of us like our music to include stuff like songs. >because the gap between pretensions/talent isn't nearly as great as the gap >found in, say, the Verve. !!!! Well, there's something in almost every Eb post to love *and* to hate, and I'll leave it at that... :-) >Eb, who won't rest until NMH and Rufus are multi-platinum ;) But can Rufus do it without Chaka Khan? Oh, you mean *that* Rufus. today's tom sawyer, Miles ====================================================================== "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, 6 Sep 1998 16:58:42 -0700 From: Eb Subject: weeniebait! ;) > From: Richard Newirth > Newsgroups: rec.music.marketplace,rec.music.marketplace.vinyl > Subject: FS: RARE Soft Boys single: I Wanna Destroy You featuring Robyn > Hitchcock > Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1998 16:46:40 -0700 > > Bid for it on ebay: > > http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=29113213 > > The Soft Boys featuring Robyn Hitchcock-- RARE single > I Wanna Destroy You > 7" vinyl single > Armageddon Record AS 005 > B side: I'm an Old Pervert (disco) > picture sleeve > Vinyl and sleeve in mint condition > > Thanks ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V7 #347 *******************************