From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V8 #142 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Monday, April 19 1999 Volume 08 : Number 142 Today's Subjects: ----------------- celebrity deathwatch [hal brandt ] all time [Joel Mullins ] Re: all time ["Capitalism Blows" ] Re: all time ["Chris!" ] Re: all time [Ben ] did someone say "surreal"? [Eb ] Re: all time ["Chris!" ] Re: all time [Joel Mullins ] re: 500 [Eb ] Re: what about Steve Earle? do you think he would have sex with me? [Ded] Re: 500 ["Chris!" ] Re: all time [MARKEEFE@aol.com] Re: 500 [Joel Mullins ] Re: all time [Joel Mullins ] Re: all time [Ben ] RE: celebrity deathwatch [tanter ] Re: all time [Joel Mullins ] Lunatics... ["Chris!" ] Re: Lunatics... [Eb ] Re: all time - Feg All Time! [MARKEEFE@aol.com] Re: all time - Feg All Time! [Ben ] boring people and Hitchcock [David Librik ] Re: Lunatics... [S Dwarf ] Might be interesting, if only for the singer's name (NR) [steve ] Re: all time - Feg All Time! [Joel Mullins ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 10:43:40 -0600 From: hal brandt Subject: celebrity deathwatch RIP Ellen Corby "G'night, Grandma Walnut" (she was also in that other Hitchcock's VERTIGO) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 14:46:50 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: all time Hey, I found this page where some guy has listed what he believes to be the greatest 50 albums of all time. He's got Fegmania! at #29 and In The Aeroplane Over The Sea at #35. Later Joel ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 13:22:31 PDT From: "Capitalism Blows" Subject: Re: all time and --are you ready for this dede?-- he's got BOYLAN HEIGHTS at #22! still, this: is good and fucked up, even if he does choose ABBEY ROAD as his one and only beatles album, and place it at #3 overall. and his "opinionated" robyn disco. is pretty neat, but, PERSPEX as one of the four robyn albums which rates an A grade or higher???? i mean, i'd probably grade PERSPEX higher than just about anybody on this list. but i *still* consider it robyn's weakest album. http://leb.net/iac/ "...the people who in most places in the world provide opposition leadership are, here in America, holed up in academic sinecures arguing about the ethics of lunch and whether or not to hire an immigrant maid. The two-party dictatorship is literally destroying the country and Clinton is the worst president we've ever had -- much worse than Nixon and Reagan combined on everything from the environment to social and economic policy, and where's the left? Sitting by the phone hoping to get on one of those Dead White Man TV talk panels....frankly, these days every time I even see a copy of The Nation, In These Times, or, worst of all, Mother Jones, I feel like punching the first pony tailed, nasal whinnying, Virtual Asseted, public-radioed, candy-assed, so-called leftist who comes through my door. Unfortunately, they come through my door all the time and I'm too old and physically decrepit to carry out a decent physical assault. It's all very frustrating." --Bruce Anderson, Anderson Valley Advertiser _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 14:12:21 -0700 From: "Chris!" Subject: Re: all time > still, this: > > > is good and fucked up, even if he does choose ABBEY ROAD as his one and only > beatles album... First, I hesitate to call such a list anything other than "My Favorite Fifty Album of all Time." It is rather hard to be objective about this sort of thing. The Beatles album would be my choice, as well. Yes, I struggled with the Rubber Soul and Revolver choice for a long time before coming to this conclusion. It, Abbey Road, is just as innovative and what not as the other two. The reasons for their inclusion on the lists. Indeed the other two were some years before Abbey Road, but I cannot see inclusion of an album just because most people considered it a "first." Also, with Abbey Road they put a large part of the bickering from the "Let It Be" sessions behind them and produced a really great album, then called it a day. His choice of Byrds albums is *way off*. Sweetheart on any day in my mind, but not Notorious. .chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 18:36:48 -0400 From: Ben Subject: Re: all time "Chris!" wrote: > His choice of Byrds albums is *way off*. Sweetheart on any day in my > mind, but not Notorious. > > .chris Still, he is sensible enough to place "American Beauty" above both "The Notorious Byrd Brothers" and "In The Aeroplane Over The Sea". ;) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 15:52:47 -0800 From: Eb Subject: did someone say "surreal"? Tom Ewing -- resident overanalytical, navel-gazing bore of alt.music.alternative -- discusses the Hitchcock oeuvre: "The Soft Boys' 'Underwater Moonlight' is good if kind of long on CD. The rest is too English-eccentric and 'surreal' for my liking." (You should see him rave about Merzbow, though. ) Eb np: The Look of Love: The Burt Bacharach Collection ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 16:02:31 -0700 From: "Chris!" Subject: Re: all time Ben wrote: > > "Chris!" wrote: > > > His choice of Byrds albums is *way off*. Sweetheart on any day in my > > mind, but not Notorious. > > > > .chris > > Still, he is sensible enough to place "American Beauty" above both "The Notorious > Byrd Brothers" and "In The Aeroplane Over The Sea". ;) I noticed this error and decide not to comment on the most obvious and inexcusable flaws in his survey and decided to nit-pick with the items that might slip past the immediate scrutiny. :) He also has a few things that were unessential by any standard (or at least mine): Hole, Fountains of Wayne, Badfinger. And Luna's Penthouse (a fine album on its own) over Galaxie 500's "This is Our Music"??? I might add that "This is Our Music" may be the single most blissful musical recording in the known universe. It would be interesting to have a bit of text behind the selection and ranking of each. This is my message, .chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 18:10:08 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: all time Chris! wrote: > And Luna's Penthouse > (a fine album on its own) over Galaxie 500's "This is Our Music"??? I > might add that "This is Our Music" may be the single most blissful > musical recording in the known universe. I will agree that This is Our Music is a better album than Penthouse. But, IMHO, On Fire is better than both....Well, on second thought, I'd say it's a pretty close call between On Fire and This is Our Music. Both albums are really great. Joel ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 16:40:39 -0800 From: Eb Subject: re: 500 Galaxie 500 remains on my short list of the all-time most critically overrated artists (uhh, sorry...don't have other examples to toss out right now...Jane's Addiction though, for sure). I'm sorry...I just don't hear much to get excited about. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 16:59:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Dede Davis Subject: Re: what about Steve Earle? do you think he would have sex with me? The new Steve Earle and Del McCoury Band album is called "The Mountain" and it's not "kindy bluegrassy", it's pure-tee bluegrass. It is OUTSTANDING. I saw them live about a month ago and was just blown away. I've been a fan of Steve's since day 1 and this is the first time I'd gotten to see him live. "Someday" off the (I think) Exit 0 album is one of my favorite songs. It's the fuckin' anthem for anyone who, like myself, grew up in a teeny-tiny, Southern country town. "...Got me a '67 Chevy/she's low and sleek and black./Someday I'll put 'er on that interstate and never look back." still brings tears to this one's eyes. Oh, yeah. Steve Earle's the fuckin' MAN. === Dede "Takin' a ride! Takin' a ride in my pickup; Rollin' around downtown..."--G. Huntley _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 17:01:35 -0700 From: "Chris!" Subject: Re: 500 Eb wrote: > > Galaxie 500 remains on my short list of the all-time most critically > overrated artists (uhh, sorry...don't have other examples to toss out right > now...Jane's Addiction though, for sure). I'm sorry...I just don't hear > much to get excited about. Technically, there is nothing, nothing at all, special about Galaxie 500. Two cords, some noodling solos, repeated over and over, whiny "late-80s indie vocals." But, there is just something that clicks with me and the Galaxie 500. It is all emotional. Although, I do like at lot of the technical points, or lack thereof. Beat Happening are a similar case in point; Velvets might fall in here, too. I think that if you don't get it at first, it only gets worse as it goes on. But, if it were not for "This is Our Music," I would not have nearly as high of an opinion as I do of them. In fact, I do not know anyone personally who *loves* the Galaxie 500. That is not to say I sit at home wearing women's underwear and cry to "This is Our Music" because of it. One thing that makes Galaxie 500 admirable is that they split before they produced a load of crap. (Assuming you liked what they did.) There is a short ephemeral record that has not been tarnished by there own mistakes. This is something the Damon and Naomi have not been able to do on record and Luna, although producing some good stuff, just does not have that hook that G 500 had for some. emotive, .chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:16:50 EDT From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: all time I can't believe that this email has actually elicited any debates . . . I mean, he's just some guy out there in cyber space. I'd be much more curious to see any one of y'all's "50 Greatest Albums of All-Time" lists and discuss the merits of that. Although I *do* think that it was worth calling to attention anyone's list who's got NMH in the their Top 50 :-) - ------Michael K. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 19:26:02 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: 500 Chris! wrote: > In fact, I do not know anyone > personally who *loves* the Galaxie 500. I know quite a few people who *love* Galaxie 500. They're a pretty popular band in the crowd I hang out with. I think the simplicity of their music is what draws people to it. Plus, Dean Wareham's guitar solos are fucking great! Yes, they're simple. But the mood he creates is wonderful. The solo on Melt Away is very powerful. I don't think there are that many other guitarists out there today who solo as well as Dean Wareham. It's easy to be flashy. What Dean does is all nuance and mood. Plus, the songs are great. Dean is a very good songwriter and has a great sense of humor. And I think he's only getting better. I'm personally looking forward to the new Luna album, which will be out on May 25 by the way. Joel ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 19:35:46 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: all time MARKEEFE@aol.com wrote: > I'd be much more curious > to see any one of y'all's "50 Greatest Albums of All-Time" lists and discuss > the merits of that. Well, I've never made such a list and would most likely have a hard time making those decisions. Abbey Road and Ziggy Stardust would definitely be in the top 3. I've always thought it would be interesting if the entire mailing list created a Fegs' Top 100. I guess we would nominate albums and vote and then create a Top 100 list. It might make a cool section on one of the RH sites. A yearly Top 10 list could also go on there. If I wasn't on this mailing list, I wouldn't know you guys and what music you like. I'm sure there are a lot of RH fans out there who would love to see what music other RH fans are into. I mean, all the magazines make their lists. So, why shouldn't we? If we did, I think it would probably be the best list out there. Joel ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:55:40 -0400 From: Ben Subject: Re: all time MARKEEFE@aol.com wrote: > I can't believe that this email has actually elicited any debates . . . I > mean, he's just some guy out there in cyber space. I'd be much more curious > to see any one of y'all's "50 Greatest Albums of All-Time" lists and discuss > the merits of that. Although I *do* think that it was worth calling to > attention anyone's list who's got NMH in the their Top 50 :-) Actually, we all are just guys and gals in cyberspace too. His opinion on the top 50 is just as valuable (or invaluable) as anyone else's... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:28:58 -0500 From: tanter Subject: RE: celebrity deathwatch >===== Original Message From hal brandt ===== >RIP Ellen Corby > >"G'night, Grandma Walnut" I thought she died years ago..... Marcy L. Tanter Assistant Professor of English Tarleton State University Stephenville, TX 76401 254-968-9892 (9039 to leave a message) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 21:08:46 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: all time Ben wrote: > Actually, we all are just guys and gals in cyberspace too. His opinion on the top > 50 is just as valuable (or invaluable) as anyone else's... I think Michael's point was that he knows us, whereas he has no idea who this other guy is. Usually, people will accept the recommendations of those they know over those they don't. Joel ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:10:13 -0700 From: "Chris!" Subject: Lunatics... Looking for that new Luna album later this month?? Read on... Luna dropped by US label Elektra Luna have been dropped by their US label Elektra on the eve of the release of their 5th album - in an interview with UK newspaper The Independent Dean Wareham said "Now they're not even putting our album out. Dropped, man! They said it's 'not commercially viable'. We wanted out of Elektra a while ago, partly because of this mountain of fake debt that they slapped on us. And it is fake! But the timing is bad because we'd serviced the album to the press" And in another report it was stated that "an Elektra representative has confirmed that the band has parted company with the label and is now searching for a new home with the completed album in tow." Obviously the US release of Days of Our Nights is very much up in the air. Luna are still signed to Beggars Banquet in the UK and Europe and the album will be released as scheduled on the 4th May. From.... http://www.aald.demon.co.uk/galaxie/news.html .chris ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:38:51 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: Lunatics... Chris: >Looking for that new Luna album later this month?? Read on... > >Luna dropped by US label Elektra > >"Now they're not even putting our album out. Dropped, >man! They said it's 'not commercially viable'. We wanted out >of Elektra a while ago, partly because of this mountain >of fake debt that they slapped on us. And it is fake! But >the timing is bad because we'd serviced the album to the >press" Huh! Thanks for the news. Jeez, I don't personally have a copy of the album yet, but I *can* confirm that pressfolk have advance copies already. I better grab myself one of those collector items, pronto! Actually, this news doesn't surprise me at all. I was expecting Luna to be dropped shortly after Pup Tent flopped. When an alternative band's major-label release vanishes like that one did, when the band has already released a few other albums on the same label, that usually means getting the boot. See RH's Respect, Frank Black's The Cult of Ray and a host of other examples.... It's especially unsurprising, given all the OTHER alternative acts which Elektra has let go in recent times (Moby, TMBG and the Afghan Whigs for starters, and those are only the high-profile ones). Can Ween and Jason Falkner be far behind? Eb PS I saw the Zombies/Tampax ad today! YEEEESH! What, did Tampax decide they needed to target the back-to-nature hippie-girl demographic which uses sea sponges??? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 23:42:44 EDT From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: all time - Feg All Time! In a message dated 4/18/99 4:41:46 PM, skmull@swbell.net writes: << I've always thought it would be interesting if the entire mailing list created a Fegs' Top 100. I guess we would nominate albums and vote and then create a Top 100 list. I mean, all the magazines make their lists. So, why shouldn't we? If we did, I think it would probably be the best list out there. >> I think this is a great idea! But, of course, I love lists. Would enough people vote to make it worthwhile. If, like, 50 or more people posted lists of their, say, Top 20 favorite albums, then we could make a pretty representative list from that . . I don't know if we could successfully make a Top 100 without having too many albums that were tied with 1 vote each; we could make an All Time Feg Top 40 or something, though! Whaddya say? I would be willing to keep track of the whole thing and tally up the votes [yes, by the way, I *will* openly accept payola :-)]. Oh, I think there's one important thing we should decide beforehand: Should we include RH material or not? I tend to think we kinda should. For myself, that'll only put one vote for one Robyn album on there . . . a few fanatics might saturate the list, but I think it'd even out in the long run. So, any further thoughts on formatting before we start posting and tallying? Should the individual FegLists only be Top 10? Should they be as long as Top 40? And should they include RH? - -----Michael K., who, yes, did only mean what Joel said I only meant by my comment in my previous post. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 01:00:32 -0400 From: Ben Subject: Re: all time - Feg All Time! MARKEEFE@aol.com wrote: > I think this is a great idea! But, of course, I love lists. Would > enough people vote to make it worthwhile. If, like, 50 or more people posted > lists of their, say, Top 20 favorite albums, then we could make a pretty > representative list from that . . I don't know if we could successfully make > a Top 100 without having too many albums that were tied with 1 vote each; we > could make an All Time Feg Top 40 or something, though! Whaddya say? I > would be willing to keep track of the whole thing and tally up the votes > [yes, by the way, I *will* openly accept payola :-)]. Oh, I think there's > one important thing we should decide beforehand: Should we include RH > material or not? I tend to think we kinda should. For myself, that'll only > put one vote for one Robyn album on there . . . a few fanatics might saturate > the list, but I think it'd even out in the long run. > So, any further thoughts on formatting before we start posting and > tallying? Should the individual FegLists only be Top 10? Should they be as > long as Top 40? And should they include RH? You should let people put down as many as they want, based on how many albums they have. For example, someone who has a collection of 500-1000 albums may only want to do a top 10 or 20, while someone with many more would want to do a longer list. And yes we should include Robyn, because it would be interesting to see where those place in people's overall lists. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:54:29 -0500 From: David Librik Subject: boring people and Hitchcock >Tom Ewing -- resident overanalytical, navel-gazing bore of >alt.music.alternative -- discusses the Hitchcock oeuvre: > >"The Soft Boys' 'Underwater Moonlight' is good if kind of long on CD. >The rest is too English-eccentric and 'surreal' for my liking." There is a certain kind of dull indie fanatic who never sees the point of Robyn's music. I played "Invisible Hitchcock" -- surely the high point of goofy whimsical English psychedelia -- to one, and she asked about halfway through whether we could turn it off so she could put on Sonic Yoof, or maybe it was Sebadoh; some band whose "sense of humor" is, at best, a snotty irony rather than a silly "dementia." (Of course, my own sense of humor runs to Tom Lehrer, Moxy Fruvous, Chris Chandler -- brainy-kid witty quips, wordplay, and entertainment. Correct for your own tastes.) But he's right about "Underwater Moonlight" -- which is something I should have mentioned in the CD length debate. For modern listeners, the CD is the "album." The equivalent of playing a whole record album is putting on the CD and pressing "play," and not getting up and changing it until it's finished. How well does the album work as an album, a coherent, satisfying whole? This is the same question that used to be asked about records. If you have to lift the needle to skip a song, or press "shuffle," or hit the -->| button on your portable CD player -- then you've admitted the album is a failure (though a lot of the songs might be good). Underwater Moonlight started out as a great album and is now only a good one. A Can Of Bees started out pretty good and is now unlistenable. (Don't read the liner notes, don't program the tracks you want, don't consider it as a collection of three versions -- just press play at track 1 and try to appreciate the whole thing like a new listener would.) It may be a particular bias of 30-ish music fans that causes us to think of the record as the "real" album, and CDs as "more expensive, audiophile, digital encodings of the album, packed with as much extra data as they can hold." So we want lots of bonus tracks that we can program around. I think it's time to admit that CDs aren't LPs-plus-more, they *are* LPs (only smaller and shinier), and the same sense that went into sequencing a good LP should go into the CD version. - - David Librik ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 23:57:40 -0700 (PDT) From: S Dwarf Subject: Re: Lunatics... Chris! wrote: > Looking for that new Luna album later this month?? > Read on... > > Luna dropped by US label Elektra > [pins] > Obviously the US release of Days of Our Nights is > very much up in the air. Luna are still signed to > Beggars Banquet in the UK and Europe and the album > will be released as scheduled on the 4th May. and by the time they get a US deal, the hardcore of their fans will have bought the import, and so when it gets a domestic release, sales will be artifically low, causing their new record company (who won't be able to find them an expanded audience, for a variety of reasons) to wonder why they signed them, and then they'll get dumped just before the next album is about to be released, .............. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 08:19:40 -0500 From: steve Subject: Might be interesting, if only for the singer's name (NR) From the current ePulse - ------------------------------------------- 5. RECORD OF THE WEEK: When you work at a music magazine, you listen to a lot of music that's so formulaic that after a while, you almost don't hear it anymore. A part of your brain says, "Right. This sounds like so-and-so" and it gets filed permanently. But sometimes you put on a record and it grabs you by the scruff of the neck. When that happens you pay attention. 'UTERUS AND FIRE' by OLD TIME RELIJUN (K, 4/20) is such a disc. It kicks off with an aggressive guitar twang so crude it sounds like Ted Nugent had a lobotomy and couldn't tune up to save his hollowbody. Then drums kick in -- and do they. It's more accurate to say the drums are beaten, severely. The singer, who has Brigham Young whiskers and a deranged look in his eye, howls like a possessed holy roller screaming for lost souls. An upright bass claws at the remaining airspace. This disc is not subtle. Play 'Uterus and Fire' in a crowded theater and probably 98 percent of the audience would run for the exits, but those remaining are going to be entertained. Old Time Relijun draws from the primordial blues/country/rock/jazz wellspring, then pours it into a hot cauldron, mixes it with mud and blood and lets it boil over. The trio -- a singer/guitarist by the name of Arrington de Dionyso, bassist Aaron Hartman and drummer Phil Elvrum -- keep it primitive in execution and production ("available in mono only," says the press release). It's an apt setting for the lyrics of de Dionyso, who mixes some of the more apocalyptic parts of the Bible with his own feverish visions, resulting in some disturbing images. "My head is red and black and burning cause there's something I ain't learning/ Chop off my head and throw it in the water/ Serve it up on a silver plate to your curly headed flesh hipped daughter," he screams in "Burning Head," over guitar chords that sound like they're being played with an ax handle. There's no attempt at niceties, no ballads, no attempt to keep instruments tuned. For those who hate free jazz, there's some post-bop clarinet howls. So why is it a good record and not a piece of shit? Maybe it's the mystery. You wonder if these guys are serious, or whether they're on some sort of Nick Cave journey into the darkest part of the swamp. No matter the intentions, Old Time Relijun play with conviction. The odd touches -- drums coming in at unexpected moments, nearly drowning out the singer; a Jew's harp instrumental, "Khomuz"; lines like "I am the wizard, wise in white of moonlight night of fur and liquor" -- keep you coming back for more. It's an antidote to the Top 10, if that's what ails you. ( Peter Melton) _____________________ "Oh no! You accuse me of writing the Ewok National Anthem!" Partridge yelps, in obvious distress. "Please, no! I've had a lot of people accuse that track of being very Arabic; but it's very pagan, very English. There's a slight dromedary whiff about the percussion, admittedly; but it goes no further east than Norwich. And no Ewoks were involved." - - Andy Partridge, commenting on a description of "Greenman". ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:14:31 -0400 From: Ben Subject: Re: boring people and Hitchcock David Librik wrote: > But he's right about "Underwater Moonlight" -- which is something I > should have mentioned in the CD length debate. For modern listeners, > the CD is the "album." The equivalent of playing a whole record album > is putting on the CD and pressing "play," and not getting up and changing > it until it's finished. How well does the album work as an album, a > coherent, satisfying whole? This is the same question that used to be > asked about records. If you have to lift the needle to skip a song, > or press "shuffle," or hit the -->| button on your portable CD player -- > then you've admitted the album is a failure (though a lot of the songs > might be good). Underwater Moonlight started out as a great album and > is now only a good one. A Can Of Bees started out pretty good and is > now unlistenable. (Don't read the liner notes, don't program the tracks > you want, don't consider it as a collection of three versions -- just > press play at track 1 and try to appreciate the whole thing like a new > listener would.) A Can Of Bees was the second Soft Boys album I got, and this was in its Rykodisc version, and I loved it. Granted, I skipped through the tracks that repeat themselves ("Skool Dinner Blues", "Sandra's Having Her Brain Out") and "digested" the album without them. The same goes for Underwater Moonlight, although there aren't any repeats there. But with that disc, the bonus tracks are clearly labeled. And on the other Ryko/Rhino versions, if you take the time to read the liners you can clearly see what the original intention was for the running order, A Can Of Bees being an exception - but there have been many different versions of the album so it's had to say what The Soft Boys would prefer he running order to be since they resequenced the album several times. On A Can Of Bees, the running order isn't an integral part of the album, IMO. My point being... a 'new listener' doesn't necessarily just put in a CD and push play, I don't think people are that ignorant. Does someone who just bought the Ziggy Stardust CD wonder why Bowie decided to end the album with acoustic versions of two of the previous tracks? If so, I'll be happy to pull the trigger. ;) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 08:53:02 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: all time - Feg All Time! MARKEEFE@aol.com wrote: > we > could make an All Time Feg Top 40 or something, though! Whaddya say? I > would be willing to keep track of the whole thing and tally up the votes > [yes, by the way, I *will* openly accept payola :-)]. Top 40 sounds more reasonable. There should probably be several steps to the process, but I'm not exactly sure what they should be. > Oh, I think there's > one important thing we should decide beforehand: Should we include RH > material or not? I tend to think we kinda should. Yeah, we definitely should. An individual's list might be biased towards Robyn (I'd probably put 4 of his albums on there). That's what I like about doing a list together. I think it would all even out and be less biased towards any one artist. > So, any further thoughts on formatting before we start posting and > tallying? Should the individual FegLists only be Top 10? Should they be as > long as Top 40? And should they include RH? I kind of think that more is better. People should submit at least their Top 20. Joel ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V8 #142 *******************************