From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #283 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, October 12 2000 Volume 09 : Number 283 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: just for fun ["Scott Clark" ] droplift.org ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: Normally I wouldn't send this sort of thing, but... [Aaron Mandel ] Re: just for fun [dmw ] Re: just for fun [Christopher Gross ] ralph wiggum ["Andrew D. Simchik" ] Re: just for fun [Capuchin ] Re: just for fun [Aaron Mandel ] Re: just for fun [Capuchin ] Re: I don't remember [Berkshire] (aka Barleycorn Death Foretold) [Michael] Re: just for fun [Aaron Mandel ] Re: Minders/Cotton Mather [Aaron Mandel ] Re: just for fun ["J. Brown" ] Re: I don't remember [Berkshire] (aka Barleycorn Death Foretold) [Eric Lo] die tapfere neue Welt [GSS ] oops i deleted it [dmw ] deixe cair suas calgas e agarre seus tornozelos [GSS ] a spot of antipodean humor... [Mark_Gloster@3com.com] Re: just for fun [Eb ] Re: a spot of antipodean humor... [Mark_Gloster@3com.com] Re: just for fun [woj ] Re: just for fun [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: reap, also Beatlestuff [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 17:02:11 +0100 From: "Scott Clark" Subject: Re: just for fun I really tried to resist, but... 10cc 999 Beatles, The Burdon, Eric and the Animals Certain Ratio, A Cooper, Alice Rutles, The Ruts, The ? and the Mysterions Not so sure about "?", though. =============================================================== Scott Clark "The love of the irregular sc8y@swissinfo.org is a sign of the basic Charlottesville, VA, USA quest for freedom."--Soetsu Yanagi =============================================================== _______________________________________________________________________ Dreaming of a Swiss Account? Get it here: http://freemail.swissinfo.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 16:14:39 +0100 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: droplift.org Probably so six-fortnights ago for some of you, but I'm currently enjoying (most) of the sounds at: http://www.droplift.org/ Lotsa sound collage, all N(C). Fun. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 11:18:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: Normally I wouldn't send this sort of thing, but... > Re: Normally I wouldn't send this sort of thing, but... you should probably have resisted the urge this time, too. those "send it in every 20 signatures" petitions are a huge mess, and ineffective. if you want to run a petition on the net, put up a "signable" form on the web and send around a letter about that. both the letter and the web page should clearly say when the message will become irrelevant so that time-sensitive petitions aren't forwarded over and over again by well-meaning people who don't know when the Paralympics are. and with the signing happening on the web, you don't have the contact person still getting petitions mailed to them years later, and they don't have the task of figuring out how many unique names there are on the pile of petitions they've received. there's also the fact that email petitions, being notoriously easy to get people to sign, are much less effective than written petitions with the same number of signatures. but still, if one wants to do it, there's a right way and a futile way. a ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 11:20:31 EDT From: "Richard Zeszotarski" Subject: Re: just for fun >From: "Russ Reynolds" >Reply-To: "Russ Reynolds" >To: fegmaniax >Subject: just for fun >Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 06:32:20 -0700 > >Alright, let's see how many different ways there are to do this: File >these >artists in alphabetical order: > >The Beatles >Alice Cooper >The Rutles >999 >A Certain Ratio >The Ruts >10cc >Eric Burdon & the Animals >? and the Mysterions > Well, here goes: A Certain Ratio The Beatles Eric Burdon and the Animals (although this could also go under "Animals") Alice Cooper (yes, it was the name of the band, but most people think of this artist in terms of the Individual guy. Hence, alphabetized by last name) 999 ? and the Mysterians The Rutles The Ruts 10cc - -Rich Z, who as an unfair advantage here, as he works in a record store and must alphabetize albums all the time. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 11:29:54 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: just for fun well, no one has got it right yet...what's with all this number's first stuff? so here. > A Certain Ratio > The Beatles > Eric Burdon & the Animals > Alice Cooper > 999 > ? and the Mysterions > The Rutles > The Ruts > 10cc i will admit that Eric Burdon is something of a judgment call; if there were a passle of 'Animals' albums as well, i'd lump it in with them, but as presented, this is my notion of correct. it does pre-suppose that you know that "alice cooper" is the name of an individual not a band; i found "jesus jones" more genuinely problematic. - -- d. np elysian fields _queen of the meadow_ - - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr pathos - - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews - - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 12:12:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: just for fun On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, dmw wrote: > well, no one has got it right yet...what's with all this number's first > stuff? When alphabetizing CDs, I treat numbers as if they were spelled out, and I guess I'd do the same with "?" ("question mark"). Thus: [Eric Burdon & the] Animals Beatles, The Certain Ratio, A Cooper, Alice 999 ? and the Mysterions Rutles, The Ruts, The 10cc Notes: I consider Alice Cooper to be the name of a person with a band, not the name of a band, so he goes under his last name. When I think of the Animals, I think of them as a band and not "Eric Burdon et al.," so I'd skip EB altogether and put them under A; however, I might change my mind if *all* the CD covers said "EB & the Animals" instead of just The Animals. (I take it they released some albums under each name?) And finally, nothing ever gets filed under The, A or An. Never ever ever. I wouldn't even put The The there if there was a way to avoid it. (But I'm undecided about the equivalent in foreign languages. Should Die Krupps and Die Kreuzen go under D or K? I'd probably put them under K in my personal collection, but D in a store. (Unless it was a store in Germany.)) - --Chris, whose CDs are still out of order after moving to a new apartment three months ago ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:06:03 -0700 From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: ralph wiggum >From: Eb >And my very favorite: some rambling gibberish about catching Principal >Skinner and Mrs. Krabapple (sp?) making babies in the closet and "one of >the babies looked at me" "I saw Principal Skinner and Miss Krapappel in the closet making babies and I saw one of the babies and the baby looked at me!" At one point we couldn't stop saying that. Drew - -- - -- Andrew D. Simchik, drew at stormgreen.com http://www.stormgreen.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:45:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: just for fun I'm fairly anal about the arrangement of my records as well. I sort, as many do, alphabetically by artist, from lower right to upper left, which very much confuses some. Within a given artist, I sort by original release date (reissues go under the ORIGINAL release date of that which is being reissued). On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, dmw wrote: > well, no one has got it right yet...what's with all this number's first > stuff? so here. Huh? I'd do this: 10cc 999 ? and the Mysterions A Certain Ratio The Beatles Eric Burdon & the Animals Alice Cooper Jethro Tull The Rutles The Ruts I included Quail's Jethro Tull because it's also interesting and is right where it belongs (I.e. under J). I think of Alice Cooper as a person, not a band. If I found I was mistaken (and not being a Cooper follower, I just don't know), I would put it under Alice. And Eric Burdon & the Animals would go under Animals, the & Burdon, Eric if I had any records that were just the Animals (and it were the same band). So the original list becomes this: Beatles, The Cooper, Alice Rutles, The 999 Certain Ratio, A Ruts, The 10cc Burdon, Eric & the Animals ? and the Mysterions Jethro Tull Clearly you sort by the first significant word in the artists' name and sort words character by character. The length of the string is irrelevant. I can see how a person might have trouble choosing where non-letter characters fall. And I suppose you could put punctuation first, last, or in the middle; numbers first, last, or in the middle; and letters first, last, or in the middle. Me, I put numbers, punctuation, then letters. The only exception to this is the space character ' ', which goes before all. This keeps a band called "dog sand cats" in front of a band called "dogs and cats" or '1 lone man' in front of '101', preserving the expected behavior of things like telephone books. A string of numbers is just a word. It's unpredictable from one person to another how to sort numbers if you do it any other way. Is 999 "Nine Nine Nine" or "Nine Hundred Ninety-Nine"? (OK, so it's a phone number, but I'm sure there could be ambiguous examples.) And how would someone who spells numbers out distinuish 911 from 999? Would it really make sense to put 911 AFTER 999? What it really comes down to is that 9 is not "nine". They're different words. I take case as irrelevant as well. I've never run into an issue where two bands had identical names except for the case, so I'm not too worried about it. I suppose if it came down to that, the first case shifting would take precedence, so "BeanTown" would be before "Beantown", but after "BEANtown". Although I really don't think I'd ever be happy with that situation. I was just playing with my "sort" command to see if I could get it to sort records the way I would... I have to put them in the funny format above, but this works just like I would if I were unaided by technology: [jbrelin@artemis:~] $ sort -f <Beatles, The >Cooper, Alice >Rutles, The >999 >Certain Ratio, A >Ruts, The >10cc >Burdon, Eric & the Animals >? and the Mysterions >Jethro Tull >HERE 10cc 999 ? and the Mysterions Beatles, The Burdon, Eric & the Animals Certain Ratio, A Cooper, Alice Jethro Tull Rutles, The Ruts, The If you dig that. So I guess the real question is what people call the most significant word and what order numbers, letters (lowers and uppers), and punctuation are placed. That is all. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin _______________________________________________ [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 12:49:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: just for fun On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Christopher Gross wrote: > I wouldn't even put The The there if there was a way to avoid it. geez, it's not like the word doesn't exist. it's just a convention used for filing because articles are so often omitted when citing works. but have you ever heard anyone refer to the The just as "The"? seems unlikely. by the way, for those who don't know, Matt Johnson wasn't just trying to be cute and unfilable; he took The The's name from a Wallace Stevens poem: http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~jpierce/fun_pages/wallace.html a ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:51:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: just for fun On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Richard Zeszotarski wrote: > Well, here goes: A Certain Ratio > The Beatles > Eric Burdon and the Animals (although this could also > go under "Animals") > Alice Cooper (yes, it was the name of the band, but > most people think of this artist in terms of the > Individual guy. Hence, alphabetized by last name) > 999 > ? and the Mysterians > The Rutles > The Ruts > 10cc > > -Rich Z, who as an unfair advantage here, as he works in a record store and > must alphabetize albums all the time. You're on crack, Rich. This is one of the many reasons I don't go to record stores. So you're saying that the definite article doesn't count, but the indefinite article DOES count? This seems to be the opposite of sensible. Would you put 911 after 999? That's just nonsensical. Slurping his nonsensicle. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin _______________________________________________ [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 17:52:32 +0100 (BST) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: I don't remember [Berkshire] (aka Barleycorn Death Foretold) On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Scott Clark wrote: > Ah-hah! I was given a copy of JB by someone I share no musical other > tastes with and it became a favorite. How does the re-issue differ--any > improvement in AAD sound quality? The big difference from earlier releases of John Barleycorn is the inclusion of two live tracks by a line-up of Winwood, Capaldi, Wood and Ric Grech, playing 'Who knows what tomorrow may bring?' and 'Glad'. These songs were due to be released on a 1970 live album which was unaccountably pulled at the last minute - see: http://www.azstarnet.com/~bobbieg/live70.htm If your main interest is sound quality, these two items are not that great; _but_ Winwood is playing some out and out freaky keyboards, which are well worth a listen. The sound on the studio tracks is good, though my brand new copy has a couple of jumps on it (weren't CDs supposed to have abolished that?). But of course we'll never ever hear anything again as good as Winwood, Capaldi and Wood playing 'John Barleycorn Must Die' live. Awesome - magical. Has anyone got a video of them doing it? - - Mike Godwin PS I don't believe there ever was a band called 'Eric Burdon and the Animals'. Eric Burdon and the New Animals, yes: Vic Briggs, John Wieder and some other buggers. File under A for Animals, or possibly W for War! n.p. 'Doctor Dark' from Don's Birthday Party ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:03:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: just for fun On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Capuchin wrote: > So you're saying that the definite article doesn't count, but the > indefinite article DOES count? This seems to be the opposite of > sensible. that's exactly the convention used at my radio station as well, and it has stood the test of time there. indefinite articles are comparatively so uncommon in front of band names that people don't seem to ignore them when looking for records by A House or A Certain Ratio or... well, i can't think of any others. a ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:09:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: Minders/Cotton Mather On Sun, 8 Oct 2000, Alex Wettreich wrote: > That's funny because, while I like The Minders, they've always seemed > particularly beholden to the British Invasion template, at least when > compared with most of their E6 brethren. Then again, I haven't heard > the new EP. [...] > To my ears, Cotton Mather, while undoubtedly Beatlesque, are willing > to fuck with the genre in a way that many of their compatriots won't, > particularly on the Kontiki and Hotel Baltimore releases. the new Minders EP is not much of a departure. i just don't get the feeling that what they've appropriated from the past is, to them, the most important part of the record. it's a style to write songs in, and Leaper seems to enjoy crafting songs. Cotton Mather, on the other hand, are so desirous of being the new, updated Beatles that they conspicuously (and superficially) fuck around with the sound. admittedly, this makes the records somewhat more interesting, but to my ears, it doesn't keep them from sounding more locked into a formula than the Minders. they obey by disobeying, or whatever that phrase is. most of the Cotton Mather i've heard just doesn't jump. a ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:11:20 -0700 (PDT) From: "J. Brown" Subject: Re: just for fun On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Russ Reynolds wrote: > Alright, let's see how many different ways there are to do this: File these > artists in alphabetical order: Putting my Library School experience to work: 10cc (numbers come before letters in library practice) 999 Alice Cooper (name of the band not the guy) Animals, Eric Burdon and the (shouldbe colocated with Animals records) Beatles, The Certain Ratio, A ? & the Mysterians (assuming the authority file says Question Mark) Rutles, The Ruts, The Jason Wilson Brown - University of Washington - Seattle, WA USA "Monkey in a Turban, Oh What Does it Mean?" -Frank Black ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:23:16 -0400 From: Eric Loehr Subject: Re: I don't remember [Berkshire] (aka Barleycorn Death Foretold) At 05:52 PM 10/12/00 +0100, Michael R Godwin wrote: >The big difference from earlier releases of John Barleycorn is the >inclusion of two live tracks by a line-up of Winwood, Capaldi, Wood and >Ric Grech, playing 'Who knows what tomorrow may bring?' and 'Glad'. These >songs were due to be released on a 1970 live album which was unaccountably >pulled at the last minute - see: >http://www.azstarnet.com/~bobbieg/live70.htm There are also two previously unreleased tracks from the sessions: I Just Want You to Know Sittin' Here Thinkin' of My Love I have to confess that I haven't listened to these since I got the CD when it (the reissue) first came out -- the fact that I can't remember at all what they sound like is probably a good indication that they shouldn't be the deciding factor in buying it -- unless you're a huge Traffic fan (ok, I am). Hey, when's that Blind Faith reissue supposed to happen? Anybody hear any of the Morgan rehearsals boots? Eric "A Stranger to Himself" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 12:57:41 -0500 (CDT) From: GSS Subject: die tapfere neue Welt a little more discouragement. is anyone else familiar with this latest piece of socio-fascist crap? - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Fugitive Apprehension Act of 2000 (S. 2516), sponsored by Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-UT, and Patrick Leahy, D-VT, passed the Senate on July 26. If it passes the House this week it will become law. Its stated purpose is to "fund task forces to locate and apprehend fugitives in federal, state and local felony criminal cases and give administrative subpoena authority to the United States Marshals Service." Interestingly, the bill defines the term fugitive as someone who has merely been "accused" and not necessarily convicted of a crime. And although the bill appears to be focused on "fugitives," it gives the government alarming new powers to search the property owned or controlled by people who are merely witnesses. You could be considered a witness if you have a friend, roommate, neighbor, spouse, or family member who is merely under investigation by a government agency. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 14:00:25 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: oops i deleted it nine hundred eleven does go before nine hundred ninety-nine i don't think there's any ambiguity about proper expansion of numbers with more than one place in them. and yeah, i'd file (seminal dc post-hardcore band) 9353 (nine thousand three hundred fifty three) after 911, whether it's pronounced 'nine three five three' or not. ....if i actually filed stuff, that is. instead i cram them on shelves wherever they fit in almost completely random fashion. - -- d. np cockeyed ghost _the scapegoat factory_ - - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr pathos - - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews - - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:06:11 -0500 (CDT) From: GSS Subject: deixe cair suas calgas e agarre seus tornozelos here it is in all it's glory, http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:S.2516.ES: gss ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 11:23:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: oops i deleted it On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, dmw wrote: > nine hundred eleven > does go before > nine hundred ninety-nine > > i don't think there's any ambiguity about proper expansion of numbers with > more than one place in them. Huh?!? What about Nine hundred twelve vs. Nine hundred ninety-nine ? > ....if i actually filed stuff, that is. instead i cram them on shelves > wherever they fit in almost completely random fashion. I'm saying that it don't quite make sense. It's wholly idiosyncratic and unpredictable by anyone searching the catalog. Hmm... perhaps we could point a camera at your CD shelves and generate truly random numbers based on the disc orders there... J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin _______________________________________________ [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 15:02:02 -0700 From: Mark_Gloster@3com.com Subject: a spot of antipodean humor... I heard an Aussie interviewed during the Olympics. He was working at a tourist information booth in Sydney. The interviewer asked him what the stupidest question was that he had had to field. He said something to the effect that an American couple came in and asked if they could drive their cars from there to Auckland. "I think you'll want to roll up the windows if you try," he replied. I found this uproariously funny, sitting in a quickysquirtyjiffylubeymart place waiting room in, as Tom would say, buttfuck nowhere. Nobody else in the room found it humorous at all until the network illustrated the geographical humor with a map. I wonder if "cousin James" moved there as a result of a very wrong turn on an Albuquerque freeway. Happies, - -Markg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 14:52:35 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: just for fun I have a hard time getting excited about this thread, but I'll just note that I agree with Christopher Gross. ;) But here, I can throw out some other dorky issues, which popped up in my own collection. I made my own decisions, which may or may not follow official protocol. Have fun.... ;) The period issue: A.C. Marias, before or after Able Tasmans? B.A.L.L. before or after Badfinger? P.M. Dawn, before or after Painkiller? Ben Folds Five, under "B" or "F"? Worry about the distinction between Beefheart & HIS Magic Band and Beefheart & THE Magic Band? Charlie Mingus vs. Charles Mingus? David Thomas albums: Chronological, or grouped by backing bands "The Wooden Birds," "Foreigners," "Two Pale Boys" and "The Pedestrians"? Or similar name-vs.-backing-band issues with Elvis Costello, Robyn Hitchcock, Graham Parker, Neil Young... Wings Over America, under "Wings" or "McCartney"? 801, under "801" or "Manzanera"? Which comes first, Richard Thompson or Richard & Linda Thompson? Foetus albums, all filed under "Foetus" or by the individually embellished names? (And am I wrong in lumping Steroid Maximus under Foetus? Probably....) Or Roger Miller records, all filed under "Miller" or by "No Man," "No Man is Roger Miller," "Roger Miller's Exquisite Corpse," etc.? The Mothers of Invention, under "Zappa" or "Mothers"? Naked City, under "Zorn" or "Naked"? Le Mystere des Voix Bulgares, under "Le" or "Mystere"? Soundtrack collections by Carl Stalling, Ennio Morricone, John Lurie and Ry Cooder under soundtracks or alphabetically by name? Ciccone Youth, under "Sonic" or "Ciccone"? Anderson, Bruford, Wakeman, Howe under "Anderson" or "Yes"? The Dukes of Stratosphere and Mr. Partridge, under "XTC" or those names? File Tyrannosaurus Rex and T. Rex albums chronologically, or as separate bands? This also might be a good place to note that I only know one band who released three albums under three different names. I have one album each by "Th Faith Healers," "Th Faith Healers UK" and "Th' Faith Healers." Heh. Eb, who *still* hasn't decided whether he should file Tin Machine albums under "Tin" or "Bowie" PS Mike, I don't believe "Traffic" and "Barleycorn" yet have been reissued with the deluxe remaster/remix treatment, in the States. And my greatest-hits record on MGM is by "Eric Burdon & the Animals"...no "New." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 15:20:47 -0700 From: Mark_Gloster@3com.com Subject: Re: a spot of antipodean humor... I didn't mean to suggest that James lives in Auckland. Happies, - -markg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:46:38 -0400 From: woj Subject: Re: just for fun when we last left our heroes, Eb exclaimed: >David Thomas albums: Chronological, or grouped by backing bands "The Wooden >Birds," "Foreigners," "Two Pale Boys" and "The Pedestrians"? Or similar >name-vs.-backing-band issues with Elvis Costello, Robyn Hitchcock, Graham >Parker, Neil Young... the hitchcock stuff is easy -- it gets filed in a separate, smaller rack, chronological (tori and KaTe get similar treatments). >Which comes first, Richard Thompson or Richard & Linda Thompson? richard, probably. ;) >Eb, who *still* hasn't decided whether he should file Tin Machine albums >under "Tin" or "Bowie" i'd file them under "ehhhhh". +w ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 16:06:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: just for fun on a similar track, everyone else here rolls their eyes when they see Ben Folds Five under "b", right? right? dmw wrote: > > well, no one has got it right yet...what's with all this number's > first stuff? so here. > > > > A Certain Ratio > > The Beatles > > Eric Burdon & the Animals > > Alice Cooper > > 999 > > ? and the Mysterions > > The Rutles > > The Ruts > > 10cc > > i will admit that Eric Burdon is something of a judgment call; if > there > were a passle of 'Animals' albums as well, i'd lump it in with them, > but > as presented, this is my notion of correct. it does pre-suppose that > you > know that "alice cooper" is the name of an individual not a band; i > found > "jesus jones" more genuinely problematic. > > -- d. > > np elysian fields _queen of the meadow_ > > - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr > pathos > - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews > - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop > ===== "[I]t's important for the maintenance of consensus that some people keep on being scared of what might happen and probably won't; otherwise, they would not be such easy prey for what can happen and actually has. There is even a name for this tactic -- it's called 'triangulation' -- and eight years of it have been much more than enough." -- Christopher Hichens in Mother Jones, Sep/Oct 2000 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 12:10:52 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Re: reap, also Beatlestuff >Donald Dewar, First Minister of the Scottish Parliament Also Sri Lanka's Sirimavo Bandaranaike - the world's first woman prime minister. >a)They, along with the Crickets, really promoted the idea of the >self-contained band; that is, a group of musicians who write their own >songs. This Ur-DIY approach quickly caught on and thanks to it the 60's >evolved into a very diverse group of musicians. >b) They advanced ROCK AND ROLL songwriting itself. They always pushed the >limits of what was 'rock' and what was 'pop'. Almost from the very start of >their songwriting they (especially Paul) were always trying new chords, new >things. As an example, whenever someone goes from a chord's major to the >same chord's minor right away (like, D-Dm) people automatically think of it >as "Beatle-esque). >c) They advanced (along with George Martin) many technical production ideas. >They were always looking for new ways to make records, and it wasn't always >'How are we going to re-invent the wheel this time?", it was as if the >production was demanded by the sheer complexity of the songs they had >already written in their heads. >d) To refute them as 'just a 60's boy band': Every single record they put >out challenged all the top songwriters and producers of the day. When >"Pepper" came out there was nothing to compare it to (well, Pet Sounds >certainly, but that's about it). In no way does this resemble the boy bands >of today - I don't see Robert Pollard eagerly pouring over the new 'N Sync >single, trying to decode "How the fark did they do that?". While the Beatles >were putting out records, that is indeed what everyone was trying to do. very well put. I would argue that the challenging chord patterns were mainly Paul, though. Many of the early intriguing chord patterns were John's - "If I fell", that augmented chord in "I'm happy just to dance with you", the intro to "You can't do that", "Anytime at all". Paul could still produce intriguing chord structures (Things we said today" and "I'll be back" both use that minor/major modulation thingy, as does "I'll follow the sun", but much of the early chord fiddling was John's. James James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- You talk to me as if from a distance -.-=-.- And I reply with impressions chosen from another time =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #283 *******************************