From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V12 #21 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Monday, January 20 2003 Volume 12 : Number 021 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Eat y'self (and others) fitter ["matt sewell" ] Re: Avril, Luxor ["Brian Hoare" ] Future Feg [Jon Fetter ] Re: piece of arse [gSs ] Re: The unsual dribs n drabs [gSs ] Re: The unsual dribs n drabs [Aaron Mandel ] Re: The unsual dribs n drabs [gSs ] Seligman in Bass Player [brian@lazerlove5.com] Morris***: Which one am I complaining about now? ["Rex.Broome" ] Re: The unsual dribs n drabs [Aaron Mandel ] To the alterna-tuners (James et. al.) ["Rex.Broome" ] Re: The unsual dribs n drabs [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: To the alterna-tuners (James et. al.) ["Michael E. Kupietz, wearing a] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:39:25 +0000 From: "matt sewell" Subject: Re: Eat y'self (and others) fitter Pure fallacy, I'm afraid - most carnivores will eat meat from any source, though close family members are less likely to be on the menu. Lions will eat lion quite happily. I think one reason some animals don't eat their own kind is perhaps because members of their own species are bigger than prey items (eg. a sparrowhawk wouldn't go after another sparrowhawk, not for any ethical reason, just because a sparrowhawk is a lot bigger than a sparrow). I think that cannibalism is bad not for any moral objection (anyone who eats pig should know that they are as intelligent as chimps and chimps aren't much stupider than humans), it's just bad practice - you're far more likely to get a disease that's compatible with yourself eating another human than you would from say, a chicken... Cheers Matt >From: "Rex.Broome" >Taboos aside, isn't the main issue that carnivores/omnivores rarely eat the >flesh of other carnivores/omnivores, and that's sort of the way it >biologically goes? I'm sure there are exceptions-- most of us eat filter >feeders or carnivorous fish-- but I think that's the crux of it. > >-Rex - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 02:12:16 -0800 From: "Michael E. Kupietz, wearing a pointy hat" Subject: Re: that horrible 'lavigne' girl & some robyn At 1:55 AM -0500 1/19/03, those funny voices I hear when no one else is around called themselves "* randi / twofangs.productions *" and whispered: >It drives me crazy to know of so many good Canadian singer/songwriters >and all you get in the States is Avril, Shania, and Alanis. Shhhh! South of the border here we try to keep a lid on Blue Rodeo, because we don't want them to sell out. And, hey, Bryan Adams! Just kidding. At 7:22 PM -0500 1/19/03, those funny voices I hear when no one else is around called themselves "HSatterfld@aol.com" and whispered: ><supposed to be the new wave of quality pop or something, which >if you've heard this song is complete and total shit.>> ... >I think this is a fantastic pop album, if you don't like bubble gum pop >then you won't agree. Better than Debbie Gibson? MK (w/a PH) - -- ======== We need love, expression, and truth. We must not allow ourselves to believe that we can fill the round hole of our spirit with the square peg of objective rationale. - Paul Eppinger At non effugies meos iambos - Gaius Valerius Catallus ("...but you won't get away from my poems.") "Moderation in all things, except Wild Turkey." - Evel Knievel ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 05:56:17 -0600 From: Dolph Chaney Subject: Re: UVS At 10:33 PM 1/19/2003, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: >Quoting The Birdpoo : > > > > Yeah! Ultra Vivid Scene's Joy 1967-1990 is a great one. > > Whatever happened to Kurt and his UVS? >He's done a lot of production >since, I gather - don't know if he's recording at all anymore. He produced a great record by Mistle Thrush called _Super Refraction_ -- another killer 99 cent buy from a "War Against Silence" recommendation. Strong female vocal, lots of big swirly guitars and Moogs, it reminds me of Polara, if that helps. dolph np: Bare Jr., BOO-TAY ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:16:01 +0000 From: "Brian Hoare" Subject: Re: Avril, Luxor Ross: >OK, just a bit more. Compared to most of what my 14 year old >daughter and her friends think of as good music she's Janis Joplin. I haven't listened too closely but it gets a lot of play in my 10 year old daughter's room, along with Pink and Kylie's Fever. Doesn't do much for me but it's better than the S Club and Steps sounds that she enjoyed last year. Meanwhile the seven year old found herself dancing to NDL but found the band photo highly amusing -- "are they that old"? bayard: >Subject: who of you sent me this?/Luxor >Also, I was reading a book I bought about Egyptian Mythology and found out >that Luxor is a city in ancient (and modern?) Egypt. We went there in october 2001 ( very few tourists:) ) and it is both ancient and modern. The east side is quite developed - the hotels are on this side so you can see the sunset over the Nile, it also has the temples, shops, museums &c. The west side is much less developed but is the only place you'll get a fully egyptian meal in Luxor, the east side being good mostly for pizza,pasta and chips. Stayed in the New Winter Palace which is the modern neighbour of the maginficent Victorian old Winter Palace. The are connected so we got to wander around this wonderful building where Carter started his hunt for Tut's tomb. The ancient sites were as amazing as expected. Did I tell you about the time I was taken up the valley of the queens by a tootless guide called Mohammed? Brian >Subject: Unable to locate message > _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:47:54 -0500 From: Jon Fetter Subject: Future Feg Jon and Rani Fetter are happy to announce the birth of Nathaniel Jyunyian Fetter on Jan 17, 2003. Weighing 7 lbs. 4.5 oz. and just shy of 20 in. in length, he is cute to the extreme. Whether he likes the music of one Robyn Hitchcock remains to be determined... Cheers, Jon ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:08:48 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: piece of arse On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Steve Talkowski wrote: > uhm... exactly what form of oral sex are you engaging in where "stuff" > comes off?? you know, the regular type. don't you always swallow a bit of your lover? like hair, pieces of lip skin for instance, among other things? and then of course the liquidic matter. 'liquidic', isn't that a word from star trek? even swapping spit i guess could be associated with cannabalism, loosely. gSs ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:48:50 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: The unsual dribs n drabs On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > > so should we classify each child molestation case as aggravated or non > > aggravatedd > I was distinguishing between someone actually abusing a physical person, > and someone contributing indirectly to that abuse by paying to view images > of that abuse. that is a direct contribution. i have to disagree with the seperation. i believe the makers of these films would love to be partakers and in addition probably watch these films when they are not involved in the production. on the other side if there is another side, the buyers and viewers of these films I believe would just as soon participate activity, with a camera or without. i see no difference in these people and therefore see no reason to vary the punishment. gSs ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:27:04 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: The unsual dribs n drabs On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, gSs wrote: > on the other side if there is another side, the buyers and viewers of > these films I believe would just as soon participate activity, with a > camera or without. Why should that be true of child porn, when it's not categorically true for any other kind of sexual desire? I don't know anything about child porn; I've never talked to anyone who had seen any (or at least, nobody who said so). But I would bet you that there are people out there who get off on it that would never touch a child inappropriately themselves. Sure, it's a disturbing thought. If I found out somebody I knew liked this stuff, no matter how much they swore it would be against their personal principles to *do* any of it, I would have a hard time trusting them. Taking a step back, though, the vast majority of porn consumed depicts situations that in some way, the viewer wouldn't actually want to be in. If you add in written porn, the proportions are probably even higher. I suppose there's an argument against what I'm saying in that watching child porn without flipping your lid means that you can stand the idea of *some* adult forcing themselves on children, and that the impersonal reasons to forbid it, not personal taste, is what stops most people from having any sexual contact with kids. That is, a porn tape of actors having group sex on a golf course in the middle of the day will probably be viewed almost entirely by people that don't want to have group sex on a golf course BUT who also don't mind the idea of someone else doing it. I just don't find this argument too compelling. I'm not saying child porn is harmless. I'm not it shouldn't be illegal to own. I'm not even saying that it's harmless for *some* people. But I think you're denying the nature of human sexuality by saying that everyone who watches it wants to commit active sex crimes of their own. Our minds don't work that way, and as an aside neither does our society. A better analogue than regular adult porn might be, say, kids writing approvingly about the Columbine massacre. I mean, you just *know* that there were a handful kids all over the country who scrawled messages of solidarity with the Columbine killers in the days after it happened. Some of them probably had their own little diagrams of how to do the same thing in their own schools. Is that scary? Is it a warning sign that something is wrong in those kids' lives, or maybe with the kids themselves? Is it hard to empathize with someone who would be un-revolted enough by those murders to cheer about them? Yes. But most of those kids (maybe all of them) didn't turn into copycats. And nothing was stopping them except the fact that in the end, they didn't want to. a ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:19:53 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: The unsual dribs n drabs On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Aaron Mandel wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, gSs wrote: > > > on the other side if there is another side, the buyers and viewers of > > these films I believe would just as soon participate activity, with a > > camera or without. > > Why should that be true of child porn, when it's not categorically true > for any other kind of sexual desire? I don't know anything about child > porn; I've never talked to anyone who had seen any (or at least, nobody > who said so). But I would bet you that there are people out there who get > off on it that would never touch a child inappropriately themselves. i do not belief that is correct. if watching a child like jon-benet for instance, gives a man an erection, the only the think keeping him away from other children is the fear of being caught, nothing else. i personally have yet to meet someone who enjoys viewing adult pornography but would rather not be participating in such activity. not the filming possibly but definately that type of activity. people do not watch porn actively because of the musical score or dance routines. > Sure, it's a disturbing thought. If I found out somebody I knew liked this > stuff, no matter how much they swore it would be against their personal > principles to *do* any of it, I would have a hard time trusting them. > Taking a step back, though, the vast majority of porn consumed depicts > situations that in some way, the viewer wouldn't actually want to be in. what type of porn have you watched? i am not an active participant in the porn industry on the consumer level or any other, but most porn is made with attractive people doing things that I myself enjoy doing. and it's the sex itself, not the scripts that attract people to this market. > I'm not saying child porn is harmless. I'm not it shouldn't be illegal to > own. I'm not even saying that it's harmless for *some* people. But I think > you're denying the nature of human sexuality by saying that everyone who > watches it wants to commit active sex crimes of their own. Our minds don't > work that way, and as an aside neither does our society. i disagree, they do or will as soon as they are comfortable enough with the outcome. would you enjoy watching a film of a someone being raped? or do you think those who do watch and enjoy on any level would not also enjoy participating. do you think people who enjoy watch hunting shows most often do not enjoy participating in an actual hunt? > A better analogue than regular adult porn might be, say, kids writing > approvingly about the Columbine massacre. I mean, you just *know* that > there were a handful kids all over the country who scrawled messages of > solidarity with the Columbine killers in the days after it happened. i think that is a very strange comparison as children shooting fellow students and faculty at their school i believe can draw no logical comparison to chester the molester who watchs naked children while he masterbates, or worse. and chester will do worse given the opportunity. gSs ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:44:27 +0000 (GMT) From: brian@lazerlove5.com Subject: Seligman in Bass Player Anyone get the new Bass Player magazine? My friend says that there an interview with Matthew Seligman in it. I guess he talks about the bass line in Strings. Nuppy ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:33:49 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Morris***: Which one am I complaining about now? Eb on Dinosaur Jr: >>It's pretty hard for me to even make distinctions between Where You Been, >>Without a Sound and Hand It Over anymore...my mind just mixes them >>together into one big hazy blob. Very true... case in point, I think you listed them in chronological order but I am in no way certain. >>I mean, how could groups called "Blue Cartoon," "Bronco Bullfrog" and "The >>Yum Yums" NOT suck? The odds are astronomical. I'd like to disagree in principle (cf. Challenging Rainblow) but I just can't. Thanks for telling it like it is. _______ Randi: >>It drives me crazy to know of so many good Canadian singer/songwriters >>and all you get in the States is Avril, Shania, and Alanis. Ehh, it ain't so bad. Most people who know those artists apparently like them. Meanwhile Neil Young still has a recording contract... __________ Jeffrey FF: >>I've heard only a little of the post-Morrison Doors - and it seems >>Manzarek, at least, remains convinced to this day of Morrison's utter >>genius. Check out the first chapter of "Please Kill Me", the "oral *heh heh* history" of early punk by Legs McNeill et. al. Series of interviews and quotes from the participants. There's a long quote by, I think, Gerard Malanga about Morrison, then a little bullet by Manzarek: "Jim was a shaman." Next quote starts "Morrison was an asshole"... can't remember who said that, though. _________ Jill: >>There was a ton of great music back then in the early-mid 80s, but for me, the >>Smiths stood way out above the rest I know a lot of people feel this way. They were pretty great, I won't deny that, but as I mentioned they've been kind of tainted for me by latter, boring Morrissey. And even at the time they just didn't grab me the way a lot of other bands did. Lyrically in particular; that mix of misanthropy and coyness (vulnerability?) was just to the side of my emotional wavelength. Interestingly, I can see why that would appeal to a Ray Davies fan such as yourself, but I love the Kinks a great deal, too, and I see a whole different set of aesthetics there. >>As for Morrissey's lyrics, many of them can stand on their own without a >>note behind them And that may be the dissonance I experience summed up quite nicely. _____ Drew: >>I know Marr has worked with everyone else on the planet, but he's like tofu, >>taking on the flavor of whoever he's with, and not really setting any real >>direction of his own. Whole 'nother kettle o' squid, but I hear you. Marr is way more talented than a lot of my favorite guitarists, and I like a lot of what he's done, but he doesn't have that instantly-identifiable sound that really grips me with my faves. I take a lot of heat for this opinion, largely from my musical collaborators who note that as a kind of frequently jangly guitarist I write a fair amount of Marr-like stuff. Oh, well. On the flipside, Pete Buck is instantly identifiable as a guest artist but inevitably boring-- there's a guy who needs his musical foils (Mills in particular, apparently). Me, then back to Drew: >>>>I'd almost guarantee he usually has his lyrics (and song >>> titles!) written before he even hears the musical piece they go with. >>Assuming that's what he does, I don't see how that's inherently a problem. It's not, at all... I tried to clear up later that it's the results that mildly grate on me in Mozza's case. >>Do you have the same objection to Jarvis Cocker's lyrics? Hmmm. I dunno. Cocker seems less to be trying to actually "sing". Loureeding it, as it were. >>And I hate to say this but the most radical style deviations our Robyn has >>displayed in his own solo career were on _Invisible Hitchcock_. It's arguable, but the music is all largely written and played by Robyn, so it tracks for me. Morrissey has a choice of not just collaborators, but, by definition, co-writers. Could be Robyn, even, or it could be Aphex Twin. Not that I suggest wild stylistic oscillations for Morrissey, but there's a greater width and breadth of style within even the realms of "power pop" and "jangle" than Morrissey sems to tap into. But I'm just hearing the singles, really, so I should shut up. >>Yeah, it's weird to imagine that you find Moz's melodies awkward yet you >>would rather listen to something like "Do It Clean," but hey, as long as we're >>both happy. Well, I'm just now really realizing-- and largely due to exchanges with Drew-- that really love '60's bands much, much more than their worthy '80's followers: you may take my Icicle Works if you must, but you will pry my Byrds reissues from my cold, dead hands. So the '80's bands I like the most seem to be the ones that follow most directly from the garage/folkrock/psych/garage/prepunk blueprint, and yet expand on the legacy. Thus "Do It Clean" is like "Modern Lovers plus" to me-- a sheer rock rush that can get by without a whole lot of "melody". Maybe that's my deal. I dunno. That paints my tastes as more conventional than I think they are, in a way, but there it is. ____ Does anyone else find it ironic that one of the few non-pedophile-related threads on Feg right now concerns the return of the Sex Gang Children? - -Rex (Gang Children) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:44:20 +0000 (GMT) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: tunings, Luxor On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, James Dignan wrote: > on a completely related note, can anyone here tell me how a charango > should be tuned? These people refer to Standard, Drop 1/2 Step, DADGAD, Drop D, Open D and Open E. I think you have to pay them $14.95 to find out more. No-one has talked much about re-entrant tuning. The classic re-entrant tuning that I know is the ukulele ADF#B (aka "my dog has fleas"), with a high A instead of a low one. Those 5-string banjos are also re-entrant IIRC, but the 5th string isn't fretted, so it's more like a drone than a playable string. On the topic of Luxor, that's the modern name. It used to be called Thebes (100-gated Thebes, not 7-gated Thebes which is in Greece). The tombs of the nobles are not to be missed, as they include fascinating scenes of everyday life, passing giraffes, dancing girls, visitors from Crete etc, while the big tombs of the Kings and Queens tend to just be going through samey "opening of the mouth" ceremonies, applauded by the Ennead. The tombs of Nakht and Rekhmire are particularly recommended. There is also a classy but small museum in Luxor, not to mention the astounding temples of Karnak and Luxor. Oh, and don't miss the Punt reliefs at Hatshepsut's temple, which Velikvovsky claims are Palestine and not Yemen at all. Mind you, they're probably all drenched in tourists' blood now. As far as excursions go, the plane hop down to Abu Simbel is worth the money, and if you can get a trip to Abydos it has painted chamber after painted chamber full of the real authentic Egyptian gloom. - - MRG n.p. The Marvelettes "When You're Young And In Love" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:03:10 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: The unsual dribs n drabs On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, gSs wrote: > i personally have yet to meet someone who enjoys viewing adult > pornography but would rather not be participating in such activity. not > the filming possibly but definately that type of activity. What do you mean by "that type", though? People who would never cheat on their partners will happily watch porn with infidelity in it. I'm sure that everyone who gets off on child porn would rather be having SOME KIND of sex than watching child porn, but only for some is the kind of sex they want to have the same as the kind they're watching. > would you enjoy watching a film of a someone being raped? Nope. But that doesn't prove much. For just about any thing X, there are people who enjoy watching and doing X, people who enjoy neither, and people who enjoy watching X but not doing it. I'll repeat what I said before -- just because we're talking about kiddie porn, after all, and I'm scared of being misunderstood: I agree that if a movie depicts someone being the victim of a crime, buying that movie makes you legally and morally complicit by encouraging whoever made it to commit more crimes. It just doesn't prove you want to commit the crime yourself. When that movie Total Recall was in theaters, some people cheered as Arnold Schwarzenegger shot his wife. Those people may well be jerks, but I don't advocate the same penalties for them as for people who kill their spouses. Now, nobody was actually killed in making that movie, so I'm not sure those people are committing *any* misdeed, morally speaking. But you weren't saying that child-porn viewers should be punished as harshly as its creators because of their fractional *support* for the creators; you were saying that they want to rape children themselves and should be punished as if they had already done so. > do you think people who enjoy watch hunting shows most > often do not enjoy participating in an actual hunt? A hell of a lot of people watch cooking shows but don't cook, or don't cook the dishes they see on TV. I used to find it strange, but now I do it myself occasionally when Alton Brown is on. (He's like Mr. Wizard, but cute and with food! But I digress.) You could say "Sure, but they probably *want* to cook the dishes they see on TV." And yet the forces preventing child rape are a lot stronger than the ones keeping me from making an herb alfredo sauce, I hope you agree. The fact is that I clearly don't want to emulate Alton Brown very much or else I would have damn well done it by now; I like the *idea* of cooking like him, which isn't the same thing. Not sure that's a good analogy with pornography, but you brought up hunting TV shows, so... > i think that is a very strange comparison as children shooting fellow > students and faculty at their school i believe can draw no logical > comparison to chester the molester who watchs naked children while he > masterbates, or worse. and chester will do worse given the opportunity. No, really, what's the difference? I'm saying that sometimes people like the *idea* of doing something that other people find repulsive, and yet they don't do it. I'm trying to figure out whether you think that's just never true, or whether you think child porn is special somehow. a ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:15:11 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: To the alterna-tuners (James et. al.) Jeffrey: >>I'm too lazy to try alternate tunings - I hate retuning my guitar. Of >>course, I own only one - and I hardly every play it anymore. Other than the boneheaded drop-D, I mess around with alternate tuning occasionally but rarely commit to them sheerly because you really need to buy the right string guages to keep the tension consistent, and I have trouble keeping track of what strings I'm low on for my guitars anyway. How d'you handle this, James? Dedicated guitars for certain tunings? I recall making up a tuning for an acoustic Sonic Youth cover once. Sounded really cool, but I think the experience is totally responsible for the shortage of .10 guage strings that plagues me to this day. What makes it worse is that I move between three guitars with about equal frequency-- acoustic, electric, and electric 12-- and I constantly cannibalize the strings that "go" with one for the others. Brian: >>Violin is indeed G,D,A,E (ascending). Mandolin, too, so one can learn basic mandolin chords by plaing "upside down" guitar chords minus the two highest strings. Sometimes you have to adjust for lost notes in minor chords, etc., but this is what I did, and when I got a mandolin chordbook, damned if I hadn't worked it out pretty close. I really miss my mandolins. They always seem to collapse on me, or mysteriously get smashed to shreds onstage. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:14:01 -0800 From: "John B. Jones" Subject: Somebody ring the cheese alarm!!! http://www.otisfodder.com/365days.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:31:19 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: The unsual dribs n drabs On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, gSs wrote: > i do not belief that is correct. if watching a child like jon-benet for > instance, gives a man an erection, the only the think keeping him away > from other children is the fear of being caught, nothing else. Bullshit. I do not try to seduce every woman thoughts of whom might in some way stir me to an erection. This was true when I was single, of single women, so there was no "getting caught" to be fearing. - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Solipsism is its own reward:: __Crow T. Robot__ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:49:10 -0800 From: "Michael E. Kupietz, wearing a pointy hat" Subject: Re: To the alterna-tuners (James et. al.) I play in open G (DGDGBG) about 70% of the time - no tension problems, but I did eventually resigned myself to having two guitars just to avoid having to retune constantly. I keep my favorite guitar in open G, and the beater in standard. Also, because you generally play in one key in open tuning, but jump around in standard, the strings wear differently - lots of wear in a few places, instead of evenly spread out. The third string usually breaks its winding or snaps right above the third fret, long before anything else. Butcha can't play those blues without bending your minor thirds, though, can you. Break like the winding, Mike At 11:15 AM -0800 1/20/03, those funny voices I hear when no one else is around called themselves "Rex.Broome" and whispered: >Jeffrey: >>>I'm too lazy to try alternate tunings - I hate retuning my guitar. Of >>>course, I own only one - and I hardly every play it anymore. > >Other than the boneheaded drop-D, I mess around with alternate tuning >occasionally but rarely commit to them sheerly because you really need to >buy the right string guages to keep the tension consistent, and I have >trouble keeping track of what strings I'm low on for my guitars anyway. >How >d'you handle this, James? Dedicated guitars for certain tunings? > >I recall making up a tuning for an acoustic Sonic Youth cover once. >Sounded >really cool, but I think the experience is totally responsible for the >shortage of .10 guage strings that plagues me to this day. What makes it >worse is that I move between three guitars with about equal frequency-- >acoustic, electric, and electric 12-- and I constantly cannibalize the >strings that "go" with one for the others. > >Brian: >>>Violin is indeed G,D,A,E (ascending). > >Mandolin, too, so one can learn basic mandolin chords by plaing "upside >down" guitar chords minus the two highest strings. Sometimes you have to >adjust for lost notes in minor chords, etc., but this is what I did, and >when I got a mandolin chordbook, damned if I hadn't worked it out pretty >close. I really miss my mandolins. They always seem to collapse on me, or >mysteriously get smashed to shreds onstage. > >-Rex - -- ======== We need love, expression, and truth. We must not allow ourselves to believe that we can fill the round hole of our spirit with the square peg of objective rationale. - Paul Eppinger At non effugies meos iambos - Gaius Valerius Catallus ("...but you won't get away from my poems.") "Moderation in all things, except Wild Turkey." - Evel Knievel ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V12 #21 *******************************