From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V15 #97 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, May 3 2006 Volume 15 : Number 097 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: My name is "Eb", and I've got botox in my asscheeks! [Tom Clark ] RE: This Is the BBC ["Bachman, Michael" ] RE: This Is the BBC ["Brian Nupp" ] Re: This Is the BBC [Benjamin Lukoff ] Re: This Is the BBC ["Lauren Elizabeth (gmail)" ] Re: This Is the BBC ["Spotted Eagle Ray" ] Re: This Is the BBC [Eb ] RE: This Is the BBC ["Michael Wells" ] RE: This Is the BBC [Jeff Dwarf ] Dear Eb, what are your five favorite RH songs? ["Brian Nupp" ] Re: This Is the BBC [2fs ] Crap [Eb ] Re: This Is the BBC [2fs ] Re: This Is the BBC [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: This Is the BBC ["Spotted Eagle Ray" ] Re: This Is the BBC ["Spotted Eagle Ray" ] the Dolby blog ["michael wells" ] Re: This Is the BBC ["Lauren Elizabeth (gmail)" ] Re: My name is "Eb", and I've got botox in my asscheeks! ["Stewart C. Rus] Re: This Is the BBC [Eb ] Re: This Is the BBC [2fs ] reap [Eb ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 08:42:13 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've got botox in my asscheeks! On May 1, 2006, at 11:47 PM, Eb wrote: > Sure are a lot of folks buzzing about this new USB turntable. > It's USB 1.1. Once the USB 2.0 Audio spec is ratified a product like this might be worthwhile. > > PS I love this: http://thankyoustephencolbert.org Talking to Eb is like boxing a glacier. - -tc, in South Lake Tahoe for the week. It's beautiful! [demime 0.97c-p1 removed an attachment of type application/pkcs7-signature which had a name of smime.p7s] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 14:14:34 -0400 From: "Brian Nupp" Subject: This Is the BBC Finally got my copy of THIS IS THE BBC last night in the mail. I think I've heard just about everything on here in lower quality form before, but it's a pleasure to have it in cleaner form now. Right off from 1st listen I'll say I like theses versions of De Chirico Street, Where Do You Go When You Die and I Saw Nick Drake better than the official album versions. Where Do You Go When You Die BBC seems much better/fuller here than on Storefront. I Saw Nick Drake doesn't sound like it was recorded in a cave like it does on A Star For Bram. I've heard enough of Robyn covering Dylan already. How bout some more Syd or Lennon? Or Roxy Music or VU. That reminds me: the Soft Boys cover of Run Run Run from a 1980's boot I have is great... Also regarding I Saw Nick Drake, I see it's now credited as the lyrics being writting by Robyn and the music being co-written by Robyn and Tim Keegan. This is the 1st I've seen of this isn't it? Beautiful intro to Madonna of the Wasps, but I heard enough of this song on MTV in 1989/90. I wish they done Globe Of Cats instead. BTW, I was home over the weekend and faintly remember overhearing someone talking about a policeman pulling them over and then the policeman starting to sing a Beatles song that was on the persons radio. I remember I turned to my brother and said: "Then the answer is 'yes.' Policemen do sing." True story. - -Nuppy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 14:58:17 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: This Is the BBC Nuppy wrote: >Finally got my copy of THIS IS THE BBC last night in the mail. I >think I've heard just about everything on here in lower quality form >before, but it's a pleasure to have it in cleaner form now. I hope mine arrives today! >Right off from 1st listen I'll say I like theses versions of De >Chirico Street, Where Do You Go When You Die and I Saw Nick Drake >better than the official album versions. Where Do You Go When You Die >BBC seems much better/fuller here than on Storefront. I Saw Nick >Drake doesn't sound like it was recorded in a cave like it does on A >Star For Bram. Can't wait!! >I've heard enough of Robyn covering Dylan already. How bout some more >Syd or Lennon? Or Roxy Music or VU. That reminds me: the Soft Boys >cover of Run Run Run from a 1980's boot I have is great... I like his cover of Psychedelic Fur's The Ghost In You. Maybe it's time he did a cover of the PF's President Gas? Michael B. NP Gene Clark - No Other ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 12:33:46 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On 5/2/06, Bachman, Michael wrote: > > > > I like his cover of Psychedelic Fur's The Ghost In You. Maybe it's time > he did a cover of the PF's President Gas? SOMEONE oughtta. Boy howdy are a lot of old school protest songs sounding ripped from today's headlines. Randomized iPod just offered up a Mark Arm cover of "Masters of War". I have yet to hear much of Neil's new thing. I fully expect to run very hot and very cold on it. Honestly? I just expect to be annoyed by the choir, and to enjoy the less agitproppy numbers that will be less discussed more than the hot-button ones. > NP Gene Clark - No Other How's that going for ya? - -Rx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 15:46:07 -0400 From: "Brian Nupp" Subject: RE: This Is the BBC From: Michael.Bachman >>I've heard enough of Robyn covering Dylan already. How bout some >more >>Syd or Lennon? Or Roxy Music or VU. That reminds me: the Soft Boys >>cover of Run Run Run from a 1980's boot I have is great... > >I like his cover of Psychedelic Fur's The Ghost In You. Maybe it's >time >he did a cover of the PF's President Gas? Oh yes. Psychedelic Furs too! - -Nuppy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 13:29:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Benjamin Lukoff Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On Tue, 2 May 2006, Spotted Eagle Ray wrote: > SOMEONE oughtta. Boy howdy are a lot of old school protest songs sounding > ripped from today's headlines. Randomized iPod just offered up a Mark Arm > cover of "Masters of War". I have yet to hear much of Neil's new thing. I > fully expect to run very hot and very cold on it. Honestly? I just expect > to be annoyed by the choir, and to enjoy the less agitproppy numbers that > will be less discussed more than the hot-button ones. I find the choir thoroughly annoying. "Living with War" ain't no "Ohio"--but then how could it have been? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 13:04:39 -0700 From: "Lauren Elizabeth (gmail)" Subject: Re: This Is the BBC Michael B. says: > I like his cover of Psychedelic Fur's The Ghost In You. He did a cover of "All That Money Wants" that I really love as well. I had stopped paying attention to the Psychedelic Furs after "Midnight to Midnight" so I didn't even know the song (it turns out that late-term Psychedelic Furs is pretty good, although not all that necessary.) xo Lauren - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." - The Buddha ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 13:44:45 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On 5/2/06, Benjamin Lukoff wrote: > > > I find the choir thoroughly annoying. "Living with War" ain't no > "Ohio"--but then how could it have been? Wouldn't be a modern day-- or perhaps *any* day-- Neil release without some kind of bizarre irritating conceit threatening to sink the whole generally inspired enterprise. Although that just may not be true of Prairie Wind; I didn't have enough time to absorb it... I think the last couple of tracks came close to sabotage, but would need to go back and relisten (might do so right now when the track now playing, "Lisa" by The Chthulhu Two and Others, winds down. - -Rx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 14:12:19 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: This Is the BBC Brian Nupp wrote: > I've heard enough of Robyn covering Dylan already. How bout some more > Syd or Lennon? Or Roxy Music or VU. Well, add the Byrds and Beatles to this list, and you've already exhausted his entire repertoire. The long-time predictability of RH's cover-song choices remains utterly exasperating to me. Maybe if he tried discovering some fresh artists, his own music wouldn't be turning so recycled and moldy. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 16:38:07 -0500 From: "Michael Wells" Subject: RE: This Is the BBC Lauren: > He did a cover of "All That Money Wants" that I really love as well. One of my favorite RH covers. I think there's a very nice version on one of Hooker's Bottom Line recordings (02?). > I had stopped paying attention to the Psychedelic Furs after "Midnight > to Midnight" so I didn't even know the song (it turns out that > late-term Psychedelic Furs is pretty good, although not all that > necessary.) You didn't miss it by much, though - "All that Money Wants" was, IIRC, a one-off for a greatest hits package that came out in the next year or two. (edit: checking wiki, it looks like '88). But that brings up the not-entirely-rhetorical question "can ANY Furs be not all that necessary?" It's shaping up to be a grand month musically...Secret Machines, Thomas Dolby and Angels and Airwaves!* Yippee! Michael * though not all together Ps. MRG I'd be happy to do "St. James" for your wife but I'll need a bit more lead next time. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 14:57:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: RE: This Is the BBC Michael Wells wrote: > Lauren: > > I had stopped paying attention to the Psychedelic > > Furs after "Midnight to Midnight" so I didn't even > > know the song (it turns out that late-term > > Psychedelic Furs is pretty good, although not all > > that necessary.) > > You didn't miss it by much, though - "All that Money > Wants" was, IIRC, a one-off for a greatest hits > package that came out in the next year or > two. (edit: checking wiki, it looks like '88). But > that brings up the not-entirely-rhetorical > question "can ANY Furs be not all that > necessary?" _Midnight to Midnight_, certainly. And a lot of _Mirror Moves_ qualifies as overly shined up turds too, though it has some really good songs as well. "A severed foot is the ultimate stocking stuffer." -- Mitch Hedberg . Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 18:15:09 -0400 From: "Brian Nupp" Subject: Dear Eb, what are your five favorite RH songs? ? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 15:55:02 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: Dear Eb, what are your five favorite RH songs? > ? Out of 300+ choices? Jeez...that would take awhile to determine, because I can't conjure up most of his songs from memory. And I'd have to know if Soft Boys songs are eligible. A lot of the songs which I *don't* like are more due to slick production than bad performance/songwriting. Such as tracks off Perspex Island, Queen Elvis and Grotty Decay. I probably couldn't narrow it down to a top five with any confidence, because his style/tone just doesn't vary enough for me to have fierce preferences among the top 30 or 40. It's a lot easier for me to call him "consistently good" than to isolate some handful of tunes as his "masterpieces." I dunno...make it worth my while, and maybe I'll make the effort. ;) Glacially yours, Eb PS I still have not heard a note of either Luxor or Spooked. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 16:08:01 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On 5/2/06, Michael Wells wrote: > > Lauren: > > He did a cover of "All That Money Wants" that I really love as well. > > > One of my favorite RH covers. I think there's a very nice version on one > of Hooker's Bottom Line recordings (02?). You know what, between those two acoustic RH covers and Buffalo Tom's version of "Heaven", I'm thinking that almost all of my favorite recordings of Furs songs are not by the Furs, and incredibly stripped down. I think I was kinda slow to come to respect that band... I useta view them as sort of a disposible third-string Mighty Lemon Drops-class band. But then I first encountered them around the time of "Heartbreak Beat", and when 120 Minutes did retrospectives you got "Dumb Waiters", which was pretty jaw-dropping, and then *everything* after that sounded so slickly produced ("The Ghost in You" sounds pretty ghastly, really) that I assumed they had started strong and sold out instantly. I remember being really nonplussed by the Buffalo Tom cover the first time I heard it... I was thinking it was a kitsch cover at first, but it turned out to make sense as a serious thing after all. It took me a while to hear the good tunes in that later Furs stuff and sort ret-con the production in my mind so that it sat alongside the other stuff from the era that I liked the first time around... could be just me, but stuff from 1986 that I discover in the here and now sounds totally dated, but stuff that I liked at the time just gets sort of mentally translated into normalcy. A few years ago someone tried to impress me with early Tears for Fears and I didn't like it at all, but I probably happily listened to "Murmur" and "Heaven Up Here" later that same week without a second thought. Ah well, I never claimed to have consistent taste. - -Rx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 18:20:12 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On 5/2/06, Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > Michael Wells wrote: > "can ANY Furs be not all that > > necessary?" > > _Midnight to Midnight_, certainly. And a lot of > _Mirror Moves_ qualifies as overly shined up turds > too, though it has some really good songs as well. I think there might be a couple of good songs on Midnight. There are many good songs on Mirror Moves...but in both cases, the songs are all but overwhelmed by annoying glossy high-80s production. Much of Mirror survives it - I'd have to say Midnight does not. Subject to modification if I were to actually check a track listing. Let's just Midnight is the only Furs album I never bought on CD. (Trust your Jeffs! They are always right!) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 16:21:49 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Crap I just realized that I forgot to tape Leno's monologue last night, to "rate" his Keith Richards jokes. Anyone else see it? Eb ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 18:25:12 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On 5/2/06, Spotted Eagle Ray wrote: > > > You know what, between those two acoustic RH covers and Buffalo Tom's > version of "Heaven", I'm thinking that almost all of my favorite > recordings > of Furs songs are not by the Furs, and incredibly stripped down. I think > I > was kinda slow to come to respect that band... I useta view them as sort > of > a disposible third-string Mighty Lemon Drops-class band. But then I first > encountered them around the time of "Heartbreak Beat", and when 120 > Minutes > did retrospectives you got "Dumb Waiters", which was pretty jaw-dropping, > and then *everything* after that sounded so slickly produced ("The Ghost > in > You" sounds pretty ghastly, really) that I assumed they had started strong > and sold out instantly. First two albums are classics. Third one (Forever Now) a bit more iffy sonics, but still pretty damned good (and noisy cello sawing). Then we get the records discussed above. Their last two (Book of Days and, uh, "Outside" something) are pretty much a return to form. The remake of "Pretty in Pink" is an abomination. The original is the only version. It took me a while to hear the good tunes in that later Furs stuff and sort > ret-con the production in my mind so that it sat alongside the other stuff > from the era that I liked the first time around... could be just me, but > stuff from 1986 that I discover in the here and now sounds totally dated, > but stuff that I liked at the time just gets sort of mentally translated > into normalcy. I think it was Miles at one point who was wondering why '80s production got such a bad rap (when the production tics of other decades often get a free pass, or even become fashionable again). My personal theory is that there's so much shiny high-end in that '80s sound that it gives people headaches. But yeah: sometimes I like things that sound like other things I don't like just because I liked the first things when I liked them and hadn't heard the other things. It could have been reversed, maybe. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 16:38:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: This Is the BBC 2fs wrote: > Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > Michael Wells wrote: > > "can ANY Furs be not all that > > > necessary?" > > _Midnight to Midnight_, certainly. And a lot of > > _Mirror Moves_ qualifies as overly shined up turds > > too, though it has some really good songs as well. > I think there might be a couple of good songs on > Midnight. There are many good songs on Mirror > Moves...but in both cases, the songs are all but > overwhelmed by annoying glossy high-80s production. > Much of Mirror survives it - I'd have to say > Midnight does not. Subject to modification if I were > to actually check a track listing. Let's just > Midnight is the only Furs album I never bought on > CD. Mirror Moves is one of the few albums where I can't tolerate the overproduction (which is not to say there aren't plenty of albums where I find overproduction at least annoying). "Highwire Days" and "Here Come Cowboys" are the only songs that don't sound like Billy Idol records waiting for the glam-metal guitar solo to be added (I much prefer the alternate "Alice's House" that is on the reissued _Forever Now_). Of course, it is overproduced by Keith Forsey, so that's sort of to be expected. > (Trust your Jeffs! They are always right!) Except Dahmer. And always remember that Joey Ramone was a Jeff. > ...Jeff Norman But never your Geoffs. They're up to something.... "A severed foot is the ultimate stocking stuffer." -- Mitch Hedberg . Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 17:00:26 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On 5/2/06, 2fs wrote: > > > I think it was Miles at one point who was wondering why '80s production > got > such a bad rap (when the production tics of other decades often get a free > pass, or even become fashionable again). My personal theory is that > there's > so much shiny high-end in that '80s sound that it gives people headaches. Some of it is surely that nobody knew how to do digital shit yet, or something. Another factor is that the '80's sound is so monolithic-- for some reason it was the midpoint where everyone had figured out one universal way to record stuff (after experimenting and making up how to produce stuff in stereo, multitrack, etc.) and before they realized that there were a whole bunch of ways that rock music could sound. If that makes sense. Basically it seems like all '80's rock records sounded the same, at least in terms of drum sounds, EQ, relative levels of instruments/vocals in the mix, regardless of the differing styles of the music itself. I think you can credit hip-hop and early indie rock with broadening the pallet... in the latter case, I think it took a few successful "lo-fi" records to do the trick; it seems like the assumption about early punk, post-punk, and new wave bands in their own era was that they would sound slicker if they could afford to, and it took another generation before folks at large would understand that you might have dry guitars and natural-sounding drums because you *wanted* to. You know, about the time that Blur started to claim to be influenced by Pavement or whatever. I also think that I temporally adjust music in two directions at once, since most of the music I liked in the mid '8'0s sounded like it was trying to be from 1968 or 1976 anyway. Sort of counter to Eb's recent dismissal of "'80's jangle pop"... when I hear that sort of thing I generally know what it would've sounded like in a room and give it a pass. Thus relatively recent discoveries like The Monochrome Set or The Black Watch are ret-con-able with ease, while the Tears for Fears and Simple Minds of that era aren't. Or, erm, maybe I just like the bands with the better songs. > But yeah: sometimes I like things that sound like other things I don't > like > just because I liked the first things when I liked them and hadn't heard > the > other things. It could have been reversed, maybe. Exactly. - -Rx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 14:43:44 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On 5/2/06, Eb wrote: > > Brian Nupp wrote: > > I've heard enough of Robyn covering Dylan already. How bout some more > > Syd or Lennon? Or Roxy Music or VU. > > Well, add the Byrds and Beatles to this list, and you've already > exhausted his entire repertoire. > > The long-time predictability of RH's cover-song choices remains > utterly exasperating to me. Maybe if he tried discovering some fresh > artists, his own music wouldn't be turning so recycled and moldy. I won't argue the core point about the covers-- throw in some Steeleye Span, Hendrix, Incredible String Band, and Beefheart and you're just about there. Which should make the periodic recurrence of "Kung Fu Fighting" more refreshing than it is. But if you count "Nextdoorland" and "Spooked" as RH's two most recent "real" releases, I would classify both as solid efforts and not particularly moldy. And I didn't think I was in that much of a minority... am I? - -Rx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 21:32:48 -0700 From: "michael wells" Subject: the Dolby blog Mebbe mentioned it before, but I'm really enjoying Thomas Dolby's online ruminations about the current tour, songwriting, gear and life in general. I think it's got a little something for just about any kind of music fan, with a heavy emphasis on the 'techno-geek' side of things and a side helping of behind-the-scenes-here's-how-it-all-fits-together thrown in. Quite readable and always interesting. More at http://blog.thomasdolby.com/ And If ever knew that he'd done all that work on polyphonic ring tones, I'd forgotten. Michael n.p. "The Adventure" - Angels and Airwaves ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 20:05:21 -0700 From: "Lauren Elizabeth (gmail)" Subject: Re: This Is the BBC Michael Wells says: > Lauren: > > He did a cover of "All That Money Wants" that I really love as well. > > > One of my favorite RH covers. I think there's a very nice version on one > of Hooker's Bottom Line recordings (02?). Found it...12 April 2002, the late show. Here it is; I'll leave it up for awhile: http://home.comcast.net/~ralpal/11-AudioTrack11.flac Apologies that FLAC Encoder guessed that it's a 1995 Glastonbury Pulp track. xo Lauren - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." - The Buddha ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 00:06:33 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've got botox in my asscheeks! Stacked Crooked wrote: > have y'all noticed that the "literally" mania seems to be morphing into a > "quite literally" mania? still almost always used incorrectly, of course. it was a fad in the UK about 12 years ago, but only if you pronounced it "quite liderally", a la Smashy & Nicey. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 22:47:19 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: This Is the BBC Spotted Eagle Ray wrote: > But if you count "Nextdoorland" and "Spooked" as RH's two most > recent "real" > releases, I would classify both as solid efforts and not particularly > moldy. I would call Nextdoorland solid. But...did he do anything on that album which he couldn't have done over 20 years ago? Where's the growth? Eb ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 07:09:22 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: This Is the BBC On 5/3/06, Eb wrote: > > Spotted Eagle Ray wrote: > > But if you count "Nextdoorland" and "Spooked" as RH's two most > > recent "real" > > releases, I would classify both as solid efforts and not particularly > > moldy. > > I would call Nextdoorland solid. But...did he do anything on that > album which he couldn't have done over 20 years ago? Where's the growth? It was malignant, and was removed. But to no avail - it grew enormous, powerful fins, and leapt into a nearby industrial dishwasher and swam away through the sewage lines. Eventually making its way to a colony of nudist rabbit-worshippers in Idaho, it learned to fly by flapping its fins rapidly, and wreaked havoc by painting all the rabbits orange. Unfortunately, Dick Cheney was nearby and, mistaking the orange-clad rabbits for a hunter, he shot them all. The end. Uh...anyway: I'd say Spooked actually is different from anything else Robyn's done. The instrumental textures aren't something he'd worked with previously, and the Gillian and Dave harmonies are worked out very differently from the Soft Boys/Egyptians harmonies. I mean, it's not radical innovation - he didn't suddenly compose a serialist opera using entirely instruments built from discarded washing machines - but it is (what you asked about) growth in the sense of not resting on what he'd already done. You mentioned you hadn't heard a note of it, though. I'm pretty sure there are several F#s in it - if you hear one of those, you can pretend it's from Spooked. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 12:18:04 -0700 From: Eb Subject: reap Tiger Woods' dad Earl. Eb ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V15 #97 *******************************