From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V16 #623 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, June 5 2008 Volume 16 : Number 623 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Apropos: Aimee Mann YouTube Contest [2fs ] Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! [HwyCDRrev@aol.com] Re: yucky band name [Rex ] NEIL YOUNG UNRELEASED ----WAS no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) [HwyCDRrev@aol.c] NEIL YOUNG UNRELEASED -----------WAS no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) [HwyCDRre] Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) ["kevin studyvin" ] Re: cwinkydink! [Rex ] Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! [2fs ] Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) [2fs ] Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) [2fs ] NEIL - was :Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) [HwyCDRrev@ao] Re: cwinkydink! [Rex ] Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! [HwyCDRrev@aol.com] Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) [Christopher Gross ] Re: NEIL - was :Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) [Rex ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 19:59:36 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Apropos: Aimee Mann YouTube Contest On 6/4/08, Rex wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:07 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn < > Hagedorn@spinfo.uni-koeln.de> wrote: > > > Ten runners-up will receive an autographed copy of Aimeeb s new CD, > @#%&*! > > Smilers, I'm assuming, given Aimee's foul mouth, it's something like "Fucking Smilers"... - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:03:56 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! aw, shucks ! actually -it could be a math problem trying to figure out how much money she's lost from illegal downloading and if it's any greater than the amount her record companies have ripped her off for ? In a message dated 6/4/2008 8:59:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jeffreyw2fs.j@gmail.com writes: On 6/4/08, _HwyCDRrev@aol.com_ (mailto:HwyCDRrev@aol.com) <_HwyCDRrev@aol.com_ (mailto:HwyCDRrev@aol.com) > wrote: the title is EITHER At Number Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation Point OR At Sign Tic Tac Toe Board Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation Point either way it starts with "A" , as does Aimee actually @#%$*! could be a code for Aimee! Intriguing theory... ;-) But I don't think any human ever in the history of the universe would render the title the ways you put it above **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&NCID=aolfod00030000000002) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 18:05:02 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: yucky band name On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:16 PM, 2fs wrote: > On 6/4/08, (0% rh) wrote: > > > > > > i enjoyed the statistics, but...need more bad band name examples!!!! > > > An old one: An Emotional Fish. That's like fifteen flavors of huh, none of > which rise to the level of minimal rats'-ass-giving: why "an" emotional > fish? how is a fish emotional? why care? And if a fish were emotional, why > would we want to listen to it? > > > oh, also, jeff: have you been watching the helvetica documentary again? > > (http://spanghew.blogspot.com/2008/06/gee-baby-g.html) > I gotta see this. > True enough - but I like that old stuff, too. Precisely because the flavors > are so very different. It's like, you can look at a very clean, modern > room, > and admire its sleekness, purity of line, starkness of materials...and then > you can turn around and love a Victorian room full of bric-a-brac covering > every square millimeter. I can look at vintage magazines forevar. > > > another great part was the designer who blamed the vietnam war on > > helvetica (in case you're wondering, helvetica was also to blame for > > the iraqi war.) > > > - and > annoyances like Papyrus, Mistral, and the dreaded Comic Sans (whose > designer, reading between the lines of his blog - can't find it now, > someone > else had linked to it a few weeks back - seems to regret its ever having > been made into a full-fledged font, which wasn't what he made it for) I associate two of those with very specific people. In the case of Comic Sans, it is, appropriately, the Devil, or someone very like her. > Does anyone still use that font now glimpsed almost solely at the bottom of > checks to connote "futureness"? Wasn't that originally invented as a legitimate so-primitive-computers-can-read-it device? - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:17:58 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: NEIL YOUNG UNRELEASED ----WAS no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) well - i cannot find it online i thought i was this one : http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9102787/cover_story_neil_young_ the_last_american_hero but i didn't find it there but i know i didn't dream it ! if i do -i'll let you know In a message dated 6/4/2008 8:42:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, spottedeagleray@gmail.com writes: Dude... I have *never fucking heard of this*. How can that be? And just *how many* unreleased records can one man have cut in the '70's? **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&NCID=aolfod00030000000002) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:23:35 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: NEIL YOUNG UNRELEASED -----------WAS no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) a HA! go here : http://human-highway.com/pages/album/unreleased.html example : Born To Run - from the 1970's, recorded for an album of songs that had the same titles as famous songs by other artists. (The album was never released.) Recorded again for Ragged Glory. Greensleeves - 1974 Bottom Line show, also played at the 1991 Bridge show. Different lyrics than the traditional song. Neil (probably) wrote the new verses; the chorus is the same as the original. ALSO : Neil was doing WONDERIN' in 1970 it ended up on the 1983 classic NEIL & THE SHOCKING PINKS - EVERYBODY'S ROCKIN' short LP - long EP - sort of mini-album In a message dated 6/4/2008 8:44:31 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, spottedeagleray@gmail.com writes: Dude... I have *never fucking heard of this*. How can that be? And just *how many* unreleased records can one man have cut in the '70's? **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&NCID=aolfod00030000000002) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 18:36:41 -0700 From: "kevin studyvin" Subject: Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) > > in the 70s , neil young recorded an unreleased album > > of songs with titles of famous songs already released by others > > > > i believe GREENSLEEVES and BORN TO RUN > > were mentioned in a Rolling Stone article C 1978-9 > > > Dude... I have *never fucking heard of this*. How can that be? And just > *how many* unreleased records can one man have cut in the '70's? > I recollect some magazine piece around the time of Zuma where he mentioned having at least an albums' worth of stuff stashed away with the same titles as existing songs. It was probably in connection with "Stupid Girl." But let's face it, he probably puts an albums' worth of stuff in the can every couple of weeks. You gotta know when he kicks the bucket there's gonna be a flood of posthumous releases like nothing the world's ever seen before - even more than CBS/Sony's gotten out of Miles Davis. I just hope to be around long enough to hear Homegrown in its original sequence... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 18:48:56 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: perhaps the most annoying mp3 tag problem yet On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Christopher Gross wrote: > Is bit-torrent a verb yet? I recently bit-torrented a collection of 48 old > hardcore punk singles. Every single one had the song title in the artist > field, and vice versa. Grrr. It's enough to make you want to apply the toe > of your Doc Marten to the seat of someone's ripped jeans. Always happens on compilations for some reason. Very annoying, but almost always operator error. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 18:52:21 -0700 From: "Stacked Crooked" Subject: Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) dang, i thought that *Invasions* was friggin' *great* -- and i consider *Decline*, *Jesus*, and *Invasions* to comprise a trilogy. don't know whether that's what *arcand* himself "considers"; but, anyway, the three share characters, so are of the same "universe". shit. if you don't tag "@#%$*!" as "Fucking", then...i'll cry myself to sleep every night this week. similarly, when shelving (if there are any fegs what still own physical CDs), simply place masking tape over "@#%$*!", and write in "Fucking". i disagree: even if that's not what the symbols spell, that's how people commonly refer to it. personally, i've got it tagged as "IV" (another common reference for it); but if you wanna (or don't wanna) put "ZOSO", it's *your database*. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 18:55:40 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: cwinkydink! On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:26 PM, wrote: > oh - right (embarrassment icon) > > an ampersand is: & > > still - AT SIGN still starts with an "A" > > the title is EITHER At Number Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation > Point > OR At Sign Tic Tac Toe Board Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation > Point > I was just wondering if it stood for any particuar epithet or something, as in Neil Young's "F Asterisk Exclamation Point Tic Tac Toe Board in Apostrophe Up", more popularly known, of course, as "Snakin' Up". - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:04:27 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! On 6/4/08, HwyCDRrev@aol.com wrote: > > > actually -it could be a math problem trying to figure > out how much money she's lost from illegal downloading > > and if it's any greater than the amount her record companies > have ripped her off for ? As an aside: I would hazard a guess that very few of the people who download entire CDs of music would, if such downloading were impossible, buy the CDs instead. The industry's calculations on "lost income" are fabulously inflated. I forget the exact details now, but in one of the more notorious RIAA lawsuits, they sued some grandfather on behalf of his grandkid, for some enormous amount of money in the upper thousands, for possessing something on the order of a dozen CDs' worth of illegally downloaded material. That's some impressive profit margins there. Funny how when those accountants are doing the math where artists' money is concerned, suddenly they have to sell way way more copies to see any profit. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 19:06:12 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:58 PM, 2fs wrote: > > FWIW, in my own, old database system, it occurred to me that a self-titled > album has the same title (essentially, an indexical symbol referring to the > artist, really the equivalent of "Myself"), and so it's silly to > alphabetize > the album called _The Beatles_ near one end of the alphabet and the album > called _Yes_ at the other: they're both self-titled. In the title field for > those albums, I put :[s/t] - which simply indicated self-titled. The : is > there so it didn't alphabetize among the "s" section. Therefore, all the > self-titled albums alphabetized together. I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but there are two Throwing Muses albums which appear to be called Throwing Muses, but according to the band, the first one is simply *untitled* and the second one is actually *called* "Throwing Muses" (although, to make matters worse, the latter one appears by some reckonings of its artwork to be entitle "Uses"). It might be argued that the whole concept is a load of pretentious shit, but I think that it's probably just something that makes perfect sense in Kristin Hersh's mind, and less so elsewhere. Weezer seems to have given up on naming albums entirely. I personally did like Peter Gabriel's early theory that his albums didn't need titles since they were basically just consecutive issues of the same magazine. - -Rex - -Rex > > > Doesn't solve what to do with Mann's album - if pressed, I'd probably just > say file it under _Smilers_ as those letters are the initial > *alphabetizable* characters presented. > > Actually I'm surprised no one's pointed out the obvious: all ASCII > characters have an order in computer naming systems, and so another answer > is: just follow that order. And that is also the practical locus of this > alphabetization concern, as follows: to begin, is there a name for two > different alphabetization systems I encounter, one of which is > case-sensitive and files *all* capital letters before all lower-case > letters, the other of which does not? > > This gives me grief: on CD-Rs full of miscellaneous tracks, I've settled on > a system of grouping them into sets of 20 tracks, and within those 20 > tracks, the order is simply alphabetical. Problem is, "alphabetical" as far > as my database is concerned is case-insensitive; alphabetical as far as my > car's CD player is concerned is case-sensitive (it just plays by alpha > order > by filename). So when I'm using the database to put together a playlist so > I > know what I'm hearing when I play the disc in the car, I have to be careful > to manually move something by CSS (say) *ahead* of a track by Crooked > Fingers (in fact, ahead of any other C-initial act except those whose > second > character is a capital letter earlier than S), even though my database puts > it afterwards. Similarly, if I forget to change it and a filename begins > with a lower-case letter, it'll end up playing after a filename beginning > iwth capital Z - i.e., a segment of this alphabetical sequence runs > X-Y-Z-a-b-c etc. > > I could bother to rename all the files consistently, or begin them with > numbers (I do this if one of those CD-Rs contains a whole album - so it > might be "01_Love for Tender.mp3", "02_Opportunity.mp3", "03_The > Imposter.mp3" etc.) But I don't, usually. > > > -- > > ...Jeff Norman > > The Architectural Dance Society > http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:07:31 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) On 6/4/08, kevin studyvin wrote: > > > I recollect some magazine piece around the time of Zuma where he mentioned > having at least an albums' worth of stuff stashed away with the same titles > as existing songs. It was probably in connection with "Stupid Girl." But > let's face it, he probably puts an albums' worth of stuff in the can every > couple of weeks. You gotta know when he kicks the bucket there's gonna be > a > flood of posthumous releases like nothing the world's ever seen before - > even more than CBS/Sony's gotten out of Miles Davis. > Whereas when Robert Pollard dies, people will discover at least 97 songs that were released twice, under different titles, a fact no one noticed because they never did finish listening to the first album the song was on before Pollard released a new one, thereby sending them off to the store to buy it before they finished listening to the first one. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 19:10:15 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 6:36 PM, kevin studyvin wrote: > >> I recollect some magazine piece around the time of Zuma where he mentioned > having at least an albums' worth of stuff stashed away with the same titles > as existing songs. It was probably in connection with "Stupid Girl." But > let's face it, he probably puts an albums' worth of stuff in the can every > couple of weeks. You gotta know when he kicks the bucket there's gonna be a > flood of posthumous releases like nothing the world's ever seen before - > even more than CBS/Sony's gotten out of Miles Davis. > From the sound of things, the "Archive" is shaping up to be pretty damned definitive. > I just hope to be around long enough to hear Homegrown in its original > sequence... > There's so much crossover between the various Homegrowns, Chrome Dreamses and actually-released records that I'm not sure how revelatory it would be. But of course I'd like to hear it, too. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:13:49 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! On 6/4/08, Rex wrote: > > > I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but there are two Throwing Muses > albums which appear to be called Throwing Muses, but according to the band, > the first one is simply *untitled* and the second one is actually *called* > "Throwing Muses" (although, to make matters worse, the latter one appears by > some reckonings of its artwork to be entitle "Uses"). It might be argued > that the whole concept is a load of pretentious shit, but I think that it's > probably just something that makes perfect sense in Kristin Hersh's mind, > and less so elsewhere. > I reject the "Uses" theory under the Zoso theorem. Another perverse titling decision: the band Lilys (no article) has an album that almost no one knows exists (it doesn't appear in their discographies in either AMG or Wikipedia), which is the British version of their _Precollection_ album, resequenced, with a different track or two, and some songs slightly retitled and/or remixed. The title of that British album? _The Lilys_. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:15:23 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: cwinkydink! On 6/4/08, Rex wrote: > > > > I was just wondering if it stood for any particuar epithet or something, as > in Neil Young's "F Asterisk Exclamation Point Tic Tac Toe Board in > Apostrophe Up", more popularly known, of course, as "Snakin' Up". > Why'd you have to bring that thread up again? You tulip! You pea-brained earwig! - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:18:17 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) On 6/4/08, Stacked Crooked wrote: > > > > (which is simply those four symbols..the first of which is NOT, contrary to > stoner belief, the letters "ZOSO")? You don't, really: you say that the > album is untitled, and within the band's discography it is simply the 4th > album.> > > i disagree: even if that's not what the symbols spell, that's how people > commonly refer to it. personally, i've got it tagged as "IV" (another > common reference for it); but if you wanna (or don't wanna) put "ZOSO", > it's *your database*. I'm reminded of a cartoon someone recently referred to (didn't see the actual cartoon): Woman in nightgown wandering into dimly room at which unshaven man sits illuminated by light of computer screen: "Honey, come on to bed. It's 3 am, and you've been sitting there typing for hours." Man: "Yes - but there are still people on the Internet who are *wrong*!" - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:30:02 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) On 6/4/08, Rex wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 6:36 PM, kevin studyvin > wrote: > You gotta know when he kicks the bucket there's gonna be a > > flood of posthumous releases like nothing the world's ever seen before - > > even more than CBS/Sony's gotten out of Miles Davis. > > > > > From the sound of things, the "Archive" is shaping up to be pretty damned > definitive. Disc 1, Track 1: "In 1956, a young Neil was touring Sun Studios when he failed to stifle a small belch arising from that morning's breakfast. As it happened, tape was running - and thus, Neil Young's very first recording." Disc 937, Track 34: "March 31, 2024. An arthritic, liver-spotted Young struggles to tune his guitar, before muttering, 'it shoulda been 'Young, Crosby, St -' before toppling over on top of his guitar case, dead of a heart attack at age 78." - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:39:35 -0700 From: "Stacked Crooked" Subject: Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) you don't say which part you think i'm wrong about. but you seem to be saying that every person should organise his or her database according to some universal standard? why? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:15:47 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: NEIL - was :Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) for starters, there's an acoustic POWDERFINGER In a message dated 6/4/2008 10:10:35 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, spottedeagleray@gmail.com writes: There's so much crossover between the various Homegrowns, Chrome Dreamses and actually-released records that I'm not sure how revelatory it would be. But of course I'd like to hear it, too. **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&NCID=aolfod00030000000002) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 20:20:57 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: cwinkydink! On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 7:15 PM, 2fs wrote: > On 6/4/08, Rex wrote: >> >> >> >> I was just wondering if it stood for any particuar epithet or something, >> as >> in Neil Young's "F Asterisk Exclamation Point Tic Tac Toe Board in >> Apostrophe Up", more popularly known, of course, as "Snakin' Up". >> > > Why'd you have to bring that thread up again? You tulip! You pea-brained > earwig! Now that I think about it, the word that appears in that song-- according to the lyric sheet, I'm pretty sure-- is "shnake". But while we're at it... is the Spoon album "A Series of Sneaks" Wire reference, or do they both reference something else with which I'm not familiar? I'd always assumed the latter, since "series" seems more correct than "serious", but Googling the phrase just turns up a million references to the Spoon record. And searching for the combo "series of snakes" only punishes the Googler with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-4ECzWDbiM Man. Like, why? - -Rex - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:21:16 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! agreed that the $ is inflated HOWEVER - i assume the amount awarded the record companies also has something to do with punishment for the crime of illegal downloading (yes it's a crime) - not just reimbursement . . .and presumably as a warning to others if you rob a bank - you don't just return the money - you go to jail In a message dated 6/4/2008 10:12:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jeffreyw2fs.j@gmail.com writes: I would hazard a guess that very few of the people who download entire CDs of music would, if such downloading were impossible, buy the CDs instead. The industry's calculations on "lost income" are fabulously inflated. I forget the exact details now, but in one of the more notorious RIAA lawsuits, they sued some grandfather on behalf of his grandkid, for some enormous amount of money in the upper thousands, for possessing something on the order of a dozen CDs' worth of illegally downloaded material. That's some impressive profit margins there. Funny how when those accountants are doing the math where artists' money is concerned, suddenly they have to sell way way more copies to see any profit. **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&NCID=aolfod00030000000002) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:23:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, 2fs wrote: > I'm reminded of a cartoon someone recently referred to (didn't see the > actual cartoon): http://xkcd.com/386/ - --helpful Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 20:27:43 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: NEIL - was :Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 8:15 PM, wrote: > for starters, there's an acoustic POWDERFINGER That's the first track one of my versions of "Chrome Dreams"... or at least *an* acoustic version of "Powderfinger" is. There are a lotta weird shits lying around. There's the version of "Pocohantas" that's the same minus the echo-ey string scrapes, the slow "Sedan Delivery", etc... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:39:57 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: Re: NEIL - was :Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) this might clear things up : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrome_Dreams In a message dated 6/4/2008 11:28:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, spottedeagleray@gmail.com writes: That's the first track one of my versions of "Chrome Dreams"... or at least *an* acoustic version of "Powderfinger" is. There are a lotta weird shits lying around. There's the version of "Pocohantas" that's the same minus the echo-ey string scrapes, the slow "Sedan Delivery", etc... **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&NCID=aolfod00030000000002) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:14:01 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: NEIL - was :Re: no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 8:39 PM, wrote: > this might clear things up : > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrome_Dreams > The acetate-based sequence is more or less what's usually bootlegged as the "Rust Edition"... I have that, and also another putative "Chrome Dreams" which is called (by me, at least, since these are the only other words that appear on the cover aside from the cover) the "Blow Job" edition. Some of the same material, some not (most of the "not" is familiar from elsewhere, and some of the "Rust Edition" songs are missing). I've had that one slightly longer, so I'm kinda more used to it, even though it's less legit. And I have some of the tacks from both rattling around on other boots or as bonus tracks on boots of other records. "Chrome Dreams II" sounded a lot more like "Freedom II" to my ears, actually. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:32:11 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: cwinkydink! On 6/4/08, Rex wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 7:15 PM, 2fs wrote: > >> On 6/4/08, Rex wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> I was just wondering if it stood for any particuar epithet or something, >>> as >>> in Neil Young's "F Asterisk Exclamation Point Tic Tac Toe Board in >>> Apostrophe Up", more popularly known, of course, as "Snakin' Up". >>> >> >> Why'd you have to bring that thread up again? You tulip! You pea-brained >> earwig! > > > Now that I think about it, the word that appears in that song-- according > to the lyric sheet, I'm pretty sure-- is "shnake". > > But while we're at it... is the Spoon album "A Series of Sneaks" Wire > reference, or do they both reference something else with which I'm not > familiar? > I've always assumed it works something like this: the Wire track puns on "series/serious"; the Spoon album restores "series" but puns on "snakes" and is an obvious Wire reference. Don't know what else it would be - I have nothing like it - I've seen nothing like it. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V16 #623 ********************************