From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V3 #175 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Thursday, June 8 2000 Volume 03 : Number 175 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Exploited [MarkBursa@aol.com] Re: paul effin' young [MarkBursa@aol.com] Re: OMD's stage performance [MarkBursa@aol.com] NME Review of Wire [george.m.hook@ac.com] Re: paul effin' young & LedZep [Carl Archer ] Re: paul effin' young & LedZep [MarkBursa@aol.com] Re: paul effin' young & LedZep ["tube disaster" ] Re: Exploited ["tube disaster" ] Re: paul effin' young & LedZep ["tube disaster" ] RE: paul effin' young & LedZep [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] RE: paul effin' young ["giluz" ] RE: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep ["giluz" ] Re[2]: paul effin' young [paul.rabjohn@ssab.com] RE: paul effin' young ["giluz" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 20:09:15 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: Exploited Cat, Going down fighting!!!!! That's the spirit..... Happy birthday mate.... Mark (40 in about four and a half months...aaargh!!) << << because it was wankers like these who turned what was a pure and honest movement, into a cartoon cliche. Stupid Mowhawk haircuts and the uniform Leather Jacket. Wankers, Scum..die die die... >It meant more than that.......;-) The Siam Cat..........close to death.... >> ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 20:13:32 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: paul effin' young Dan, << OK, a question for you UKers ... Did Paul fucking Young start out as a pseudo-punk or something? A fairly sizable lot of late '70s/early '80s 7"s I got in the mail a couple of weeks ago included a '78 RSO release of him doing Sheena is a Punk Rocker & Pretty Vacant. I haven't had the nerve to put it on the turntable ... as it is, I've been successfully avoiding his version of Love Will Tear Us Apart (if I'm thinking of the right guy) for nearly 2 decades now. >> Errr...no! He was originally in novelty pub-rockers Streetband (execrable hit single called toast...about making toast. I kid you not.) Thence to big-band soul review the Q-tips (a bit like the Commitments) and solo in the early '80s, where he spouted stuff about being an interpreter of songs. One of the most obscure treasures of my 7in single collection is a (1982!!) cover of LWTUA by an Austrian band called Chutzpah. With sax break. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 20:15:43 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: OMD's stage performance Alistair, << First time I saw Wire & I vaguely remember the support act was two young guys, white shirts, black strides playing synths. Sounded quite hard edged in a light industrial sort of way. Could these have been...? >> OMD's singer played bass live. By 1980 they had two extra members for gigs - a second keyboards man and a drummer. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 20:00:13 -0500 From: george.m.hook@ac.com Subject: NME Review of Wire At the Garage. More favorable than the previous review of this tour. Wire London Highbury Garage As if you needed reminding, these men are not your friends. Heroes only to the sort of people who won't admit to having heroes, the Wire reunion continues to be a source of marvel and confusion. Like so much else about this austerely enigmatic band, the purpose of it all remains unclear. The regrouping of four sour-looking men - who were quite old even when they were meant to be young - appears, unusually, to be neither cynical nor soppy, as they persist in playing history's least obvious 'greatest hits' set. But then understanding Wire - from leading punk's cryptic art wing, through filtering surrealism into '80s pop, to their myriad solo experiments - has never really been the point. Newman, Gilbert, Gotobed and Lewis have always made a music that's detached and impressive rather than matey and accessible. Empathy? How vulgar. Tonight is no exception. In contrast with their multi-media event at the Royal Festival Hall in the winter, it's a proper, grimy rock show. Michael Clark is here, for sure, but lurking by the bar rather than dancing onstage, and the only ambient side-project on display is the ten minutes of effects pedal mucking about at the start whilst Bruce Gilbert tries to make his guitar work. Then, for what is reputedly the last time, they go digging in the crevices of their back catalogue for the chill riffs, the motorik rhythms, the dazzlingly opaque lyrics. And still, as they lurch artfully through 'Lowdown', or recreate the tense prettiness of 'Silk Skin Paws', Wire remain a tremendous idea for a band, driven by that callous and highly effective disregard for the emotional niceties music normally at least pretends to have. A farewell to all that can rarely have been less sentimental. John Mulvey ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 21:08:12 -0400 From: Carl Archer Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep There goes that myth about Brits possessing excellent grammatic skill, unless of course you're an American who lives or lived there. :P Carl > From: "lucifersam" > Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 22:49:07 +0100 > To: "Jack Steinmann" > Cc: "wire mailing list" > Subject: Re: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep > > Some of there stuff ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 21:20:19 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep Carl, At least we can spell... << possessing >> Mark ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 19:21:49 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep Ummm ... I know of no other way to spell it. If I'm off-base, for crissakes please don't tell the reporters whose copy I handle. Dan >Carl, > >At least we can spell... > ><< possessing >> > >Mark ;-) > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 21:32:40 -0400 From: Carl Archer Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep That's fair play. Anyway, who is Wat Tyler? I happen to have an .mp3 entitled "It's Football, Not Fucking Soccer". I have no idea who this is. Anybody? Carl (50% English, 50% absolute mutt American) > From: MarkBursa@aol.com > Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 21:20:19 EDT > To: notcarl@home.com, idealcopy@smoe.org > Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep > > Carl, > > At least we can spell... > > << possessing >> > > Mark ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 19:28:20 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: Exploited > >> Can you guys explain why there is such animosity towards Exploited, > Basically mate, they were a pile of shite. They had no idea of what punk >was all about (like 90% of the music world) and missed the point totally. > >> especially among Brits? I saw it on punk77 list, and I think I saw it here >> yesterday, unless I am way mistaken. >> <Exploited, > Crass and the such in contemt, justifiably so. Can't speak for "Brits from 'the day'," not being one (just an American from "the day" ... I'll be 41 in 3-odd months), but in my experience Crass get *infinitely* more respect than the Exploited, & rightfully so. I've got a soft spot for certain old (& admittedly thick-headed) Exploited songs, like Sex & Violence & Cop Cars, but if they ever did anything to compare to Nagasaki Nightmare or Bloody Revolutions or Big A Little A or Shaved Women, it's escaped my attention. I find Crass' LPs pretty tedious -- the great anarcho albums tend to have been done by the likes of Rudimentary Peni, Zounds, Omega Tribe, the Instigators, Subhumans & Flux of Pink Indians, though I'm probably forgetting at least a couple -- but they were an ace singles band. > > >> I have no idea about who they teamed up in regards of politics (if >> their politics are the reason), but I do know their lyrics ("Maggie... >> you're a c$%t") are not that much different from, say, Crass, and >> musically "Punk's not dead" is way better than pretty much anything >> by, say, above-mentioned Crass, or highly-praised (at least in US) >> Minor Threat. I mean, Exploited are a very good 80s punk band. They >> are not punk77; but they are not your Green Day/Offspring either. >> So why all the animosity? Wow ... I thought IIIIIIIIIIIII had a case of tinnitus ... Dan > << because it was wankers like these who turned > what was a pure and honest movement, into a cartoon cliche. Stupid > Mowhawk haircuts and the uniform Leather Jacket. Wankers, Scum..die >die die... > >>It meant more than that.......;-) >The Siam Cat..........close to death...... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 19:34:06 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep A pretty good "humorous" band, judging from the split CD (with Thatcher on Acid) of theirs I've got. Dan >That's fair play. Anyway, who is Wat Tyler? I happen to have an .mp3 >entitled "It's Football, Not Fucking Soccer". I have no idea who this is. >Anybody? > >Carl (50% English, 50% absolute mutt American) > >> From: MarkBursa@aol.com >> Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 21:20:19 EDT >> To: notcarl@home.com, idealcopy@smoe.org >> Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep >> >> Carl, >> >> At least we can spell... >> >> << possessing >> >> >> Mark ;-) > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 22:04:48 CDT From: "Laurel G" Subject: Re: misc. digest comments - Cheap Trick - sorry, I'm way behind Help! I've gotten behind and I can't catch up!! I'm way behind, so please excuse if I reply on a few things you might have thought you were done with - I actually almost replied to Dan's about Cheap Trick the other day, but was a-scared to - cause as Dan knows, and has probably been dreading me talking about, I'm not fond of them, so I was glad to see Katherine say she wasn't as impressed now - let me know I might not be totally flamed for this - let me exlain - I was working in the 70's bar scene (dan's descrip) and I booked bands for a club or two in the late 70's - - I had occasion to work with them and to go to clubs to see them - I was there at the last show they did before beginning recording their first album, hell, I still have a momento from that night - BUT - to me they will always be and sound like a bar band - and - it's in the voice - I'm big on voice - a voice can sell me or lose me regardless of the rest - and I'm sorry, but when I hear Robin Zander's voice, all I can think of pretty boys and fluff - just doesn't do it for me - HOWEVER - I think they write great songs and I've loved almost every cover I've heard by another band Laurel *Surrender - Pegboy - now THERE's a voice that does it for me > >Btw, how > > does everyone feel about Cheap Trick? > > >I remember being very enthusiastic about "Live at Budakhan" (sp?) but that >was a long time ago!! Recently downloaded some songs from that and >listened >again, and wasn't as impressed. But back then it was fun air guitar music! > >Katherine ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 00:10:51 -0400 From: Katherine Pouliot Subject: Re: misc. digest comments - Cheap Trick - sorry, I'm way behind yeah, Cheap Trick did it for me before I became a teenager. Now I hear whiny ballads by them on the easy listening station that plays at my office. I have to wonder if their tastes really changed that much, or if they were really always just rolling with the record companies' suggestions/demands for the times. I'll have to check out some of these covers you speak of! Katherine > From: "Laurel G" > Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 22:04:48 CDT > To: idealcopy@smoe.org > Subject: Re: misc. digest comments - Cheap Trick - sorry, I'm way behind > > Help! I've gotten behind and I can't catch up!! > > I'm way behind, so please excuse if I reply on a few things you might have > thought you were done with - I actually almost replied to Dan's about Cheap > Trick the other day, but was a-scared to - cause as Dan knows, and has > probably been dreading me talking about, I'm not fond of them, so I was glad > to see Katherine say she wasn't as impressed now ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 02:10:33 -0600 From: Jorge Punaro Subject: RE: paul effin' young & LedZep Hey, the first Paul Young album is ok, a bunch of it´s tracks are good enough! Saludos jorge - -----Mensaje original----- De: Katherine Pouliot Para: Ciscon, Ray ; wire mailing list Fecha: Miércoles, 07 de Junio de 2000 02:51 p.m. Asunto: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep >right on, my brother! > >> From: "Ciscon, Ray" >> Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:27:15 -0500 >> To: "wire mailing list" >> Subject: RE: paul effin' young & LedZep >> >> Regardless of your intense dislike of Paul Young and his version of Joy >> Division's 'Love Will Tear Us Apart', I'm here to tell you that it is far >> less painful to hear than the muzak version of Jimmy Hendrix's 'Purple >> Haze', which I actually heard in the elevator of my last employer. >> >> And lets be honest, Ian Curtis didn't exactly have a golden throat, and the >> production of that song wasn't very good... the PY version of it at least >> made it radio friendly here in the US, where it did get a little play. >> Remember, there's always a chance that some young fool took the effort to >> find out who 'J. Division' is, and sought out more of Mr. or Ms. Divisions >> work. >> >> I too would rather listen to just about anything by A Flock o' Seagulls or >> OMD than even the best of Led Zepplin. Back in my High School days, local >> Chicago rock radio stations had an unwritten rule: Thou Shalt Play A Led >> Zepplin Song At Least Once An Hour. If I never hear LedZep again, I'd die a >> happy camper. Heck, I'd rather listen to all of the pompous Art Rock crap of >> the 70's that has been ripped on this list lately than listen to LedZep. >> >> You know what I'd like to hear right now though.... Dread Zepplin! >> >> Cheers, >> >> Ray Ciscon >> Remote Office LAN/WAN Support Manager >> Comark, Inc. >> > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 23:30:41 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: RE: paul effin' young & LedZep On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, Ciscon, Ray wrote: > Regardless of your intense dislike of Paul Young and his version of Joy > Division's 'Love Will Tear Us Apart', I'm here to tell you that it is far > less painful to hear than the muzak version of Jimmy Hendrix's 'Purple > Haze', which I actually heard in the elevator of my last employer. Someone I know once heard a muzak version of...Frank Zappa's "Bobby Brown." What the... > I too would rather listen to just about anything by A Flock o' Seagulls or > OMD than even the best of Led Zepplin. Back in my High School days, local > Chicago rock radio stations had an unwritten rule: Thou Shalt Play A Led > Zepplin Song At Least Once An Hour. Led Zeppelin did, in fact, record more songs than "Stairway to Heaven," "Rock'n'Roll," "Black Dog," "Whole Lotta Love, and (the worst) "Livin' Lovin' Maid/Heartbreaker." I may have missed one or two, but radio thinks its listeners are dogs trained to salivate on command but can only be imprinted by a handful of songs at once. And most of those other LZ songs (when they weren't stolen from blues guys whom they apparently assumed were either dead or ignorant - last laugh, when they got sued by Willie Dixon) are far better written and much more intriguing arranged than any of the above. Of course, there remains Robert Plant and his hyaena impersonations (which in themselves were bad enough - but we also had to put up with *years* of bad impersonations thereof on the radio). When he tones it down, and if you pretend you don't know English so as not to hear him babbling about elves and mystic flowers, he's not bad. Fortunately, I have an apparent hearing defect that makes me almost completely not hear lyrics. - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/reviews.html ::we make everything you need, and you need everything we make:: ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 07:52:26 +0100 From: "lucifersam" Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep Oi !!! There's nuffin' rrong wiv my speelin'..!!!! The Siam Twat. :-( - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 2:20 AM Subject: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep > Carl, > > At least we can spell... > > << possessing >> > > Mark ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:59:18 +0200 From: "giluz" Subject: RE: paul effin' young > OK, a question for you UKers ... Did Paul fucking Young start out as a > pseudo-punk or something? I remember they once had on TV a collection of old punk gigs from 1977, and on one of those, I forgot what band it was, you could clearly see in the audience Simply Red's singer (whose name I forgot because my brain has much more important and useful things to deal with) pogoing with a punk haircut!!! giluz ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:02:53 +0200 From: "giluz" Subject: RE: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep Right on - I don't have any LedZep CD, but they certainly had their great moments giluz > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-idealcopy@smoe.org > [mailto:owner-idealcopy@smoe.org]On Behalf Of lucifersam > Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 11:49 PM > To: Jack Steinmann > Cc: wire mailing list > Subject: Re: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep > > > Actually....as a former punk rocker.....I feel......embarrassed to > say....... > I quite like..........some Led Zeppelin........Saw 'em at Earls court in > 1975... > the night England beat Scotland 5-1 @ Wembley.....eeekkkkk > Some of there stuff, beleive it or not is quite Avant Garde....... > "No Quarter"..."Kasmir"....."Dancin' Days"..."Achilles Last Stand"... > The Chemical Brothers used Bonhams drums on there first single! > The Siam Twat.... > (dreading midnight) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jack Steinmann > To: > Cc: wire mailing list > Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 10:02 PM > Subject: re: Re: paul effin' young & LedZep > > > > 1) The production of most Factory JD songs was usually AMAZING. 'Love > Will Tear Us Apart' was something of an exception, though, being > one of the > few Hannett productions that was so unsatisfactory to all > participants that > a second version was included on the flip side of the single. > Great drums, > though. > > > > 2) Ian Curtis wasn't a great singer the way, say, Thom Yorke is a great > singer. But no one could have done for 'New Dawn Fades' or 'Dead Souls' > what Curtis did. > > > > 3) Led Zep: Strip off the vocals (if only!) and you'd have some pretty > cool stuff. Compare uh, Dancing Days with Lowdown. > > > > > > Jack > > > > > > lucifersam@supanet.com wrote: > > >I have to beg to differ here young Ray. Have you ever heard > such passion > > >as Ian Curtis displayed on "Transmission" of "Love will etc... > No vocal > > >chords > > >but soul to die for.Personally I hated Joy Division! But those 2 songs > > >kick me right in the cobblers. As for the production. Who Cares!(with > > >respect). > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:08:26 +0100 From: paul.rabjohn@ssab.com Subject: Re[2]: paul effin' young >>>>> no no no. that single is by paul JONES , ex-mannfred mann (do wah diddy and all that). i recall he did a punk single for reasons that escaped me (and most people i think). paul young made a lot of crap , but not "punk" crap. shame our us friends missed "toast" , maybe puff daddy could re-work it ir something. best of led zep is worst than the worst of AFOS? i think i'll go lie down for a bit.p ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: paul effin' young Author: MIME:dpbailey@worldnet.att.net at INTERNET Date: 07/06/2000 19:56 OK, a question for you UKers ... Did Paul fucking Young start out as a pseudo-punk or something? A fairly sizable lot of late '70s/early '80s 7"s I got in the mail a couple of weeks ago included a '78 RSO release of him doing Sheena is a Punk Rocker & Pretty Vacant. I haven't had the nerve to put it on the turntable ... as it is, I've been successfully avoiding his version of Love Will Tear Us Apart (if I'm thinking of the right guy) for nearly 2 decades now. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:24:16 +0200 From: "giluz" Subject: RE: paul effin' young > Hi Giluz, > > That's interesting. I usually keep most of that old stuff on video and I'd > love to spot him. Can you remember whose gig it was and any other details? > > Uri > Well, it was a collection of gigs made by Granada TV, broadcast in 91 or 92. I'll have to look through my old tapes for the actual gig, which will probably take me a long time to find. I remember they had The Clash, Siouxie, Buzzcocks, Sex Pistols. No Wire of course, and I don't remember much else. We're going on the Pentacost holidays, so I'll try and look for it and might have an answer for you on Sunday. giluz ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V3 #175 *******************************