From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V1 #186 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Tuesday, August 7 2001 Volume 01 : Number 186 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [loud-fans] Smashing Fits (another ramble) [Miles Goosens ] Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] RE: [loud-fans] Emergency: Needed: Brianna Bradley's cell phone number! [bbradley@namesecure.c] Re: [loud-fans] online cd sale [Miles Goosens ] Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost [Stewart Mason ] Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost [Dan Schmidt ] Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences [AWeiss4338@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences [AWeiss4338@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences [AWeiss4338@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences [Michael Mitton ] Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: [loud-fans] Convinced ["Andrew Hamlin" ] Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost ["glenn mcdonald" ] Re: [loud-fans] big huge giant pseudo-giveaway! ["Andrew Hamlin" ] Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences [Dan Sallitt ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 09:24:24 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Smashing Fits (another ramble) At 08:59 PM 8/3/2001 -0700, Bradley Skaught wrote: >I find myself enjoying a lot of contemporary top 40 teeny bopper pop and R&B >stuff--it's the rock bands that I can't stomach. Things like Destiny's Child >or Nelly or Mandy Moore have interesting things going at various levels, but >the big Tom Petty soundalikes are just painfully boring and predictable. Big Tom Petty soundalikes? Who? Where? Hot damn! I've been waiting for these... I'll say this for today's manufactured "teeny bopper pop" (say, beginning with the Spice Girls' rise to the top of the charts): there *are* actual pop songs in there, with melodies, structure, and everything. This beats the living crap out of the mid-'90s top 40, that unfortunate period between New Jack Swing and "teeny bopper pop" where every song seemed to be some kind of meandering R&B/rap hybrid that had no melody and no hooks and they'd go on for what seemed like ten minutes, Puff Daddy et al being the nadir of this trend. me and the crew used to do her, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 09:49:47 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Smashing Fits (another ramble) At 02:38 PM 8/3/2001 -0400, Michael Mitton wrote: >On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Bradley Skaught wrote: > >> What I do get annoyed at is the assumption that exposing >> all of the Shania Twain listeners of the world to some kind of "real country >> music" is going to switch on the enlightenment switch in their head and >> they're going to realize that Shania is "bad" while the good country music is >> "good". > >I think this is basically right, but with an exception. There is a set >of people who want to listen to music as an end in itself instead of >simply lifestyle music (as Jeff put it), but don't have any real access to >it. Not everyone has a college radio station to listen to. Not everyone >has an independent record store, or friends into "real country." I'll second what Michael is saying here. One good example is my wife Melissa. She was never satisfied with the music she heard as a teenager, so she latched on to the few artists in the metal or top 40 world who seemed to be doing something different. When she met me in college, I made her a tape (of course!) not long after meeting her, chock full of things I was listening to in 1986 (R.E.M., Peter Gabriel, the Kinks, Robyn Hitchcock, the Velvet Underground, Roxy Music/Bryan Ferry), and she immediately knew that this was the music she always wanted to hear but didn't know that it even existed. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 10:00:43 -0700 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: [loud-fans] Petty Differences Sadly, the Tom Petty sound-alikes I'm referring to aren't the ones you've been waiting for! By sound-alike, I guess I meant that they have all of the same sonic characteristics as Bad Moon Fever-era Petty without any worthwhile songs whatsoever. Dull folk-rock with no imagination. Matchbox 20 immediately comes to mind. Also, I think most of us here have had the experience of hearing what we were always waiting to hear but didn't know it. I still don't think that means we'd have been miserable without it, or that we wouldn't have been able to pursue our love of music. Or that the music we found we really loved is so obviously better, and so obviously an improvement, that everyone else should have the same experience. I wish there more songwriters like Tom Petty on modern rock radio! And did Eddie Vedder absolutely lay waste to the contemporary rock singer or what? Man, every other song is delivered in that "I'm swallowing my own head" voice. By the way, though I'm not generally a fan of meandering mid-90's R&B, I definitely think that it produced some interesting songwriters--particularly R Kelly and Babyface. In fact, the new Isley Brothers album features a version of R Kelly's "Contagious" that is really smoldering--it just needed Ronald Isley to sing it! Nice to hear Ernie cutting it up again, too. B ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 13:50:25 -0400 From: jenny grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences Bradley Skaught wrote: > > And did > Eddie Vedder absolutely lay waste to the contemporary rock singer or what? > Man, every other song is delivered in that "I'm swallowing my own head" > voice. what jack endino refers to as "yarling" Jen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:43:26 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, jenny grover wrote: > Bradley Skaught wrote: > > > > And did > > Eddie Vedder absolutely lay waste to the contemporary rock singer or what? > > Man, every other song is delivered in that "I'm swallowing my own head" > > voice. > > what jack endino refers to as "yarling" A perfect description - I don't know what Vedder et al. think English vowels are, but they're surely not the noises that come from their mouths. Who was the lame-o PJ-lite band five years back or so that had a minor hit w/a song called "Cumbersome" - which came out pronounced something like "cawwwm-bahurr-sohmm"? I think it was one of the five zillion bands who suddenly sprouted numbers in their names - what's up w/that, anyway? I'd like to think it was all a tribute to Anton Barbeau's "Allyson 23" but unfortunately, it's not. BTW, I'm considering locking myself in a room for a period of hours w/nothing but CDs by Britney, Christina, N'Sync, and the Backstreet Boys, since all my observations on that music have been based on drive-by listenings: in malls, on MTV while channel-changing, on other people's radios, etc. So while I might be willing to concede that there are songs buried underneath all that hairstyle and attitude, the real problem I have has to do w/the music: I find it very difficult to tell the instrumental tracks apart, and never do I hear what sounds like a distinctive approach to instruments, the sort of thing that would allow me to say, "oh, clearly that's Richard Thompson playing the guitar" or something. (No, I don't think Thompson's done any sessions w/N'Sync) If I do perform this experiment, and survive, I'll certainly write about it. My first task will be to see if I can sift the tracks by artist in shuffle mode: can I tell the intro to a Backstreet song from an intro to an N'Sync song? - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::I can bellow like a clown school drill instructor:: __Brian Block__ np: _Y'alla_ (comp of Egyptian (I think) pop) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 11:53:52 -0700 (PDT) From: "Joseph M. Mallon" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > A perfect description - I don't know what Vedder et al. think English > vowels are, but they're surely not the noises that come from their mouths. > Who was the lame-o PJ-lite band five years back or so that had a minor hit > w/a song called "Cumbersome" - which came out pronounced something like > "cawwwm-bahurr-sohmm"? I think it was one of the five zillion bands who > suddenly sprouted numbers in their names - what's up w/that, anyway? 7 Mary 3. Listening public nil, J. Mallon ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 16:31:44 -0400 From: Michael Bowen Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences At 10:00 AM 8/6/2001 -0700, Bradley Skaught wrote: >Sadly, the Tom Petty sound-alikes I'm referring to aren't the ones you've been >waiting for! By sound-alike, I guess I meant that they have all of the same >sonic characteristics as Bad Moon Fever-era Petty without any worthwhile songs >whatsoever. Dull folk-rock with no imagination. Matchbox 20 immediately comes >to mind. The annoying thing is that I can think of a couple of artists who filled the new-Tom-Petty niche very nicely, except neither of them got played on the radio: Kevin Salem and Matthew Ryan. On a totally different topic, the new Sam Phillips album is out, and Borders has a special version with an extra track. MB ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:32:22 -0700 From: bbradley@namesecure.com Subject: RE: [loud-fans] Emergency: Needed: Brianna Bradley's cell phone number! all taken care of, BTW.... i need to type better or think more clearly.... sorry, joe and sue.... (we would've been waiting for you at BART if we hadn't heard from you guys! you think we'd leave you there?!?!) thanks for coming out to the show, too - everyone else: roxy music was a blast - too tired for review writing.. - -- brianna bradley - -----Original Message----- From: Joseph M. Mallon [mailto:jmmallon@joescafe.com] Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 3:46 PM To: Gone Tomorrow Hair Today Subject: [loud-fans] Emergency: Needed: Brianna Bradley's cell phone number! Please! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 15:57:30 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] online cd sale >http://www.express.com/halfoff/default.asp?type=musicnc > >So, if you've always wanted that Richard Thompson MOCK TUDOR album, for >example, and didn't want to pay $15, they've got it for $6.79. Or They >Might Be Giants' FLOOD for $7.19. Or Todd Rundgren's ONE LONG YEAR for >$7.19. THE FUTURE by Leonard Cohen for $4.79. You get the picture. I'm >sure you could find most of this stuff for around the same price used if >you looked around, but hey... They also have almost all of the Yo La Tengo catalog as part of the sale. I've got 'em all already, but for those of you missing one of their albums, this might be a good chance to fill in that blank. I've not ordered from Express.com before, so I have no idea what their fulfillment speed will be. Rog, MasterCard and I thank you for the link! later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:40:13 -0700 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: [loud-fans] Toppermost To say you're going to sit down with a bunch of Top 40 CDs and see if you can figure them out is pretty similar to saying you're going to sit down a bunch of "indie" CDs and come up with something. There's an enormous amount of difference and variety. Like when New Kids and Bobby Brown were both on the charts--obviously there's a huge difference. For instance, you might never be able to tell the Backstreet Boys and NSync apart--there isn't much difference. It's pretty bland and lacking in personality--anonymous and predictable. Some of the hits are catchy and fun to sing, but it's not very interesting. They're all at the mercy of their producers, really. It's kind of like Motown--like knowing what makes a Norman Whitfield track different from a Smokey Robinson track or something. Most folks just know "Motown". And, in that sense, the top 40 R&B and Hip Hop is where most of the interesting stuff is--anything produced by Timbaland will be interesting and well put together. Destiny's Child trancend the genre largely because of some really bizarre production--super caffeined rhythm tracks with ice cold synth strings and lots of herky jerky shifts. Britney's got some ABBA style Swedish weight behind her, so her hits (lame ballads aside) tend to be really fun and swinging in the style of the best Michael Jackson Dangerous-era stuff. "Oops...", in particular, is a fantastic arrangement. I'm really spending an enormous amount of time selling this stuff aren't, I? It's not really my point--my point is that a lot of it is fun and well made and not worth any more derision than any other era's disposable teen pop. It's a whole lot better than Fankie Avalon, actually. B ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:47:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Michael Bowen wrote: > The annoying thing is that I can think of a couple of artists who filled > the new-Tom-Petty niche very nicely, except neither of them got played on > the radio: Kevin Salem and Matthew Ryan. What happened to the old Tom Petty? Really - if the radio wanted Tom Petty, he's still around... > On a totally different topic, the new Sam Phillips album is out, and > Borders has a special version with an extra track. I'm not sure what to think of this - the fact that Borders has a special version, I mean. I guess I don't really like the notion that an artist I respect has, it seems, gone so far in endorsing a particular retail outlet as to make one track available only through that outlet - as if to say, if you're a real Sam Phillips fan, you'll patronize Borders - but then, for all I know Sam Phillips had zero (zero zero) to say about that, and it was all her label's doing. (Is she still on Virgin? I suspect not...) I suppose I could also say that if Borders has also agreed to put up nifty li'l cardboard Sam cutouts (I want one) to help increase sales, well maybe it's okay, since she deserves the exposure. I already have a regular copy ordered - but maybe I'll stop by Borders on the way home to see if they're doing any promotion. It would suck if they weren't. - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::I can bellow like a clown school drill instructor:: __Brian Block__ np: Creeper Lagoon _Take Back the Universe and Give Me Yesterday_ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 16:26:59 -0600 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences At 04:47 PM 8/6/01 -0500, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: >> On a totally different topic, the new Sam Phillips album is out, and >> Borders has a special version with an extra track. > >I'm not sure what to think of this - the fact that Borders has a special >version, I mean. I guess I don't really like the notion that an artist I >respect has, it seems, gone so far in endorsing a particular retail outlet >as to make one track available only through that outlet - as if to say, if >you're a real Sam Phillips fan, you'll patronize Borders - but then, for >all I know Sam Phillips had zero (zero zero) to say about that, and it was >all her label's doing. (Is she still on Virgin? I suspect not...) It is undoubtedly her label's choice (she's on Vanguard now, btw), and Borders probably gave the label rather a lot of money for this "exclusive" privilege, money which no doubt helps make Sam's new album a higher promotional priority for them. >I suppose I could also say that if Borders has also agreed to put up nifty >li'l cardboard Sam cutouts (I want one) to help increase sales, well maybe >it's okay, since she deserves the exposure. I already have a regular copy >ordered - but maybe I'll stop by Borders on the way home to see if they're >doing any promotion. It would suck if they weren't. I think this album will probably sell relatively well, in Sam's terms--I personally know at least a couple dozen people who have gotten turned on to her music through her work as the music supervisor on GILMORE GIRLS. Now, who here has heard Freedy Johnston's new cover of "Love Grows Where My Rosemary Goes"? I like Freedy and all, but nobody fucks with the first pop song I ever loved and gets away with it. Does he acquit himself? Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 16:30:03 -0600 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost At 02:40 PM 8/6/01 -0700, Bradley Skaught wrote: >For instance, you might never be able to tell the Backstreet Boys and NSync >apart--there isn't much difference. It's pretty bland and lacking in >personality--anonymous and predictable. Some of the hits are catchy and fun to >sing, but it's not very interesting. My fairly limited exposure suggests that the Backstreeters are much better harmony singers than the NSyncers. The lyrics don't really make a hell of a lot of sense (although they do provide plenty of opportunity for rude parody lyrics about anal sex), but the harmonies on "I Want It That Way" are pretty terrific and certainly far better than anything I've ever heard on an NSync single. Neither of them can touch DuJour, though. S ------------------------------ Date: 06 Aug 2001 18:31:25 -0400 From: Dan Schmidt Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost Stewart Mason writes: | My fairly limited exposure suggests that the Backstreeters are much | better harmony singers than the NSyncers. The lyrics don't really | make a hell of a lot of sense (although they do provide plenty of | opportunity for rude parody lyrics about anal sex), but the | harmonies on "I Want It That Way" are pretty terrific and certainly | far better than anything I've ever heard on an NSync single. My exposure is limited as well, but NSync did a terrific highly chromatic arrangement of The Star-Spangled Banner during last year's World Series. - -- http://www.dfan.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:38:05 EDT From: AWeiss4338@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences In a message dated 8/6/01 4:33:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mbowen@frontiernet.net writes: > On a totally different topic, the new Sam Phillips album is out, and > Borders has a special version with an extra track. > > And it's great, too. One of her best. But it's very short, about 36 min even with the extra track. But I'm not going to complain with it only 12.99$. Andrea ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:43:38 EDT From: AWeiss4338@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences In a message dated 8/6/01 5:48:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jenor@csd.uwm.edu writes: > I'm not sure what to think of this - the fact that Borders has a special > version, I mean. I guess I don't really like the notion that an artist I > respect has, it seems, gone so far in endorsing a particular retail outlet > as to make one track available only through that outlet - as if to say, if > you're a real Sam Phillips fan, you'll patronize Borders - but then, for > all I know Sam Phillips had zero (zero zero) to say about that, and it was > all her label's doing. (Is she still on Virgin? I suspect not...) > > I wanted to get Fan Dance from my local store, and they screwed up the order, and I was forced to buy it at Borders. As I say, it's a good album, so I didn't mind so much after I listened to it a couple of times. I know what you mean, but Sam may not have anything to do with this, it may be something Nonsuch, her new label, have going with Borders. I'll have to ask on her list, now I'm curious. Andrea ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:45:19 EDT From: AWeiss4338@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences In a message dated 8/6/01 6:26:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time, flamingo@rt66.com writes: > Now, who here has heard Freedy Johnston's new cover of "Love Grows Where My > Rosemary Goes"? I like Freedy and all, but nobody fucks with the first pop > song I ever loved and gets away with it. Does he acquit himself? > > Yes! It's great. Andrea ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:59:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Mitton Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences In defense of Border's being somewhat deserving of selling a Sam Phillips exclusive, as far as the national chains go, they aren't bad about promoting indie music. Wherehouse or Sam Goody or whatever only promote Top 40 as far as I can tell, but the listening bars at Border's always have at least some interesting things. For example, off the top of my head, in the last few months I've seen The Blake Babies, Sarah Harmer, Gomez, Young Fresh Fellows, Minus 5, Mojave 3, Kristin Hersh, Belle & Sebastian, and so on.... - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 20:48:48 -0400 From: timv@triad.rr.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences On 6 Aug 2001, at 18:45, AWeiss4338@aol.com wrote: > flamingo@rt66.com writes: > > Now, who here has heard Freedy Johnston's new cover of "Love Grows Where My > > Rosemary Goes"? I like Freedy and all, but nobody fucks with the first pop > > song I ever loved and gets away with it. Does he acquit himself? > > Yes! It's great. > Andrea What she said! I've only heard it once, about a week ago on WNCW, and it knocked me way back in my chair. He does it more than justice. Tim Victor timv@triad.rr.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 21:46:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Bradley Skaught wrote: > By the way, though I'm not generally a fan of meandering mid-90's R&B, > I definitely think that it produced some interesting > songwriters--particularly R Kelly and Babyface. and those were great years for clubby dance-pop, too. my roommates and i were deeply stricken with shame over the realization that we were both tempted by an overpriced mailorder compilation featuring "Another Night", "Move It", "Boom Boom Boom" and, uh, i don't exactly remember the names of the others. (in my case the shame was partially at realizing how many parties i went to then, and how rarely i go dancing now.) if anyone knows any good compilations from around then which don't cost $25 + S&H, let me know. anyway, though i got a little sick of it after four days of near-continual listening, i want to recommend the Craig David album. my British associates give me the impression he's considered barely a step up from boy-band pop over there, but i don't know, i think David's quick delivery and the Artful Dodger's production make for a very high hit rate. i also like the double entendre of the title / cover art / public image: the album is called "Born To Do It", and the cover photo of him with eyes closed, smiling and listening to headphones perfectly evokes both his loverman image and his youthful-pop-prodigy image. meanwhile, i'm looking at my stack of Jeff-swag (thanks, Jeff!) and realizing that pretty much everything i swapped him for is peculiar, if not downright avant-garde. my coworkers will be thrilled. a ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 23:48:25 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Bradley Skaught wrote: > They're all at the mercy of their producers, really. It's kind of like > Motown--like knowing what makes a Norman Whitfield track different from a > Smokey Robinson track or something. Most folks just know "Motown". > And, in that sense, the top 40 R&B and Hip Hop is where most of the > interesting stuff is--anything produced by Timbaland will be interesting and > well put together. point--my point is that a lot of it is fun and well made > and not worth any more derision than any other era's disposable teen pop. It's > a whole lot better than Fankie Avalon, actually. ONe of my swap tapes (I think it's a swap tape) features Bradley singing a version of a Frankie Avalon song - and sure 'nuff, he brings out some pathos in the track - so he knows whereof he types. But that comparison is provocative in some other ways. The pre-Beatles, post-Elvis era has long had a bad rep, at least in terms of what charted. The rep's not wholly deserved, but still, the better records in that period were dominated more by who produced than by who sang. And it seems we're in an era like that again, at least as concerns the charts. But there are some key differences, which I think add up to today's rather discouraging popular music scene. One is that the early sixties was dominated by the 45 - so if you heard a great song on the radio, you could buy *just that great song* (and its b-side), with minimal investment in time or money as to whether any other songs by that artist were any good. 45s no longer exist - and CD singles simply aren't as cheap, relatively speaking. So if you hear the way-cool hit, you're pretty much forced to drop $20 to buy the whole CD. (Yes, you cn get CDs for less than $20...but not in the malls, and we're talking about Chris Three-CDs-a-Year here.) The other is that any number of popular artists have proven you don't have to have a *song* to have a hit: you merely have to have an image. Producers are skilled at making *sounds* - but not necessarily songs. Record companies these days are run by folks who could care less whether they sell records, widgets, or diapers - so long as they sell lots of them. I persist in believing that in the much smaller, less "vertically integrated" record industry of yore, *song values* were held in much greater esteem. Yeah, this kind of gatekeeping also kept out much that was valuable - I just got the first Nuggets box, and Greg Shaw's essay about the ongoing, cyclical battle between eager, barely capable musicians and record companies who want predictability and taste is relevant here - it also meant that at every level - from label head to A&R person to engineer, arranger, etc. - songs and musicianship were held to be necessary - even if only as a backdrop for a pretty face. Now you can get the sounds out of a box, and the pretty face becomes your logo, plastered on everything from CDs to lunchboxes. If some peculiar music-hating government took over tomorrow, Britney et al. would still have careers - so long as dancing etc. were still allowed. (And so would Marilyn Manson - I predict pro wrestling>) Most of the bands most of us like would be finished. As to this era's disposable pop being just as good or bad as any other's...some of them, maybe. But go look at the top 40 for, say, 1972, or 1965 - and then tell me that the top 40 for 2000 comes close. Finally, exactly because there's so much good music out there, I really don't feel the need to find or recognize all of it - paradoxically perhaps, all the more so when it's yelling in my ear. Who knows, maybe in ten years I'll see an ad for "The Biggest Hits of 2001" and think it sounds like a gas to buy - but for now, I have only so much time & money for music, and I guess I'm willfully shutting down whole areas of music for myself simply as a heuristic to prevent overload. I *might* be capable of liking stuff in nearly any style or approach to music - but do I have to? And should I go out of my way to do so, just so I can say "yeah, I've heard the 1.5 metal albums released last year that don't blatantly insult my intelligence" - since stupid, doomy or grotesque lyrics & artwork seem required characteristics for something actually to be rgarded as metal. (I expect glenn to weigh in here...) okay, I'm done ranting... - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::I suspect that the first dictator of this country will be called "Coach":: __William Gass__ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 22:01:37 -0700 From: "Andrew Hamlin" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Convinced >(Part of an ongoing anti-blues tirade, inspired by our local college radio >station's attempt - successful though it's been, and I guess I'm grateful >for that - to build an audience by programming nothing but the blues >during evening drive-time every weekday. This wouldn't be so bad, except >that four out of five days feature DJs whose ideas of "blues" consist >solely of lame-ass "Chicago-style" tired variations that just reek of all >those suburbanites slurping cachet as "blues fans." Yeah, that's my >problem - and I certainly know it doesn't diminish the achievements of >Robert Johnson, Howlin' Wolf, Muddy Waters, etc. etc., whose music I can >still enjoy.) You and Dennis are both going to enjoy a certain scene from GHOST WORLD, I tell you now. I may have told this story before, but I once turned on my college radio station and found an energetic fellow spinning a "blues show" which consisted of Stevie Ray Vaughan album sides and Johnny Winter album sides. I called him up and asked for Howlin' Wolf. He said, "Who's that?" And the untimely death of Selena Quintanilla-Perez, Andy "omg, you just dont know < a href="http://freeporn.at/Online/">click here if you are curious







" - --some spam I got this morning ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 01:17:50 -0400 From: "glenn mcdonald" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost > stupid, doomy or grotesque lyrics & artwork seem required characteristics > for something actually to be rgarded as metal. (I expect glenn to weigh in > here...) Oh, metal isn't all stupid, and there's even some good metal that *is* stupid. But if you don't like the style, so be it. It's not like there's any shortage of other kinds of music to keep you as busy as you want. On the other hand, my favorite discovery of 2001 so far is Nightwish, a near-Wagnerian Finnish (but English-singing) metal band with an opera-trained female singer. Don't be so sure you know what you don't like... glenn ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 22:21:24 -0700 From: "Andrew Hamlin" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] big huge giant pseudo-giveaway! >Bride of No-No B.O.N.N. APETIT! >This record is not indicative of what this band can do. The drummer who played >on this was canned immediately after the record was recorded, and with good >reason, as she seems to play in a different time than the rest of the band. Not >a different time *signature*, a different time altogether. Maybe I should get this one too--after all, Helen Wiggin used the identical approach with the Shaggs, and you all know how I feel about the Shaggs. Bic-penned LP situation, Andy "This old world may never change The way it's been And all the ways of war Can't change it back again I've been searchin' For the dolphins in the sea And sometimes I wonder Do you ever think of me" - --from "Dolphins," by Fred Neil, recorded by Neil himself, Tim Buckley, It's A Beautiful Day, Beth Orton, and others. Neil, who also wrote "Everybody's Talkin'," a hit for Harry Nilsson, died in Florida on July 7, 2001. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 01:38:11 -0400 From: jenny grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] big huge giant pseudo-giveaway! Andrew Hamlin wrote: > > Neil, who also wrote "Everybody's > Talkin'," a hit for Harry Nilsson, died in Florida on July 7, 2001. I hadn't heard about this. How old was he and what did he die of? Jen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 22:50:26 -0700 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Toppermost > features Bradley singing a > version of a Frankie Avalon song You know, when you're recording something it seems like just a really great idea. And then years later you realized it's been _recorded_. Pray my live version of "Now My Heart Is Full" from Sacramento doesn't end up on one of your swap tapes. > the better records in that > period were dominated more by who produced than by > who sang. There's a long standing tradition of this, really, and a quick scan of the charts from nearly any era will turn up a substantial number of such tunes. Plenty of folks were sent to Mickie Most or Joe Meek or Oldham or whomever because they were the hitmakers. If someone wants a hit today than you gather up the hitmakers, I suppose. Just like you'd try to do a Lennon/McCartney or Dylan tune or something back when that would sell some records. Just substittue with Babyface or Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis or someone like that. > so if you heard a great song on the radio, you could > buy *just that great song* (and its b-side) I wasn't there, obviously, but it seems like i'm always reading about young kids, smitten by the music, who couldn't afford to buy singles. And I certainly see enough 13 year olds with 20 dollar bills or, gasp, credit cards buying up the new hits. So I guess I feel it probably evens out somehow despite the difference between and album and a single. I tend to believe that more kids are buying more music now--it's just kind of fully integrated into the social scene, really. > The other is that any number of popular artists have > proven you don't have > to have a *song* to have a hit: you merely have to have > an image. I bring back poor old Frankie Avalon and the whole watered down post-rockabilly era. There was an enormous amount of selling to the teens going on throughout the fifties and sixties with images and hacked together sub-novelty nonsense. The famous George Harrison scene in Hard Day's Night was certainly a pretty razor sharp satire that suggests little was different in that time as opposed to ours. You certainly get the sense that more of what was great in pop music artistically made it to the top than does now, of course, but there were a lot less people making music in general and, as Jeff suggests, the industry hadn't quite mastered moulding the hits yet. But there was payola and dance craze knock-off songs and a whole lot of manufactured to make money garbage. > Producers are skilled at making *sounds* - but not > necessarily songs. Again, I think the Beatles and Dylan temporarily knocked that practice on its ear, but prior to that you've got enough half-written sound alikes to fill volumes of compilations. There were of course, the Bacharachs and Robinsons and whatnot, but you still had "Wooly Bully" and garbage like that--that's barely a song, and I can guarantee the NSynch/Backstreet catalogs have way more songs of interesting melodic and structural character than ? & The Mysterians. The one hit wonder/sound not song phenomenon is age old. I'm not convinced the quality to crap ratio has slipped much in terms of fun, disposable pop enjoyment. The lack of chart recognition for artistically substantial material is hard to argue against, though. Still you can imagine someone wondering why their beloved _Song Cycle_ was a total commercial failure while Sgt Barry Sadler sold millions. Or look at Capitol Records' undermining of Pet Sounds with a greatest hits compilation. > Now you can get > the sounds out of a box I argue that any idiot can learn to play "Wooly Bully", too, and it's going to be a similarily complicated process. I've heard plenty of sounds out of boxes, but putting together a hip-hop track or dance/pop song the likes of which you'll hear on top 40 radio is not a simple, out of the box process. > As to this era's disposable pop being just as good or > bad as any > other's...some of them, maybe. Hindsight has a lot to do with it, I think. I've got co-workers who shudder when they hear Wings or Edison Lighthouse or The Carpenters. They can't imagine why anyone would listen to such garbage. And i've got other co-workers who hear it now and think, "hey that's great, really. I hated it then." I remember when electro beats and fuzzy synths were embarassing and not nearly as good as whatever acceptable thing had come before them. I think it's possible that, fifteen years from now, "Oops I did It Again" will be a blast to hear and appreciated for whatever craft was involved. And again, i'm talking about disposable fun stuff. There's no equivalent to The Beatles anywhere near the charts right now. I can spot the holes in the hull of my various arguments miles away, really. I just like to fly the flag of "there's no such things as good old days" whenever possible. It's mildly cynical and it keeps me thinking. I'm also generally disgusted by nostalgia and 20-somethings who dress like The Faces, sneer at anything made after 1977, and make albums that sound exactly like albums made before 1977. So I get defensive of the past twenty years of pop music, because I generally prefer it. I also live in the year 2001 and have a real strong need for whatever new music i'm hearing to reflect that. I'm just being grumpy really, but it's all fun, B ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 01:46:18 -0400 From: Dan Sallitt Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Petty Differences > (No, I don't > think Thompson's done any sessions w/N'Sync) No, but he did cover "Oops, I Did It Again" in concert last year. Folks who heard it said it sounded pretty good. - Dan ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V1 #186 *******************************