From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V2 #183 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 Thursday, May 23 2002 Volume 02 : Number 183 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [loud-fans] Linda and Richard Thompson Reunite ["Larry Tucker" ] RE: [loud-fans] Linda and Richard Thompson Reunite ["Larry Tucker" Subject: [loud-fans] Linda and Richard Thompson Reunite I'm sure Mr. Sallitt knows all about this. This is one reunion I thought would never happen. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/newsarticle.asp?nid=15966 - -Larry <> [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/octet-stream which had a name of RollingStone.com News Linda and Richard Thompson Reunite.url] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 11:50:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Walker Subject: [loud-fans] there's no such thing as bad publicity a followup to the "Don't screw up -- or else" thread: {Hi Brian! :) } - -- > From: Brian Jones > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:05 PM > To: Brian Jones > Subject: > > > This is from the midheaven mailorder site, which I assume uses the > blurbs from promo one sheets: > > WAXWINGS "Shadow Of..." (Bobsled - BOB > 26) CD $ 9.35 ***Brand new album > from the internet "buzz band" of the season! > Known for their incredible > live performances, professional attitude, > tireless self-promotion, and > friendly, hanging-out-at-the-front-door > demeanor, the band is poised and > ready to be brought to the level of bands like > the White Stripes. > Melodic layered guitars, three-part harmonies, > and a great rock'n'roll > sound. No expense was spared in the > production of this album. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 13:22:57 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] there's no such thing as bad publicity can i go to the head of the class for spotting the set up? i just wish i'd thought of it first. On Wed, 22 May 2002, Dave Walker wrote: > a followup to the "Don't screw up -- or else" thread: > > {Hi Brian! :) } > > -- > > From: Brian Jones > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:05 PM > > To: Brian Jones > > Subject: > > > > > > This is from the midheaven mailorder site, which I assume uses the > > blurbs from promo one sheets: > > > > WAXWINGS "Shadow Of..." (Bobsled - BOB > > 26) CD $ 9.35 ***Brand new album > > from the internet "buzz band" of the season! > > Known for their incredible > > live performances, professional attitude, > > tireless self-promotion, and > > friendly, hanging-out-at-the-front-door > > demeanor, the band is poised and > > ready to be brought to the level of bands like > > the White Stripes. > > Melodic layered guitars, three-part harmonies, > > and a great rock'n'roll > > sound. No expense was spared in the > > production of this album. > - ------------------------------------------------- Mayo-Wells Media Workshop dmw@ http://www.mwmw.com mwmw.com Web Development * Multimedia Consulting * Hosting ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 10:38:47 -0700 From: "Douglas Stanley" Subject: [loud-fans] Who's your Grandaddy Pardon me if we've discussed this before, but I probably don't pay as much attention as I should... I've been sitting here the past couple of days listening to "The Sophtware Slump" by the Modesto band Grandaddy. Frankly, I getting blown away a little further with each listen. I find this strange because I am not a fan of the bands I'm finding them compared to (Radiohead, Pavement, Mercury Rev). The web is rather devoid of information on them - other than the apparent fact that they like to drink to excess. Another tidbit reveals that this album pales in comparision to their first, "Under the Western Freeway". So, what's the skinny? It's so rare that I hear a band that strikes my fancy on first listen that there must be a catch. Off-list if you're so inclined. Doug S. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 13:42:48 -0400 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Who's your Grandaddy At 10:38 AM 5/22/2002 -0700, Douglas Stanley wrote: >Another tidbit reveals that this album pales in comparision to >their first, "Under the Western Freeway". Balderdash. UNDER THE WESTERN FREEWAY is very good in places, but it's terribly uneven and it lacks the cumulative impact of THE SOPHTWARE SLUMP. S ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 13:42:35 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Linda and Richard Thompson Reunite At 08:34 AM 5/22/2002 -0400, Larry Tucker wrote: > I'm sure Mr. Sallitt knows all about this. This is one reunion I >thought would never happen. > > http://www.rollingstone.com/news/newsarticle.asp?nid=15966 Before anybody gets too hepped up in anticipation, RS's "RICHARD AND LINDA THOMPSON REUNITE" headline is a huge exaggeration. The story here is that Richard guests on one song on Linda's forthcoming solo album. Given the acrimony of their original split, even that much of a thaw probably comes as a surprise to most folks, but it's hardly a "reunion." It's not like they've done a whole album in collaboration or they're touring together. I wouldn't write a "HUSKER DU REUNITES" headline if Grant Hart played drums on a Mould solo track. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 12:01:26 -0700 From: "me" Subject: [loud-fans] Klez virus http://news.com.com/2100-1001-887330.html http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/cn/20020518/tc_cn/are_you_the_ klez_monster_ interesting virus - it spoofs e-mail addresses. - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 15:04:15 -0400 From: "Larry Tucker" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] Linda and Richard Thompson Reunite |-----Original Message----- |From: Miles Goosens [mailto:outdoorminer@mindspring.com] |Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:43 PM |To: loud-fans@smoe.org |Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Linda and Richard Thompson Reunite | | |At 08:34 AM 5/22/2002 -0400, Larry Tucker wrote: | > I'm sure Mr. Sallitt knows all about this. This is one |reunion I >thought would never happen. > > |http://www.rollingstone.com/news/newsarticle.|asp?nid=15966 | | |Before anybody gets too hepped up in anticipation, RS's |"RICHARD AND LINDA |THOMPSON REUNITE" headline is a huge exaggeration. The story |here is that |Richard guests on one song on Linda's forthcoming solo album. |Given the |acrimony of their original split, even that much of a thaw |probably comes |as a surprise to most folks, but it's hardly a "reunion." | |It's not like they've done a whole album in collaboration or they're |touring together. I wouldn't write a "HUSKER DU REUNITES" headline if |Grant Hart played drums on a Mould solo track. | |later, | |Miles Does appear to bit a bit of an exageration as Richard does only appear on one song. Interestingly most were co-wrote with Teddy Thompson and maybe equally shocking that RT and LT doing *anything* together at all is that Linda plans on touring. http://people.zeelandnet.nl/flipfeij/linda.htm - -Larry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:37:30 -0700 From: "me" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Bic Defeats Copy Protection! and, in retaliation (and in satire), Sony Music Lobbies for Ban on Markers http://bbspot.com/News/2002/05/markers.html - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Mitton" To: Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:32 PM Subject: [loud-fans] Bic Defeats Copy Protection! > I know there was a thread on copy protected CDs recently, and I didn't pay > close attention to it. So I apologize if this is a repeat. Anyway, it > looks like the fancy new copy protection scheme for CDs can be defeated by > running a felt tip marker around the outer edge of the CD: > > http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/industry/05/21/bc.media.cd.piracy.reut.reut/ind ex.html > > --Michael > > http://www.filmatters.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 20:35:58 -0400 From: jenny grover Subject: [loud-fans] more webcasting/CARP/RIAA stuff http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/webcasting.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/25381.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 22:45:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Walker Subject: Re: [loud-fans] more webcasting/CARP/RIAA stuff I love JWZ's final paragraph -- it perfectly sums up what is so wrong with the fee proposals: > And after all is said and done, what happens to your fees? > The media conglomerates take your money, keep most of it for > themselves, and then divide the rest statistically based > on the Billboard charts. That means that no matter what > kind of obscure, underground music you played, 3/4ths > of the extortion money you paid goes to whichever > management company owns N'Sync; and the rest goes to > Michael Jackson (since he owns The Beatles' catalog.) > All other artists (including the ones whose > music you actually played) get nothing. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 22:58:01 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Bic Defeats Copy Protection! On Wed, 22 May 2002, me wrote: > and, in retaliation (and in satire), Sony Music Lobbies for Ban on Markers > > http://bbspot.com/News/2002/05/markers.html Of course, there's at least one person out there who'd agree with this: Rose loves to tell this story on herself, so I'm sure she won't mind if I repeat it here. Way back in her college days (before I knew her), she was at a friend's party when it was overwhelmed by high-schoolers in town for the state wrestling championships or something. One of the invited guests knew one of the high school kids, and foolishly had invited (only) him - of course, all his buddies tagged along. Anyway, the place was overrun with underage drunks. Rose was about to leave, when one of her friends spotted her and beckoned her into a room. The invited guests had commandeered the room with the stereo and had managed to bring in most the good drinkables (and other consumables). Anyway, after a while, things had mostly died down, and they left the rom to find a few scattered drunken idiots about. One in particular was exceedingly obnoxious - fortunately (but not for him) he passed out in short order. Rose and her friends started talking about him, and at one point someone produced a marker. Rose, having artistic tendencies, decided that a false mustache, Frankenstein-monster bolts, etc., would be good decoration for this passed-out fool. At one point, someone said, "good thing that isn't a permanent marker!" Of course, you can guess that Rose looked at the marker...and noticed it indeed was a permanent marker. Anyway, they wheeled the graffiti'd drunk out and left him somewhere (at his friend's house? as I said, I wasn't there). She never did find out who it was. Of course, every time she tells the story for a new person, that person is inevitably tempted to claim, "That was me! You ruined my life!" etc. melodramatic etc. So don't. Now it seems, that guy became a senator! Who knew, that drunken, anti-social lout could become a senator! - --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: Wed, 22 May 2002 23:11:08 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: [loud-fans] creepy - curious I was listening to Soul Coughing's _Ruby Vroom_, which I hadn't done for a while, when "Is Chicago, Is Not Chicago" comes on. You may remember the chorus (more or less): A man flies a plane into the Chrysler Building That was a weird feeling. On an utterly unrelated note, I was listening to Robyn Hitchcock's version of "Kung Fu Fighting," and you know after the titular line there's that little synth thingy - the cliched "oriental" lick that you hear everywhere? Where the hell did that come from? It's become *very* formalized: always the same notes (allowing for different keys) and the same rhythm (deedle-deedle dum dum dum dum dah). I wonder what was the context of its first appearance, and how it became so pervasive. (And why anyone still uses it, given that it's hopelessly shlocky and near-offensive by now.) - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb:: __Batman__ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 23:24:33 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] more webcasting/CARP/RIAA stuff On Wed, 22 May 2002, Dave Walker wrote: > I love JWZ's final paragraph -- it perfectly sums up what is > so wrong with the fee proposals: > > > And after all is said and done, what happens to your fees? > > The media conglomerates take your money, keep most of it for > > themselves, and then divide the rest statistically based > > on the Billboard charts. That means that no matter what > > kind of obscure, underground music you played, 3/4ths > > of the extortion money you paid goes to whichever > > management company owns N'Sync; and the rest goes to > > Michael Jackson (since he owns The Beatles' catalog.) > > All other artists (including the ones whose > > music you actually played) get nothing. Which reminds me of what's so very wrong about John Balzar's article in the _LA Times_ ("The Internet or a .45, It's Robbery of the Artist"): he says, "What is the distinction between robbing a person and robbing him of his ability to earn?" Good question: perhaps he should ask it of those who write up, enforce, and benefit from typical recording artist contracts. (link here: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-000034302may15.column?coll=la%2Dutil%2Dop%2Ded You have to register and give all kinds of annoying (and fictitious, in my case) demographic info - use login "membe4" and password "password" if you want.) He also writes, "If technology bestows a new right on its users to 'share' music, movies and stories without payment, what will be the incentive to make music, produce movies and write stories?" To which I would respond: anyone who's making music only to be paid is either naive or meretricious - - and in neither case would I want to buy that music. To not notice that these laws are intended *primarily* to protect record/movie/etc. companies' profit streams, and will do nothing to enhance artists' exposure or revenues, is to so thoroughly miss the point as to be making no argument at all. No artist can make money unless people are exposed to that artwork. Yes, there are problems if there's no benefit to buying music as opposed to getting it for free...but people tend to like to physically possess things they're fond of, which have value to them. Otherwise, public transit would be more popular than it is, isntead of everyone driving around and having to park their own, personalized vehicles. - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::[clever or pithy quote]:: __[source of quote]__ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 01:12:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Mitton Subject: [loud-fans] Cherish Liz Phair I saw a preview for the movie "Cherish" tonight, and I thought to myself, that sure looks a heck of a lot like Liz Phair. Of course, it was her in her acting debut. Has anyone seen the film yet? Does she do OK? Based on the preview, I thought the movie could be pretty interesting. - --Michael http://www.filmatters.com ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V2 #183 *******************************