From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V2 #434 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 Wednesday, December 18 2002 Volume 02 : Number 434 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [loud-fans] Record industry self-inflicted wound? [Dave Walker ] [loud-fans] Vaguely Scott-related news ["jer fairall" ] Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) [Miles Goosens ] Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) [Miles Goosens ] [loud-fans] Richmond area loudfans ["Larry Tucker" ] Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's ["Joseph M. Mallon" ] Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) ["Roger Winston" ] Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's [Stewart Mason ] Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) ["me" ] Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's [Matthew Weber ] [loud-fans] chris burns [dennis@illusions.com] [loud-fans] EW Top 10's [Steve Holtebeck ] [loud-fans] URL-Segwhy? [Bill Silvers ] Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's [Elizabeth Brion ] Re:[loud-fans] Record industry self-inflicted wound? [dana-boy@juno.com] Re: [loud-fans] Record industry self-inflicted wound? [Dave Walker ] Re: [loud-fans] 24 (ns) [John Cooper ] Re: [loud-fans] Record industry self-inflicted wound? [dmw Subject: [loud-fans] Record industry self-inflicted wound? With most of the major media conlomerates being (directly or indirectly) affilliated with RIAA members, I wouldn't expect this story to get much play, but a few people have been looking at the industry's published numbers and noticed something pretty striking. The Register's coverage: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/28588.html and a more in-depth look at the numbers http://www.azoz.com/music/features/0008.html -d.w. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 07:15:28 -0700 From: Roger Winston Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) At Wednesday 12/18/2002 01:21 AM -0500, dmw wrote: >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > > > > > > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . >...unless, mebbe, firsty doesn't exactly MIND killing, but what firsty >really wants is souls alive but in utter despair. That seems to be what he was after in his original appearance, when he almost got Angel to kill himself. >wasn't there sposed to be some whole other giles-in-england show? cuz if >he's dead and evil, that'd seem to be nixed. True. I keep hearing differing accounts about whether or not that spinoff show is really happening or not. If so, it's not happening any time soon. >i mean, you can't have >*everybody* die and come back from the dead -- else it loses a lot of its >dramatic impact. Yeah, the more I think about it, the more it seems like a red herring to me. They want us to suspect Giles, so that when we find out what's really going on, it will be a bigger surprise. I really wonder why he was acting like such a wuss though. >here's another thing - if the first can't manifest directly, but only >through agents, whassup w/ willow's sfx show? mebbe she really ain't >cured. I think that was part of the implication. Willow did manifest the dark eyes thing a couple of weeks ago when she scared off that spider demon at the fraternity. Latre. --Rog ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 09:42:36 -0400 From: "jer fairall" Subject: [loud-fans] Vaguely Scott-related news From www.dvdfile.com: "Last but not least we have American Family: The Complete First Season, a six-disc box set of the acclaimed television drama (not to be confused with the current hit series American Dreams). Retail is $79.95, and stay tuned for specs..." Jer Race to Save the Primates - every click provides food! http://www.care2.com/go/z/primates ------------------------------ Date: 18 Dec 2002 09:53:11 -0500 From: Dan Schmidt Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) Roger Winston writes: | 2) The First can impersonate any deceased person, though not a live | one. (Apparently the Undead count as deceased persons.) Didn't it pretend to be Buffy to Spike once, when he was chomping on that girl in the alley? Dan - -- http://www.dfan.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:53:47 +0000 From: Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Vaguely Scott-related news Jer wrote: > From www.dvdfile.com: > > "Last but not least we have American Family: The Complete First Season, a six-disc box set > of the acclaimed television drama (not to be confused with the current hit series American > Dreams). Retail is $79.95, and stay tuned for specs..." Drama? Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't 'American Family' a documentary, or to be more specific, an early example of the current bane of British TV, the docu-soap? peace & love phil ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:03:46 -0600 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) At 01:21 AM 12/18/2002 -0500, dmw wrote: >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > >> At Wednesday 12/18/2002 12:02 AM -0500, dmw wrote: >> >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> > > . >> >i was wondering that m'self. but if giles isn't giles, why would he not >> >just have offed the slayerettes? >> >> To keep track of them, toy with them? Notice that the Ubervamp tracked >> down Annabelle pretty easily once she was away from the crowd. Maybe he >> was tipped off? He probably had a cell phone in that leather coat. > >hah! >yeah, but if the goal is to get them all dead, doing a jamesbondvillian >move is dumb. not to say that rules it out, but it be a bit >disappointing. > >...unless, mebbe, firsty doesn't exactly MIND killing, but what firsty >really wants is souls alive but in utter despair. which might explain not >getting rid of spike. I think that's the ticket. >wasn't there sposed to be some whole other giles-in-england show? cuz if >he's dead and evil, that'd seem to be nixed. i mean, you can't have >*everybody* die and come back from the dead -- else it loses a lot of its >dramatic impact. Mr. Head said very recently that he'd still love to do the show (RIPPER being the title -- perhaps finally explaining the nickname of Giles' misspent youth), but that Joss had so many irons in the fire that it wouldn't be good to go ahead with it now, as he wouldn't want to do it without Joss' full attention. If FIREFLY stays dead and gone, maybe that'll be the next thing. >> Yeah, I wondered about that too, which is why I posited it as a theory >> instead of fact. But for all we know, the Drusilla scenes were not >> happening simultaneously with the Giles scenes. > >i think the way they were intercut strongly suggests simultaneity, to the >extent that it'd be narrative cheating if it weren't. But we *know* the First can manifest itself simultaneously -- the whole episode where Buffy chats with the new vamp from her high school class while the First makes time with everyone else? Anyone? Entire episode of simultaneousness there. Also, Giles said something last night about it being everywhere, and Vision Joyce mentioned that evil was in everyone... >> That was from way back in the third season - he kinda tortured Angel. > >i think i missed that season. Even though I'm an avid, adamant fan of post-high-school BUFFY, I'd still give the blue ribbon to Season 3. Available on DVD January 7th. >> There was music? > >yes. annoying stir the troops up stuff. I was vaguely bothered by the music too, but at least it was kept in the background rather than at Spielberg/Williams Louder Than Dialogue volume. >> >direct sunlight. and BEHEADING! jeez. get thee a broadsword, girl, and >> >CUT OFF ITS HEAD. (what a _terminator_ rip off.) >> >> The stake didn't work too well, so maybe the beheading wouldn't have >> either. Still, she should've tried. > >if there's any logic to it at all, SOMEthing must have killed them/put >them all to sleep. hopefully it doesn't take a comet. i think beheading >would be a very logical thing to try. The older vamps, like the Master and this vamp ancestor fella, take more killin'. Remember that the Master wasn't dispatched until Buffy threw him through a glass roof and onto a big-ass wooden shard. But yeah, beheading sounds like a good method of more killin' to me. >here's another thing - if the first can't manifest directly, but only >through agents, whassup w/ willow's sfx show? mebbe she really ain't >cured. That (as strongly hinted when Willow has used magic this season, like in the Anya-centered ep), and/or maybe the First is so basic and such a primordial part of the universe that newfangled old stuff like magic just doesn't work against it... later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:00:54 -0700 From: Roger Winston Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) At Wednesday 12/18/2002 09:53 AM -0500, Dan Schmidt wrote: >Roger Winston writes: > >| 2) The First can impersonate any deceased person, though not a live >| one. (Apparently the Undead count as deceased persons.) > >Didn't it pretend to be Buffy to Spike once, when he was chomping on >that girl in the alley? Yeah, it's imitated Buffy several times. But I don't have a problem with that, since Buffy has died (twice). Latre. --Rog ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:05:45 -0600 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) At 09:53 AM 12/18/2002 -0500, Dan Schmidt wrote: >Roger Winston writes: > >| 2) The First can impersonate any deceased person, though not a live >| one. (Apparently the Undead count as deceased persons.) > >Didn't it pretend to be Buffy to Spike once, when he was chomping on >that girl in the alley? It's pretended to be Buffy to Spike several times, including the first episode this season. But Buffy's been dead twice, so she counts. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:16:03 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Miles Goosens wrote: > At 01:21 AM 12/18/2002 -0500, dmw wrote: > >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > > > >> At Wednesday 12/18/2002 12:02 AM -0500, dmw wrote: > >> >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > >> > > >> > > > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >> > > . > >...unless, mebbe, firsty doesn't exactly MIND killing, but what firsty > >really wants is souls alive but in utter despair. which might explain not > >getting rid of spike. > > I think that's the ticket. or, killing is 1/2 point, compelling a suicide is full honors? > Mr. Head said very recently that he'd still love to do the show (RIPPER > being the title -- perhaps finally explaining the nickname of Giles' > misspent youth), but that Joss had so many irons in the fire that it > wouldn't be good to go ahead with it now, as he wouldn't want to do it > without Joss' full attention. If FIREFLY stays dead and gone, maybe > that'll be the next thing. humm. i guess it could be set in the past, a la the indiana jones movies. > But we *know* the First can manifest itself simultaneously -- the whole > episode where Buffy chats with the new vamp from her high school class missed it. > That (as strongly hinted when Willow has used magic this season, like in > the Anya-centered ep), and/or maybe the First is so basic and such a > primordial part of the universe that newfangled old stuff like magic just > doesn't work against it... sigh. saw the anya one (i think? worm boy worm boy insecure boy?) but not the spider thing Rog alluded to. but still doesn't address the question i phrased v. badly which is: if it can't work through willow, where did all that bad energy come from? ...at least this isn't xfiles. i mean, there may really be logical thought behind some of this. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:19:02 -0500 From: "Larry Tucker" Subject: [loud-fans] Richmond area loudfans Seems I recall someone was in the Richmond, VA area. I just heard that Steve Wynn is doing a reunion show with Gutterball at a place called the Have A Nice Day Cafi. The date is Jan. 9th. Anyone know any more about this? - -Larry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:44:16 -0600 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) At 10:16 AM 12/18/2002 -0500, dmw wrote: >On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Miles Goosens wrote: > >> At 01:21 AM 12/18/2002 -0500, dmw wrote: >> >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: >> > >> >> At Wednesday 12/18/2002 12:02 AM -0500, dmw wrote: >> >> >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >> > > . >> >...unless, mebbe, firsty doesn't exactly MIND killing, but what firsty >> >really wants is souls alive but in utter despair. which might explain not >> >getting rid of spike. >> >> I think that's the ticket. > >or, killing is 1/2 point, compelling a suicide is full honors? Probably even closer, since in its brief Season 3 appearance, that's what it tried to get Angel to do (suicide). >> Mr. Head said very recently that he'd still love to do the show (RIPPER >> being the title -- perhaps finally explaining the nickname of Giles' >> misspent youth), but that Joss had so many irons in the fire that it >> wouldn't be good to go ahead with it now, as he wouldn't want to do it >> without Joss' full attention. If FIREFLY stays dead and gone, maybe >> that'll be the next thing. > >humm. i guess it could be set in the past, a la the indiana jones movies. I don't know where it would be temporally, but given that A.S. Head would be reprising his role, I'd think "current day with flashbacks" rather than "Young Giles Chronicles." Geographically, it would be filmed in the U.K. as a coproduction with the BBC, as Tony's reason for giving up full-time BUFFY status was to stay closer to his family in the U.K. >> That (as strongly hinted when Willow has used magic this season, like in >> the Anya-centered ep), and/or maybe the First is so basic and such a >> primordial part of the universe that newfangled old stuff like magic just >> doesn't work against it... > >sigh. saw the anya one (i think? worm boy worm boy insecure boy?) but not >the spider thing Rog alluded to. Which means you missed the one Rog and I were talking about -- basically an all-Anya episode where in Vengeance Demon mode she causes a bunch of frat boys to get killed, there's a Bergmanesque subtitled & hilarious flashback to Anya as bunny-loving Norse girl Aud, there's a flashback musical number a la the musical episode... more would be too spoileriffic. >but still doesn't address the question i >phrased v. badly which is: if it can't work through willow, where did all >that bad energy come from? Since the First is Basic Evil, I'm guessing that when Willow came into magical contact with it, the First served as a catalyst for the considerable evil power in Willow, so that side of her personality & magic got supercharged just by trying to "touch" the First. >...at least this isn't xfiles. i mean, there may really be logical >thought behind some of this. Ha! I wish I had given up on THE X-FILES after its fourth season, but I kept thinking they'd at least partially return to form. There's a big part of me that wishes that they had never started down the "mythology episode" track and stayed strictly "monster of the week." When the mythology was headed in the "no aliens/all a gov't creation" direction (think of the end of Season 2, when Mulder's in the buried boxcar with the "alien" bodies that he realizes aren't aliens at all), I thought it was a promising plot, plus we had Chris Carter going on in interviews about how we'd never see an alien on THE X-FILES. But then it all went to hell, and the hopeless muddle of the "mythology" became dominant and pervaded the whole thing with its stupidity... later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:14:02 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Mitton Subject: Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's > 1. Stew, THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER...AND OTHER SONGS Has anyone else been totally disappointed with this? Though I liked "Guest Host" a lot, I've been so bored with NAKED that I haven't even been able to listen to the whole thing in one sitting. Maybe it's the talking or the live-ness of it, but it just feels half-assed. With that off my chest, - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:16:26 -0600 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) Quoting dmw : > On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > > > At Wednesday 12/18/2002 12:02 AM -0500, dmw wrote: > > >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > > > . > > >i was wondering that m'self. but if giles isn't giles, why would he > not > > >just have offed the slayerettes? > > > > To keep track of them, toy with them? > > ...unless, mebbe, firsty doesn't exactly MIND killing, but what firsty > really wants is souls alive but in utter despair. which might explain > not > getting rid of spike. I think this is pretty clear: The First is happy to let others do the dirty work (cuz that'll make them more evil than they were anyway) but its real deal is more insidious: reasonable advice leading to doom, appeals to one's better nature that will not work, the use of avatar-images near and dear to one...all leading to despair, I think. So if Giles isn't Giles, his actions are consistent w/those motives: he acts *as if* he's helping them, etc. > > wasn't there sposed to be some whole other giles-in-england show? cuz > if > he's dead and evil, that'd seem to be nixed. Good question - maybe that never got past development... > here's another thing - if the first can't manifest directly, but only > through agents, whassup w/ willow's sfx show? mebbe she really ain't > cured. First: did they say The First *can't* manifest directly? Or only that it prefers not to? Also: they've as much as said they know Jack Schitt about The First...so what it can & cannot do seems wholly speculative. That given, apparently "dead" means "dead at one time"...since it seems The First has manifested as Buffy - and of course, a couple of vamps. ..Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html :: "In two thousand years, they'll still be looking for Elvis - :: this is nothing new," said the priest. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:20:27 -0800 From: "Michael Zwirn" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's > > 1. Stew, THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER...AND OTHER SONGS > > Has anyone else been totally disappointed with this? I thought it was OK, but - sheesh, best record of the year? Although I'm naturally happy that he gets some recognition in the mainstream press. n.p. Jane Siberry, When I Was a Boy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:22:23 -0800 (PST) From: "Joseph M. Mallon" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Michael Mitton wrote: > > 1. Stew, THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER...AND OTHER SONGS > > Has anyone else been totally disappointed with this? Though I liked > "Guest Host" a lot, I've been so bored with NAKED that I haven't even been > able to listen to the whole thing in one sitting. Maybe it's the talking > or the live-ness of it, but it just feels half-assed. 3 or 4 really good songs (pts. 1 & 3 of "The Drug Suite", "Reeling", "Love Comes Walking Through the Door"), but not as good as GUEST HOST or PMS. Joe Mallon jmmallon@joescafe.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:25:13 -0600 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) Quoting Miles Goosens : > >> >> > > not needed... > Which means you missed the one Rog and I were talking about -- basically > an > all-Anya episode where in Vengeance Demon mode she causes a bunch of > frat > boys to get killed, there's a Bergmanesque subtitled & hilarious > flashback > to Anya as bunny-loving Norse girl Aud, there's a flashback musical > number > a la the musical episode... more would be too spoileriffic. Which reminds me: a month or so ago I registered a complaint about the way the hair and makeup people were treating Emma Caudwell (Anya). Apparently they were listening, cuz she's been wicked hot the last few eps... ..Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html :: crumple zones:::harmful or fatal if swallowed:::small-craft warning :: ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:33:36 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Michael Mitton wrote: > > 1. Stew, THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER...AND OTHER SONGS > > Has anyone else been totally disappointed with this? Though I liked > "Guest Host" a lot, I've been so bored with NAKED that I haven't even > been able to listen to the whole thing in one sitting. Maybe it's the > talking or the live-ness of it, but it just feels half-assed. Me too. I tried to listen again recently because Sweetboot 2 got me excited, and it just largely feels drab. That said, I looked at ew.com and didn't see where Stew was #1. The only best-of-2002 I found had The Streets at the top. a ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:39:30 -0700 From: "Roger Winston" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey on 12/18/2002 11:25:13 AM wrote: > Which reminds me: a month or so ago I registered a complaint about the way > the hair and makeup people were treating Emma Caudwell (Anya). Apparently > they were listening, cuz she's been wicked hot the last few eps... Agreed - but why does she suddenly need reading glasses? She's a demon, fer cryin' out loud. Not that she's less cute with the glasses, but I was just wondering. Latre. --Rog ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:51:31 -0500 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's At 01:33 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, Aaron Mandel wrote: >On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Michael Mitton wrote: > >> > 1. Stew, THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER...AND OTHER SONGS >> >> Has anyone else been totally disappointed with this? Though I liked >> "Guest Host" a lot, I've been so bored with NAKED that I haven't even >> been able to listen to the whole thing in one sitting. Maybe it's the >> talking or the live-ness of it, but it just feels half-assed. > >Me too. I tried to listen again recently because Sweetboot 2 got me >excited, and it just largely feels drab. Oddly, I appear to be the only one who was underwhelmed by GUEST HOST (which "Rehab" aside is still my least favorite Stew/TNP record, including the Sweetboots) and considers THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER a return to form. I do, however, wish that the title song -- which I also appear to be largely alone in loving, but I think it's one of his five or six greatest songs ever -- had included the sardonic "la-la-la" vocals that Stew and Heidi usually add to the live version. (As in, "The naked Dutch painter/la la, la-la-la/The naked Dutch painter/la la, la-la-la...") >That said, I looked at ew.com and didn't see where Stew was #1. The only >best-of-2002 I found had The Streets at the top. In the magazine, it's the "Second Opinion" top 10. I think it's by Tom Sinclair instead of David Browne. S ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:52:09 -0800 From: "me" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) - -- It's well known that if you take a lot of random noise, you can find chance patterns in it, and the Net makes it easier to collect random noise. Dr. James M. Robins, Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at Harvard - -- - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey" To: "Account 7870" Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) > Quoting dmw : > > > On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > > > > > At Wednesday 12/18/2002 12:02 AM -0500, dmw wrote: > > > >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > > > > > . > First: did they say The First *can't* manifest directly? Or only that it > prefers not to? Also: they've as much as said they know Jack Schitt about > The First...so what it can & cannot do seems wholly speculative. it can't _manifest_ directly (can't physically interact with it's surroundings directly), but it can appear as it self, though it rarely does. i'm not sure about whether or not it could effect the physical world around it if it chose ot look like it's own bad self, though. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:59:12 -0800 From: Matthew Weber Subject: Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's At 01:51 PM 12/18/02 -0500, Stewart Mason wrote: >Oddly, I appear to be the only one who was underwhelmed by GUEST HOST >(which "Rehab" aside is still my least favorite Stew/TNP record, including >the Sweetboots) See, I think GUEST HOST misses occasionally (the Pro-Tools-ized 78 rpm of "Man in a Dress" is annoying, and there are a few too many dirges on the record), but overall it's a fairly strong collection of songs, though the performances could use a bit more zip. I thought, e.g., that the full band version of "Re-Hab" that Stew did on tour a couple years back was much better than the recorded version. But really, "Cavity" is a great song, and "Into Me" only just misses being pretty spectacular as well. > and considers THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER a return to form. I >do, however, wish that the title song -- which I also appear to be largely >alone in loving, but I think it's one of his five or six greatest songs >ever -- had included the sardonic "la-la-la" vocals that Stew and Heidi >usually add to the live version. (As in, "The naked Dutch painter/la la, >la-la-la/The naked Dutch painter/la la, la-la-la...") I have yet to pick up copies of NAKED DUTCH PAINTER or the second Sweetboot. Best get crackin', eh? Matthew Weber Curatorial Assistant Music Library University of California, Berkeley Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age, like as a shock of corn cometh in in his season. The Holy Bible (The Old Testament): _The Book of Job_, chapter 5, verse 26 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:15:56 -0700 From: dennis@illusions.com Subject: [loud-fans] chris burns Hi, Does anyone know how to get hold of Chris Burns? Loud-fans email to Chris' account is bouncing. - -- - --- Dennis Sacks dennis@illusions.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:54:16 -0800 From: Steve Holtebeck Subject: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's Michael Mitton wrote: > > 1. Stew, THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER...AND OTHER SONGS > > Has anyone else been totally disappointed with this? Though I liked > "Guest Host" a lot, I've been so bored with NAKED that I haven't even been > able to listen to the whole thing in one sitting. Maybe it's the talking > or the live-ness of it, but it just feels half-assed. I think the songs themselves are fine, but the cabaret-like arrangements, the performances, and the talking between tracks keeps me from enjoying it as an album. The SWEETBOOT 2 versions of "Giselle" and "Stepford Lives" hint at what NAKED DUTCH PAINTER could've sounded like if it were a little more fully-assed. Come to think of it, the good songs from NDP combined with the good songs from MUDDY SWEETBOOT and TNP's WELCOME BLACK would make one monster great album! Maybe that's why we have blank CD-Rs? Steve ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:02:46 -0600 From: Bill Silvers Subject: [loud-fans] URL-Segwhy? An amusing Segway rant a little past halfway down the page on TMQ's always entertaining Page 2 column on ESPN.com: http://espn.go.com/page2/s/tmq/021217.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:03:26 -0600 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] tonight's buffy (ns) Quoting Roger Winston : > Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey on 12/18/2002 11:25:13 AM wrote: > > > Which reminds me: a month or so ago I registered a complaint about the > way > > the hair and makeup people were treating Emma Caudwell (Anya). > Apparently > > they were listening, cuz she's been wicked hot the last few eps... > > Agreed - but why does she suddenly need reading glasses? She's a demon, > fer cryin' out loud. Not that she's less cute with the glasses, but I > was just wondering. I suppose demons can be subjective to poor vision as well as any other creature... We've seen vamps with glasses before - why not demons? Anyway, I can't keep straight: is Anya technically still a demon? ..Jeff 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: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:16:41 -0500 From: John Sharples Subject: [loud-fans] If I Fell... ...really got a hold on me? I had this as a jpeg, and couldn't send it to the list, but fortunately a friend posted it: http://www.interbridge.com/images/Michael_Beatles.jpg Help! JS - ------------------------------- This mail sent through Brooklyn Law School WebMail http://www.brooklaw.edu/webmail - ------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:20:29 -0800 From: Elizabeth Brion Subject: Re: [loud-fans] EW Top 10's >>On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Michael Mitton wrote: >> >> >>>>1. Stew, THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER...AND OTHER SONGS >>> >>>Has anyone else been totally disappointed with this? Though I liked >>>"Guest Host" a lot, I've been so bored with NAKED that I haven't even >>>been able to listen to the whole thing in one sitting. Maybe it's the >>>talking or the live-ness of it, but it just feels half-assed. I had problems with it on the first few spins, which I attribute entirely to the live-ness. I'm not generally a big fan of live albums, and semi-live albums may possibly be worse. But after I got over the fervent wish that the same batch of songs had been recorded in the studio, it really grew on me; I'm pretty sure it'll end up in my top 5. However, "Welcome Black" I simply cannot get into at all. There are a few tracks I'll probably put on mixes, but I've gotta say it's the first TNP-related purchase I regret. Stewart Mason wrote: > Oddly, I appear to be the only one who was underwhelmed by GUEST HOST > (which "Rehab" aside is still my least favorite Stew/TNP record, including > the Sweetboots) and considers THE NAKED DUTCH PAINTER a return to form. I > do, however, wish that the title song -- which I also appear to be largely > alone in loving, but I think it's one of his five or six greatest songs > ever -- had included the sardonic "la-la-la" vocals that Stew and Heidi > usually add to the live version. (As in, "The naked Dutch painter/la la, > la-la-la/The naked Dutch painter/la la, la-la-la...") I had no idea people didn't like that song - it's one of my favorites as well. Probably largely because the woman in the song behaves exactly like my former roommate/best friend of my youth. She was always inviting minor rock stars over to take naps and prancing around in her underwear and then getting pissed off that they got the impression she wanted to be more than friends. (Once she had half the NYPD turning up in pairs at her 6th-floor walkup to check, repeatedly, for a leak in her bathtub; we were puzzled too until she got to the "Meanwhile, I'm trying to get dressed for work and I'm running around in my bra and slip" part of the tale.) It's strangely comforting that I may not be the only person who's ever had to sit across from such a person and sympathize with her problems while trying to pretend she's from the same planet... but more than that, the end always makes me cry because I feel like I know where she's coming from emotionally. E ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:42:13 GMT From: dana-boy@juno.com Subject: Re:[loud-fans] Record industry self-inflicted wound? With most of the major media conlomerates being (directly or indirectly) affilliated with RIAA members, I wouldn't expect this story to get much play, but a few people have been looking at the industry's published numbers and noticed something pretty striking. The Register's coverage: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/28588.html and a more in-depth look at the numbers http://www.azoz.com/music/features/0008.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have the feeling that the formatting's going to be wierd for the above. Anyway, none of us are really forensic accountant enough to know what's actually going on, but I think that the above story may not have gotten much play because the azoz guy doing it seems to be comparing a lot of figures without giving much thought to what they actually mean. I'm *pretty* sure that this is obvious enough that no one needs to pick out examples. We now return you to Buffy-fans. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:13:58 -0500 From: Dave Walker Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Record industry self-inflicted wound? On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 05:42 PM, dana-boy@juno.com wrote: > I have the feeling that the formatting's going to be > wierd for the above. Anyway, none of us are really forensic > accountant enough to know what's actually going on, but I think that > the above story may not have gotten much play because the azoz guy > doing it seems to be comparing a lot of figures without giving much > thought to what they actually mean. I'm *pretty* sure that this is > obvious enough that no one needs to pick out examples. We now return > you to Buffy-fans. I love this bit, phrased in the Reg's distinctive style: "Increasingly hysterical comments from RIAA chairperson and chief random-number-generator Hilary Rosen suggest that many billions of potential sales have been lost. " Anyway, on the azoz guy's site, a few people point out some of the problems with his numbers (and to be fair, he admits to not being an economist and welcomed the criticism), but the central point: namely, that the labels are simply not producing as much new music (and that they're selling it at a higher price) is hard to argue with. -d.w. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:41:39 -0500 From: Dave Walker Subject: [loud-fans] 24 (ns) Are people not watching "24" this year or are they just not talking about it? Last night's episode was a real cracker, maybe the best yet of this season. -d.w. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:46:58 -0800 From: John Cooper Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 24 (ns) I don't know; was it talked about much last year? I'll agree with you about last night's episode. About 35 minutes in, Jo and I turned to each other and exclaimed how undramatic and even boring it was this week, and then the writer had his laugh at us. > From: Dave Walker > Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:41:39 -0500 > To: loud-fans@smoe.org > Subject: [loud-fans] 24 (ns) > > Are people not watching "24" this year or are they > just not talking about it? Last night's episode was > a real cracker, maybe the best yet of this season. > > -d.w. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:57:33 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Record industry self-inflicted wound? On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Dave Walker wrote: > welcomed the criticism), but the central point: namely, that the labels > are simply not producing as much new music (and that they're selling it > at a higher price) is hard to argue with. this has been kicked around quite a bit some other places; i'm inclined to think it has some slight validity. i've even seen one or two "real" industry people come awfully close to raising my pet hypothesis which is: to the extent that people consciously or unconsciously budget for entertainment expenses, they get kinda lumped together. that is, at some level there are choices made between options of approximately equal cost, like, go see a movie in a theater, buy a cd, buy a dvd. dvds are selling like gangbusters (to the movie studios delight, and the rental places' chagrin -- have you noticed that the tower, blockbuster et al are stocking much more new-sale content lately?). given the state of the economy, the money those dvds are bought with isn't coming from an across-the-board increase in disposable income (i'm not an economist, but really, do i need to be to assert that?) -- i think it's pretty fair to say that at least *some* of that dvd-buying money probably woulda gone into the pockets of aunt hilary's cartel. and y'know what? i don't think there exists a satisfactory way to determine whether unauthorized digital downloading has increased or decreased overall revenue. there's no damn control group to compare to. anecdotal evidence suggests strongly that some people buy more (sample, like, purchase) and some people buy less (sample, don't like, don't buy; just plain take). and surveys say whatever the group that funded them wants them to. funny, that. my gut says increased indie revenues, decreased major revenues, and not by much either way; mostly because i think major label product is almost intrinsically more susceptible to the "only two good songs" syndrome. but i think anyone who says they know for sure is either lying or deluded. - -- d. wondering what the bluddybeJEEzus the room-mate is playing/performing now. symphony for sewer drain and passing traffic? yeeps. ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V2 #434 *******************************