From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V3 #174 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, June 17 2003 Volume 03 : Number 174 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [loud-fans] Was: iPod questions Now: Tick-Infested Deer ["Larry Tuck] [loud-fans] Re: iPod questions / Wintel iTunes alpha [steve ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [glenn mcdonald ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Michael Mitton ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Chris Prew ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. ["Tim Walters" ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Matthew Weber ] RE: [loud-fans] a list. ["Micah Bedwell" ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Stewart Mason ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. ["jer fairall" ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Phil Fleming ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Michael Bowen ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. ["Aaron Milenski" ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. ["Aaron Milenski" ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. ["Aaron Milenski" ] [loud-fans] RE: a list. ["Aaron Milenski" ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. ["Pete O." ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Stewart Mason ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Miles Goosens ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Michael Bowen ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Miles Goosens ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Phil Fleming ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Dan Sallitt ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. ["Aaron Milenski" ] Re: [loud-fans] RE: a list. [Phil Fleming ] [loud-fans] Not a list (fun links, I hope) (ns) (ntnyurl) ["G. Andrew Ham] Re: [loud-fans] Not a list (fun links, I hope) (ns) (ntnyurl) ["Michael Z] [loud-fans] List ["Joseph M. Mallon" ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [dana-boy@juno.com] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Jenny Grover ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [dmw ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Aaron Mandel ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [*THAT* Matt Weber ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Dan Schmidt ] Re: [loud-fans] a list. [Jenny Grover ] [loud-fans] NS, not pertinent, but damn funny. ["me" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:09:48 -0400 From: "Larry Tucker" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] Was: iPod questions Now: Tick-Infested Deer |-----Original Message----- |From: Robert Toren [mailto:xgamesters2000@yahoo.com] |Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 12:23 PM |To: loud-fans@smoe.org |Subject: [loud-fans] Was: iPod questions Now: Tick-Infested Deer | | |- --- Gil Ray wrote: |> I'm a tick-infested deer caught in the headlights. | | seeing is believing | http://www.angrylambie.com/tick%20infested%20deer.htm | :-) | RT |I think they started out it NC, though I never saw one. They migrated west after being threatened to extinction by night-driven beer ladened Trans Ams with rebel flag license tags. If you think they may be a breedin' out your way I can rustle up a posse of Trans Ams to fix that....but then you're left with a bigger problem of getting' rid of them. "Free Bird" Larry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:45:43 -0500 From: steve Subject: [loud-fans] Re: iPod questions / Wintel iTunes alpha Give this as much importance as you wish, but the below site claims to have a Wintel iTunes alpha - http://artificialcheese.com/story/2003/6/17/1537/90490 - - Steve __________ Maybe federal employees shouldn't get the double protection of unions and civil service status. It's not an unreasonable argument. If that's what the president believes, he should send up a separate bill abolishing the civil service system. What he's doing here is just using the crushed, maimed and devastated of 9/11 to prop up Grover Norquist's federal workplace policy agenda. - Josh Marshall ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:55:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: [loud-fans] a list. You know how it goes where someone posts a list of the 100 best whatever and people get all indignant about it being wrong? Well, here's a good one: Pitchfork's 20 worst post-breakup projects. http://pitchforkmedia.com/watw/03-06/afterglow/ I found most of it hard to argue with. a ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:22:40 -0400 From: glenn mcdonald Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. A few more I'd have listed: The Style Council (The Jam) .O.rang (Talk Talk) Josh Clayton-Felt (School of Fish) Gravy (Cavedogs) Beats International (Housemartins) Iommi (Black Sabbath) Mark Burgess/The Reegs (The Chameleons) Sophie Ellis-Bextor (theaudience) Vitamin C (Eve's Plum) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:46:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Mitton Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. > I found most of it hard to argue with. My only real complaint is with Mojave 3, a band I truly enjoy. But, I don't understand why he put them on the list in the first place. Of Slowdive, he writes, "changing their name so as not to damage their extant 'legacy' as painted Goth pretenders to the Bloody Valentine throne....though it was no great shock to find these already second-rate players firing blanks." If you don't even like the original band to begin with, how can the break-up band be such a disaster? And is Mojave 3 a break-up band at all or, as he says, a "name change"? - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:08:42 -0500 From: Chris Prew Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 10:46 AM, Michael Mitton wrote: >> I found most of it hard to argue with. > More than couple of these are like shooting fish in a barrel. I thought Big Audio Dynamite was unnecessarily bashed...they weren't the greatest band in the world, but they certainly weren't the worst, and they did have a few good cuts especially on their first record. Personally, I would take Preston School of Industry over the first Malkmus record in a heartbeat, although I wouldn't put either one on this list. Chris, Publicly thanking Stewart for the iTunes tip about creating a Smart Playlist of recent adds. Thats a neat trick for Emusic junkies. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:35:13 -0700 (PDT) From: "Tim Walters" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. Aaron Mandel wrote: > I found most of it hard to argue with. I don't know most of the bands in question, but I vehemently disagree with their assessment of Birdsongs of the Mezozoic. In fact, I prefer them (and Roger Miller's solo and No-Man records) to Mission of Burma. I wouldn't expect most people to agree with that, but the "ambient jazz" tag and the fulminations against their alleged pretentiousness are ridiculous. - -- SLAW * SNAKES & LADDERS Experimental popular children's music for adults http://www.doubtfulpalace.com/artists/Slaw ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:43:14 -0700 From: Matthew Weber Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. At 09:35 AM 6/17/2003 -0700, Tim Walters wrote: >Aaron Mandel wrote: > > I found most of it hard to argue with. > >I don't know most of the bands in question, but I vehemently disagree with >their assessment of Birdsongs of the Mezozoic. In fact, I prefer them (and >Roger Miller's solo and No-Man records) to Mission of Burma. I wouldn't >expect most people to agree with that, but the "ambient jazz" tag and the >fulminations against their alleged pretentiousness are ridiculous. When a critic says that a group like Birdsongs are pretentious, what he really means is that he lacks the ability to understand what they're doing. I really wish crits would put the word in mothballs for a while; it says nothing about the music it purports to describe, and everything about its user's insecurities and ignorance. Matthew Weber Curatorial Assistant Music Library University of California, Berkeley For thine arrows stick fast in me, and thy hand presseth me sore. The Holy Bible (The Old Testament): _The Book of Psalms_ 38:2 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:54:17 -0700 From: "Micah Bedwell" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] a list. I was with him until he mentioned Stewart Copeland's "fruitful" jams with Stanley Clarke. I did agree with him on that disaster of a band The Seahorses. That was some painful listening. Micah - -----Original Message----- From: owner-loud-fans@smoe.org [mailto:owner-loud-fans@smoe.org]On Behalf Of Michael Mitton Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:46 AM Cc: Where They've Got Such A Stem Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. > I found most of it hard to argue with. My only real complaint is with Mojave 3, a band I truly enjoy. But, I don't understand why he put them on the list in the first place. Of Slowdive, he writes, "changing their name so as not to damage their extant 'legacy' as painted Goth pretenders to the Bloody Valentine throne....though it was no great shock to find these already second-rate players firing blanks." If you don't even like the original band to begin with, how can the break-up band be such a disaster? And is Mojave 3 a break-up band at all or, as he says, a "name change"? - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:03:52 -0400 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. At 09:35 AM 6/17/2003 -0700, Tim Walters wrote: >Aaron Mandel wrote: >> I found most of it hard to argue with. > >I don't know most of the bands in question, but I vehemently disagree with >their assessment of Birdsongs of the Mezozoic. In fact, I prefer them (and >Roger Miller's solo and No-Man records) to Mission of Burma. I wouldn't >expect most people to agree with that, but the "ambient jazz" tag and the >fulminations against their alleged pretentiousness are ridiculous. Not to mention the blurb is factually incorrect and out of date on several key points: 1. The person who was "scoring films and writing music for Sesame Street" was Caleb Sampson, who a) was never in Birdsongs and b) has been dead for years. There's also the key problem that Birdsongs WASN'T ROGER MILLER'S GROUP! Birdsongs, which originally formed around the same time as Mission of Burma, was, is, and always shall be Erik Lindgren's project, usually with Ken Field's input. Roger Miller was part of the group for all of two and a half records. I'm all in favor of the snark, but it's more effective when one has at least some small idea what they're snarking about. I can't argue with most of the selections, although I disagree with his assessment of Denim's ON ICE and like the first three or four Big Audio Dynamite albums one hell of a lot more than anything Joe, bless him, did post-Clash, and compared to Simenon's hideously lame Havana 3AM project, they're the frickin' Beatles. S ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:42:55 -0400 From: "jer fairall" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. > like the first three or four Big Audio > Dynamite albums one hell of a lot more than > anything Joe, bless him, did post-Clash... I'm pretty sure that BAD was the only thing that I heard by any ex-Clash members and while I can't vouch for any of their albums but the 15-track 1995 best-of PLANET BAD is pretty consistently great. Just don't confuse it with the lame 10-track SUPER HITS collection which seems to have replaced it on the market. And while this is totally off topic, has anyone heard the Elvis Costello tribute ALMOST YOU which was released earlier in the year? I'm not all that familiar with the line up and I'm usually very tribute-phobic but the reviews I've read have made it sound promising. More info here-- http://www.glurp.com/costelloinfo.html Jer np: Lucinda Williams, WORLD WITHOUT TEARS (but suddenly now I'm in the mood for PLANET BAD) Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:07:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Fleming Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. And some I've listed: Talk Show (Stone Temple Pilots) Three Fish (Pearl Jam) Journey (Santana) Sweet 75/Eyes Adrift (Nirvana) The Doors 1971- (The Doors 1967-71) Anderson Bruford Wakeman Howe (Yes) Phil F., who really liked Tin Machine's first record, and totally disagrees with glenn's assessment with the Gravy. - --- glenn mcdonald wrote: > A few more I'd have listed: > > The Style Council (The Jam) > .O.rang (Talk Talk) > Josh Clayton-Felt (School of Fish) > Gravy (Cavedogs) > Beats International (Housemartins) > Iommi (Black Sabbath) > Mark Burgess/The Reegs (The Chameleons) > Sophie Ellis-Bextor (theaudience) > Vitamin C (Eve's Plum) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:13:03 -0400 From: Michael Bowen Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. He shoulda replaced B.A.D. (who have a full album's worth of B+ or better material to show for their career) with Wilco. Except Uncle Tupelo wasn't that great to begin with. MB np: Paul Kelly - "Look So Fine, Feel So Low" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:15:34 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. >Journey (Santana) or...Journey (Frumious Bandersnatch) What I'd like to see, to be honest, is a list of post-success projects that were better than the original. >who really liked Tin Machine's first record, The songs were OK, but that godforsaken pigsqueal lead gitar ruins the whole thing for me... _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:16:59 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. >He shoulda replaced B.A.D. (who have a full album's worth of B+ or better >material to show for their career) with Wilco. Except Uncle Tupelo wasn't >that great to begin with. Not that I'm interested in being part of it, but you're purposely trying to start an argument, right??? And why isn't Wings on the list??? I mean, just for "My Love" alone they belong there. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:17:37 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. >He shoulda replaced B.A.D. (who have a full album's worth of B+ or better >material to show for their career) with Wilco. Except Uncle Tupelo wasn't >that great to begin with. Not that I'm interested in being part of it, but you're purposely trying to start an argument, right??? And why isn't Wings on the list??? I mean, just for "My Love" alone they belong there. _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:19:54 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: [loud-fans] RE: a list. Here's another one: Aerosmith (Aerosmith) _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:21:19 -0700 (PDT) From: "Pete O." Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. ... and don't forget Loud Family (Game Theory) All lists suck. ===== ====== This space intentionally non-blank. ====== ===== __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:26:33 -0400 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. At 02:15 PM 6/17/2003 -0400, Aaron Milenski wrote: >What I'd like to see, to be honest, is a list of >post-success projects that were better than >the original. Hm. Well, I liked the first two Breeders albums a lot more than I ever liked the Pixies, although I recognize that's a minority opinion. Fugazi over Minor Threat, maybe? Mudhoney over Green River? Three O'Clock over the Salvation Army? Stereolab over McCarthy? None of those first bands had more than limited commercial success, though. Oh, I know one: I like both Fatima Mansions and the High Llamas a lot more than I ever liked Microdisney. > >>who really liked Tin Machine's first record, > >The songs were OK, but that godforsaken pigsqueal lead >gitar ruins the whole thing for me... Do I remember correctly that his shtick was that he used a vibrator to fret with? S ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:42:15 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. Michael Bowen wrote: >He shoulda replaced B.A.D. (who have a full album's worth of B+ or >better material to show for their career) with Wilco. Except Uncle >Tupelo wasn't that great to begin with. Still haven't gotten over the 100% correlation between "Loud-Fan/RT-List member (current or past)" and Wilco hatin.' Wait, since that demographic includes me, it's just 66.7%. And while we're on the UT tip, to address Aaron Milenski's subsequent query: >What I'd like to see, to be honest, is a list of >post-success projects that were better than >the original. To me, Wilco and Son Volt/Jay Farrar are both acceptable answers. I like Uncle Tupelo just fine, especially MARCH 16-20, 1992, but IMO both Tweedy and Farrar have been more focused and achieved at a consistently higher level after the breakup. back to M. Bowen for a moment: >np: Paul Kelly - "Look So Fine, Feel So Low" There's someone *I* never warmed up to -- didn't dislike him, just sorta workmanlike and ho-hum to these ears. As for that list... . With most of the entries, the "parent" acts are ones I couldn't care less about (Pavement, Unrest, Stone Roses, Ride, the Police), so I don't really care about the . I violently disagree with the Brix-bashing in the Adult Net entry (though I don't necessarily disagree about the Adult Net itself), love the first two BAD albums, and like Cracker much better than Camper. But lists like this are just pretty much snarks for snarks' sake. Now to Stewart: >like the first three or four Big Audio >Dynamite albums one hell of a lot more than anything Joe, bless him, did >post-Clash, and compared to Simenon's hideously lame Havana 3AM project, >they're the frickin' Beatles. Actually, I like *everything* I own by post-CUT THE CRAP Joe Strummer quite a bit (which includes the Strummer/Jones cowrites on BAD's #10 UPPING STREET, his soundtrack work, and three proper solo albums) -- it's just that there isn't enough of it, since writing and performing songs would have cut into Joe's real full-time occupation, pot smoking. but it hasn't stopped Snoop Dogg or Willie Nelson, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:51:55 -0400 From: Michael Bowen Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. Aaron Milenski wrote: > Not that I'm interested in being part of it, but you're purposely > trying to start an argument, right??? Nope, just offering up an opinion that is as valid as yours, the Pitchfork writer's, or Greil Fucking Marcus'. I've heard all of Wilco's albums (I even bought two, figuring if they get this much ink, they've gotta have something going) and seen them live, and can't remember a damn thing about any of them. (Actually, that's not true - "Outtamind Outtasite", particularly the Lovin' Spoonful version, was kinda kute.) I'm not as familiar with the complete oeuvre of Uncle Tupelo, but I did see them live once and have heard a fair bit of their stuff on the radio. MB np: The Softies, "Write It Down" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:03:57 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. At 02:51 PM 6/17/2003 -0400, Michael Bowen wrote: >Aaron Milenski wrote: > >> Not that I'm interested in being part of it, but you're purposely >> trying to start an argument, right??? > >Nope, just offering up an opinion that is as valid as yours, the >Pitchfork writer's, or Greil Fucking Marcus'. If you've understood anything that Greil Fucking Marcus has written over the last seven years or so, you're way ahead of me. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 12:34:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Fleming Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. Aaron Milenski sed: > > The songs were OK, but that godforsaken pigsqueal > lead > guitar ruins the whole thing for me... I sez: Actually, that's what initially drew me to it, but I can definitely see that point. The fact of Bowie totally rocking out again was another plus for me. The pigsqueal guitar was put to better effect on "Earthling" anyway. Phil F. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:44:17 -0400 From: Dan Sallitt Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. >> He shoulda replaced B.A.D. (who have a full album's worth of B+ or >> better material to show for their career) with Wilco. Except Uncle >> Tupelo wasn't that great to begin with. > > Still haven't gotten over the 100% correlation between > "Loud-Fan/RT-List member (current or past)" and Wilco hatin.' Wait, > since that demographic includes me, it's just 66.7%. People's reactions to Wilco are interesting. I keep trying to make a dent in my psyche with Wilco, the moreso since my girlfriend has become a big Wilco fan. (By the way, apparently there's some new Wilco EP online that you can download if you enter the packaging production number from YHF.) And somehow they just keep glancing off me, though they straddle exactly the genres of music that I have the easiest time with, alt-country and alt-pop. There's a small camp of people out there who feel the same way, and when we identify each other, we have these perplexed mini-conversations: "Yeah, so what's the big deal about those guys? I don't get it." Maybe it's something soporific about Jeff Tweedy's voice. I don't know. - - Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:46:11 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. > > The songs were OK, but that godforsaken pigsqueal > > lead > > guitar ruins the whole thing for me... >Actually, that's what initially drew me to it, but I >can definitely see that point. >The fact of Bowie totally rocking out again was >another plus for me. >The pigsqueal guitar was put to better effect on >"Earthling" anyway. Obviously this is just a personal taste thing, but if I had to pick any one person who's responsible for ruining the most music for me, it's Eddie Van Halen. Before him, that particular guitar tone/sound was unpopular, if not unknown. It's one thing I just can't stand to listen to, and a lot of very good albums (example: Bad Brains' I AGAINST I) have flown out of my house after just one listen because I can't get past it. I'm sure everyone here has similar pet peeves, but this is the only one I can NEVER stand. There are albums with drum machines and cheesy synths that I enjoy in spite of those things, for example. Anyone else have this, er, problem, with this or any other type of sound?? On a completely unrelated note, my discovery of the year is the 1970 "art-folk" album FRASER & DEBOLT WITH IAN GUENTHER. Awesome, passionate, and bizarre. Every review I could find on the net is completely glowing...amazing that this one has never been reissued. Anyone else know it? Aaron n.p. Greer: BETWEEN TWO WORLDS. Don Dixon when he was an early 70s hard rocker. Really. _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 12:51:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Fleming Subject: Re: [loud-fans] RE: a list. - --- Aaron Milenski wrote: > Here's another one: > > Aerosmith (Aerosmith) EXCELLENT point there!!!!! Phil F. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 12:52:43 -0700 (PDT) From: "G. Andrew Hamlin" Subject: [loud-fans] Not a list (fun links, I hope) (ns) (ntnyurl) http://db5.gemm.com/c/feedback.pl?sid=362584695&key=55130&refno=602346 http://db5.gemm.com/c/feedback.pl?sid=362584695&key=55130&refno=64717674 http://db5.gemm.com/c/feedback.pl?sid=362584695&key=55130&refno=8006305 http://db5.gemm.com/c/feedback.pl?sid=362584695&key=55130&refno=10523 http://db5.gemm.com/c/feedback.pl?sid=362584695&key=55130&seller=STUPIDREC&command= "If you could read my mind..." And now I know how my friend who makes his living off of eBay feels? Andy Company pays homeless workers with pizza By Andrew Kramer June 16, 2003 | PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) -- Instead of going Dumpster-diving for maybe a half-eaten sandwich and some cold fries, Peter Schoeff, a 20-year-old homeless man, was served a slice of hot pizza dripping with cheese. All he had to do was hold a sign for about 40 minutes that read: "Pizza Schmizza paid me to hold this sign instead of asking for money." In a tactic that calls to the mind the hiring of unemployed men during the Depression to wear sandwich-board advertisements, a Portland pizza chain has hired homeless people off the street to promote the product. They are paid in pizza, soda and a few dollars. "I think it's a fair trade," Schoeff said. "We're career panhandlers, that's the only other way we can get money." The signs were meant to be humorous, said Andre Jehan, founder of Pizza Schmizza, a 26-restaurant business in Oregon and Washington. "People don't have to feel guilty, while still appreciating the person is homeless. It's a gesture of kindness more than anything," he said. From the sandwich board to cigarette girls to aerial banners, companies are forever searching for creative means to reach customers. The search has become more frenetic lately as advertisers try to break through what is known in the industry "ad clutter" -- the way people are bombarded by commercial messages from all sides. An ad agency in London, Cunning Stunts Communications Ltd., has recruited students to wear temporary tattoos on their foreheads while hanging out at bars or trendy stores. Sony Ericcson, the cell phone company, has hired models to lounge at tourist attractions and play with a mobile phone to make the gadget look attractive. Beach N' Billboards Inc. of New Jersey used a steamroller-like machine to imprint ads for Snapple iced tea on the beach. Schmizza has also tried handing out fake parking tickets with pizza coupons, and putting up fake election placards reading "Elect Schmizza for Dinner." Gary Ruskin, director of Portland-based Commercial Alert, an advertising watchdog group founded by Ralph Nader, said homeless people acting as billboards should be paid minimum wage, or else they are being exploited. And he complained that the practice adds to ad clutter. "People don't want to get hammered with an ad every time they turn their head," he said. "Most advertising is either somewhat of a lie or deceptive, and it's an assault on our attention." Jehan said the idea sprang from the guilt he felt passing homeless people begging for money. "I got tired of not being able to make eye contact with these people. I thought, `What skills could they have?' Holding a sign was an obvious one," he said. Nate Sandall, an analyst at Standard Insurance, grinned as he passed Schoeff and his sign. "It's unusual, it's creative. At least they aren't asking me for change," he said. "Now, if every business did this, it would get old in a hurry." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:05:38 -0700 From: "Michael Zwirn" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Not a list (fun links, I hope) (ns) (ntnyurl) > June 16, 2003 | PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) -- Instead of going Dumpster-diving > for maybe a half-eaten sandwich and some cold fries, Peter Schoeff, a > 20-year-old homeless man, was served a slice of hot pizza dripping with > cheese. > > All he had to do was hold a sign for about 40 minutes that read: "Pizza > Schmizza paid me to hold this sign instead of asking for money." Schmizza is pretty good, too. There's one about two blocks from my office, but I haven't been there in a little while. Haven't seen any of the homeless-ad stuff though. >Gary Ruskin, director of Portland-based Commercial Alert, an advertising >watchdog group founded by Ralph Nader, said homeless people acting as >billboards should be paid minimum wage, or else they are being exploited. >And he complained that the practice adds to ad clutter. And Gary Ruskin (a fellow Carleton grad here in PDX ...) is a humorless whiner, although I think he has a point about half the time. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:09:10 -0700 (PDT) From: "Joseph M. Mallon" Subject: [loud-fans] List The Firm/Coverdale-Page (Led Zeppelin) GTR (Genesis/Yes) Nice to know the "Afterglow" syndrome didn't start with Unrest... Joe Mallon jmmallon@joescafe.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 17:52:44 -0400 From: dana-boy@juno.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. >What I'd like to see, to be honest, is a list of >post-success projects that were better than >the original. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't go too crazy arguing that this is more than a personal preference, but I'd take Damon and Naomi's "More Sad Hits" and Luna's "Penthouse" over anything by Galaxie 500. I'd also take Paul McCartney's "Ram" over anything by the Beatles, but recognize that that's the kind of thing that just annoys people. Um, how about Spiritualized over Spacemen 3 (even though I personally disagree). Shack over the Pale Fountains, as far as I know. For anyone who's made it this far, I think the New Pornographers are on Letterman tonight. The original list from pitchfork definitely should have had Small Factory/The God Rays. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 18:10:48 -0400 From: Jenny Grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. >>What I'd like to see, to be honest, is a list of >>post-success projects that were better than >>the original. >> I would have to say that I find Queens of the Stoneage to be more fun than Kyuss. Jen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 20:35:37 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Jenny Grover wrote: > I would have to say that I find Queens of the Stoneage to be more fun > than Kyuss. sleator-kinney over huggybear/excuse 17? or is that reaching? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 21:11:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Matthew Weber wrote: > When a critic says that a group like Birdsongs are pretentious, what he > really means is that he lacks the ability to understand what they're > doing. Well, now, I think that people generally get their ideas about what a band is trying to do from the people they know who like said band more than from the music itself. Not always, and critics are well-advised to train themselves not to do that, but it happens. So perhaps you think this is a stretch, but I'd say that the accusation of pretentiousness from a critic who doesn't have a specific anti-snob schtick to fuel more likely means that the circles they move in contain people who don't understand the band in question but like them anyway. On the third hand, if he got his facts wrong maybe it means he just came to it blind expecting a Mission Of Burma album and was disappointed, end of story. Anyway. a np. Tricky - Vulnerable (surprisingly good) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 18:21:53 -0700 From: *THAT* Matt Weber Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. At 9:11 PM -0400 6/17/03, Aaron Mandel wrote: >On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Matthew Weber wrote: > > > When a critic says that a group like Birdsongs are pretentious, what he > > really means is that he lacks the ability to understand what they're > > doing. > >Well, now, I think that people generally get their ideas about what a band >is trying to do from the people they know who like said band more than >from the music itself. Not always, and critics are well-advised to train >themselves not to do that, but it happens. > >So perhaps you think this is a stretch, but I'd say that the accusation of >pretentiousness from a critic who doesn't have a specific anti-snob >schtick to fuel more likely means that the circles they move in contain >people who don't understand the band in question but like them anyway. I should probably have said "lacks the frame of reference" instead of "lacks the ability". It would have been at least more charitable. But most rock critics don't know from Bartok or Stravinsky, even the ones that occasionally drop the names for cred; and BotM is all about Bartokian/Stravinskyan harmonic and melodic fragments subjected to minimalist processes, for the most part. They just happen to do it with "rock" instruments. >On the third hand, if he got his facts wrong maybe it means he just came >to it blind expecting a Mission Of Burma album and was disappointed, end >of story. See, this is probably the most likely scenario, in my opinion. To my ears, there's a close connection between what Roger Miller did solo (and as No Man) and early Birdsongs (when he was still part of the group). Matt Sand-strewn caverns, cool and deep, Where the winds are all asleep; Where the spent lights quiver and gleam; Where the salt weed sways in the stream; Where the sea-beasts rang'd all round Feed in the ooze of their pasture-ground... Where great whales come sailing by, Sail and sail, with unshut eye, Round the world for ever and aye. Matthew Arnold (1822-1888), The Forsaken Merman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:11:25 -0400 From: Dan Schmidt Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. "Aaron Milenski" writes: | What I'd like to see, to be honest, is a list of | post-success projects that were better than | the original. I don't know if individuals count as projects, but you could make arguments for Brian Eno > Roxy Music, Peter Gabriel > Genesis, and Elliott Smith > Heatmiser (and all three original bands set pretty high bars). Dan - -- http://www.dfan.org ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:16:51 -0400 From: Jenny Grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. Aaron Mandel wrote: >On the third hand, if he got his facts wrong maybe it means he just came >to it blind expecting a Mission Of Burma album and was disappointed, end >of story. > > That's a common bad habit, among both critics and fans. They tend to bring too many expectations into listening to a side project. A side project should be taken at face value, for purposes of critique, and not judged on the basis of what the members did in another band. If it's good for what it is, that's good. If it's crap, it's crap. But that opinion should be arrived at irrespective of who the band members are or what they have done in other bands. I'm not saying a critic shouldn't be allowed to say he liked their other band better, or do the comparison/contrast thing, but he shouldn't disqualify the new band because it doesn't have the same sound or lyrical bent as the old one. This predisposition against a side project or new band out of the ashes of an old one sometimes occurs before fans have even heard the band. One recent example is Audioslave. A lot of Soundgarden fans didn't care for Rage Against the Machine, and while waiting for the Audioslave album to come out, they displayed pessimism and snarkiness. (This apparently went on on the Rage list, too, among those who didn't care for Soundgarden, but I wasn't monitoring it). Then when Audioslave came out, they loved it and were eating their words. Others hoped it would be more like "Euphoria Morning" and were bummed out that it wasn't. The flip side of the coin, of course, is fans who will defend a mediocre or even bad band to the death because of who is in it. My dislike of "Euphoria Morning" and luke-warm feelings toward Audioslave have almost constitued stoning offenses. Was I expecting either to be a Soundgarden album? No. I expected something different. That's certainly what we got with EM, but it wasn't a "different" that I cared for. Certain fans didn't appreciate my objectivity, though. Jen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 19:17:47 -0700 From: "me" Subject: [loud-fans] NS, not pertinent, but damn funny. particularly the 'Lvl. 8 Cock of the Infinite' high geek quotient. very high. ex: BritneySpears14: I take off your pants, slowly, and massage your muscular physique. eminemBNJA: Oh I like that Baby. I put on my robe and wizard hat. http://scenario.com/ericrice/cyber.txt for loud fans, it'd be more like BritneySpears14: I take off your pants, slowly, and massage your muscular physique. eminemBNJA: Oh I like that Baby. I start up ProTools and head for the Moog. - -- Albert Einstein, when asked to describe radio, replied: "You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los Angeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly the same way: you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is that there is no cat." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 21:38:40 -0500 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] a list. Bands on Pitchfork's "afterglow" list that I own albums by: Amps, Antenna, Velo-Deluxe, Mysteries of Life, Preston School of Industry, Adult Net, Air Miami, Flin-Flon, Mojave 3, Bash & Pop, Animal Logic, Cracker, Electronic (but only the one the writer likes well enough). Albums on the above list whose quality I strongly disagree about: Preston School of Industry (better than the first Malkmus - but not the second), Air Miami, maybe Antenna. A.o.t.a.l whose quality (lack) I agree about: Amps, Bash & Pop, Animal Logic, Cracker (finally, someone else who thinks they're as shit as I do in comparison w/both CvB and Monks of Doom) Quoting Phil Fleming : > And some I've listed: > > Talk Show (Stone Temple Pilots) > Journey (Santana) Ah, but you're missing the "original band must be worthy" criterion. > --- glenn mcdonald wrote: > > A few more I'd have listed: > > > > The Style Council (The Jam) Definitely! Quoting Stewart Mason : > At 02:15 PM 6/17/2003 -0400, Aaron Milenski wrote: > >What I'd like to see, to be honest, is a list of > >post-success projects that were better than > >the original. > > Fugazi over Minor Threat, maybe? Also agreed. Someone just the other day, and I can't remember where, was arguing that Bob Mould's post-Huskers work, both solo and w/Sugar, was better than his Huskers stuff. I'm sure there will be arguments there... > Three O'Clock over the Salvation Army? For some reason, I'd thought that "Salvation Army" was the same band, essentially, with a name change forced by the pre-existing "Army." Uh, Jupiter Affect over Three O'Clock? They *did*, after all, have all that nifty Rosicrucian symbolism going for 'em... > Stereolab over McCarthy? That's a good one - even though I like the 2 McCarthy albums I've heard, they're relatively generic. Aside from somehow always sounding like themselves, despite a fairly radical evolution in sound over their career, that's not something you can say about Stereolab. Quoting dana-boy@juno.com: > I wouldn't go too crazy arguing that this is more than a personal > preference, but I'd take Damon and Naomi's "More Sad Hits" and Luna's > "Penthouse" over anything by Galaxie 500. Although I like Galaxie 500, I definitely like D&N better, and a lot of Luna's stuff is at least as good. Quoting *THAT* Matt Weber : > At 9:11 PM -0400 6/17/03, Aaron Mandel wrote: > >So perhaps you think this is a stretch, but I'd say that the accusation > of > >pretentiousness from a critic who doesn't have a specific anti-snob > >schtick to fuel more likely means that the circles they move in contain > >people who don't understand the band in question but like them anyway. > > I should probably have said "lacks the frame of reference" instead of > "lacks the ability". It would have been at least more charitable. > But most rock critics don't know from Bartok or Stravinsky, even the > ones that occasionally drop the names for cred; and BotM is all about > Bartokian/Stravinskyan harmonic and melodic fragments subjected to > minimalist processes, for the most part. They just happen to do it > with "rock" instruments. I really dislike "pretentious" in critic-speak as well - thanks for pointing this out. Just the other day, I was reading an annoying article in _Magnet_ about what the writer all but said right out was music beloved by faggots (there were tons of vaguely homophobic language in the article), but at one point, in describing the Left Banke, he made reference to "clavichords, harpsichords, and...contrapuntal three-part harmonies..." Uh-huh: I'll give him harpsichords, but I'll do a Herzog with my shoe if the guy can define the difference between a harpsichord and a clavichord - and is there really "contrapuntal three-part harmony" anywhere on that Left Banke compilation? I don't think so...but hey, "contrapuntal" is like a real musician word, innit? So I guess what I'm saying is *critics* are likelier to be pretentious than musicians ;) Oh - same issue contains an article on Pete Yorn with the most annoying writerly shtick ever, and photos of Liz Phair trying out for "Bimbo of the Month" club, with that awful raccoon eye makeup and facial makeup job that looks like the primer coat on a car about to get the Earl Scheib treatment. Speaking of the latter...every reviewer has been unable to avoid mentioning the song on Phair's new one entitled "H.W.C.," which of course stands for "hot white cum." I was unaware the substance generally was available in any other color. Quoting "Pete O." : > ... and don't forget > > Loud Family (Game Theory) I don't know if you're serious or trolling, but...whaddaya think? I'd argue that overall LF was better than GT. They lack the relatively weak first album, and personally I'd put IBC up against LN. Scott's singing was better in LF than in GT, and by and large the rest of the band was better in LF than in GT. >Jeff Ceci n'est pas une .sig np: comp of various online things...right now, the Wrens covering Duran Duran's "Seventh Stranger" ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V3 #174 *******************************