From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V3 #254 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 Saturday, August 30 2003 Volume 03 : Number 254 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [loud-fans] pfft! [dmw ] Re: [loud-fans] pfft! [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: [loud-fans] pfft! [dmw ] [loud-fans] re: another one of them damned lists to start arguments over ["Rex.Broome" Subject: [loud-fans] pfft! On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > 35. Fugazi - In on the Killtaker No. No way. I'll except as correct answers _13 Songs_ (or either the "Fugazi" or "Margin Walker" eps), _Repeater_, _Red Medicine_, _The Argument_ or even _Instrument (soundtrack)_ but "killtaker"? That's just wrong. I kinda agree with #1, though. Was the timeframe chosen to deliberately exclude "guyville" d'you think? Or is that an arguably serious omission? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 07:56:32 -0500 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] pfft! Quoting dmw : > On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > > > 35. Fugazi - In on the Killtaker > > No. No way. I'll except as correct answers _13 Songs_ (or either the > "Fugazi" or "Margin Walker" eps), _Repeater_, _Red Medicine_, _The > Argument_ or even _Instrument (soundtrack)_ but "killtaker"? That's just > wrong. > > I kinda agree with #1, though. Was the timeframe chosen to deliberately > exclude "guyville" d'you think? Or is that an arguably serious omission? The timeframe was chosen to correspond with _Magnet_'s publication: it didn't exist before '93. 'Course, that doesn't exclude "Guyville" - unless their first issue came out in the second half of '93 or some such. Pretty glaring omission otherwise: backlash against the self-titled thing, I'm guessing. Same timeframe excludes everything you mention except _Red Medicine_ and _The Argument_ (which I haven't heard). Oh, and I guess _Instrument_. So I gather - since you named nearly the entire rest of their catalog - "Killtaker" wasn't a pleasing moment for you? ..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: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 11:48:29 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] pfft! On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > The timeframe was chosen to correspond with _Magnet_'s publication: it > didn't exist before '93. 'Course, that doesn't exclude "Guyville" - unless > their first issue came out in the second half of '93 or some such. Pretty > glaring omission otherwise: backlash against the self-titled thing, I'm > guessing. gotcha. or maybe the 2nd half of 93 thing explains it. > Same timeframe excludes everything you mention except _Red Medicine_ and > _The Argument_ (which I haven't heard). Oh, and I guess _Instrument_. So I > gather - since you named nearly the entire rest of their catalog - > "Killtaker" wasn't a pleasing moment for you? fer chrissakes, get _the argument_. if it really easy the swan song for the band, it was an awfully high note to go out on; i'd rank it second or third in the catalog. much more expansively textured but still quite rocking, with some of the most directly appealing (in the "catchy" sense) material ever, and also the most nuanced vocal performances in the band's career. really really really good. i think the weakest, in order, are "steady diet," "killtaker" and "the end." they all have good things on them, mind you, and i get "steady diet" and "killtaker" mixed up -- to me, one was the "kind of treading water" after _repeater_" record and the other was the "really in danger now of being in a rut" record. but then _red medicine_ came to make it all better. - -- d. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 09:57:33 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: [loud-fans] re: another one of them damned lists to start arguments over I clock in with less than half, by one (that's twenty-nine, exactly). And I'm not surprised; I've really not been on board with a number of indie-trends during the period covered (actually, the cut-off point for my indie-ness is almost exactly 1995). There are some that I'll definitely end up with eventually-- maybe enough to get my total up to 3/4. But by the same token also a few that I wouldn't own anymore if I ever culled or pruned my collection, which I don't... I mean, I don't see spinning that Pulp album any time soon. I actually own and endorse the only record Jeffrey wouldn't consider; for me there's a big bottleneck for that "me no interest" position, headed by the Pumpkins but followed quickly by the Beta Band, Elliot Smith, and the two irritating "Wee-" bands. And it'll take some time before I can even consider approaching that Magnetic Fields record, if I ever get there. I think part of my problem is that over the last ten years I've bought a few records by people who are older than 39... not many of those on the list. Few indeed who ever released records any earlier than the mid-eighties (being country before it was alt- seems to help get you over in this area). But it is what it is. - -Rex "I can see the lack of Scott, Dylan, Cornershop, and Underworld, but no Luna?" Broome ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 11:03:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Fleming Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another one of them damned lists to start arguments over I own or have owned 26 of these. And heard the majority of the rest. I completely support dmw's stand on THE ARGUMENT (could it really be their swan song?). Either that or RED MEDICINE could easily go there in IN ON THE KILL TAKER's place. My minor gripe is: FILE UNDER EASY LISTENING??? Why not COPPER BLUE?? Oh wait.. I forgot. That one came out in 1992.. damn! ALIEN LANES? I just disagree there. While that record is fine, anything that came before or after it was much better. IS THIS IT? It may be just me, but I just don't understand how a band can record what sounds like a very expensive demo-tape and then get hyped as one of the saviors of rock n roll. I want to see what happens when the hype dies down on them. THE SOFT BULLETIN? I must be one of about 5 people who really DON'T like the new direction they began with this record. I'll stick by CLOUDS TASTE METALLIC any day. I put on this one when I have trouble sleeping. I tried to like it... I really did. I was quite surprised to see EXPLODED DRAWING there. I didn't think anyone remembered Polvo anymore... especially that record. Right on the money: PINKERTON (the only Weezer record everyone should have, IMO), IN UTERO, 69 LOVE SONGS, SUMMERTEETH, TO BRING YOU MY LOVE, and PERFECT FROM NOW ON. Off to go get my copy of DIARY, which I'd been putting off for 8 years or so, Phil F. NP: a comp of Quick Fix songs I made for Jer (it's coming, Jer!) > 60. Shins - Oh, Inverted World (bugs me - should be > "O" should it not? makes > better sense that way anyhow...) > 59. Grifters - Crappin' You Negative (someone tell > Sue T.!) > 58. Shellac - At Action Park > 57. New Pornographers - Electric Version (paramedics > have been dispatched to > glenn's house) > 56. Jon Spencer Blues Explosion - Orange* > > 55. Pernice Brothers - Overcome by Happiness > 54. Whiskeytown - Strangers Almanac > 53. Wrens - The Meadowlands (Absolutely Kosher sez > it's due out 9/9 - > advance "special edition" has been out for months > though) > 52. Helium - The Magic City (go Mitch!) > 51. Pulp - Different Class > > 50. Girls Against Boys - Venus Luxure No. 1 Baby > 49. Jawbox - For Your Own Special Sweetheart > 48. Stereolab - Mars Audiac Quintet > 47. Urge Overkill - Saturation > 46. Idlewild - 100 Broken Windows (glenn's feeling > better now...) > > 45. Afghan Whigs - Gentlemen > 44. Air - The Virgin Suicides** > 43. PJ Harvey - To Bring You My Love > 42. Unwound - Repetition* > 41. Bright Eyes - Letting Off the Happiness > > 40. Dandy Warhols - Thirteen Tales from Urban > Bohemia > 39. Polvo - Exploded Drawing > 38. Godspeed You Black Emperor! - F#A#[infinity]* > 37. Sugar - File Under: Easy Listening > 36. Beta Band - The Three EPs** > > 35. Fugazi - In on the Killtaker > 34. Interpol - Turn on the Bright Lights > 33. Smashing Pumpkins - Siamese Dream > 32. Sunny Day Real Estate - Diary > 31. Built to Spill - Perfect from Now On* > > 30. Queens of the Stone Age s/t (not even sure I > have a track by these > guys...Jenny G.'s gonna kill me!) > 29. Spoon - A Series of Sneaks > 28. Steve Earle - Transcendental Blues* > 27. Beck - Mutations > 26. Lucinda Williams - Car Wheels on a Gravel Road > > 25. DJ Shadow - Endtroducing...** > 24. White Stripes - White Blood Cells** > 23. Flaming Lips - The Soft Bulletin > 22. Magnetic Fields - 69 Love Songs > 21. Moby - Play* (and this is the *only* title on > the list I have zero > interest in owning) > > 20. R.E.M. - New Adventures in Hi-Fi (Miles sighs > contentedly) > 19. Strokes - Is This It > 18. Dirty Three - Horse Stories** > 17. Weezer - Pinkerton > 16. Mercury Rev - Deserter's Songs > > 15. Ween - White Pepper** > 14. Grandaddy - The Sophtware Slump > 13. Calexico - The Black Light > 12. Elliott Smith - XO > 11. Wilco - Summerteeth > > 10. Tortoise - Millions Now Living Will Never Die > 9. Pavement - Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain > 8. Verve - Urban Hymns* > 7. Yo La Tengo - I Can Hear the Heart Beating As One > 6. Breeders - Last Splash > > 5. Belle and Sebastian - If You're Feeling Sinister > 4. Radiohead - OK Computer > 3. Guided by Voices - Alien Lanes > 2. Nirvana - In Utero > 1. Neutral Milk Hotel - In the Aeroplane Over the > Sea > > The rag also has an obscurantists' list: > > Superconductor - Hit Songs for Girls > Cardinal - s/t > Chokebore - Anything Near Water (who?) > Bevis Frond - Son of Walter* > Licorice Roots - Melodeon (who??) > Alastair Galbraith - Mirrorwork** > My Morning Jacket - Tennessee Fire* > Comas - A Def Needle in Tomorrow > Bigger Lovers - How I Learned to Stop Worrying** > (isn't this a Larry Tucker > fave?) > Comet Gain - Realistes (do I have a comp track by > them? mebbe...) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 14:10:02 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another one of them damned lists to start arguments over On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Phil Fleming wrote: > IS THIS IT? It may be just me, but I just don't > understand how a band can record what sounds like a > very expensive demo-tape and then get hyped as one of > the saviors of rock n roll. I want to see what happens > when the hype dies down on them. Me, I didn't buy the hype - but the backlash is ridiculous too. I think it's a fine, solid, catchy, and energetic little record. > I was quite surprised to see EXPLODED DRAWING there. I > didn't think anyone remembered Polvo anymore... > especially that record. We were talking about willful perversity in selection on another list I'm on - this is a good example thereof. I loved Polvo from the yellow one that used to have lions on it through a couple releases later, but the last two seemed indiscriminately mathy to me. - --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 ::The more you drive, the less intelligent you are:: __Miller, in REPO MAN__ np: some wizened old guy from Minnesota _Planet Waves_ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:20:10 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another one of them damned lists to start arguments over On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Phil Fleming wrote: > I own or have owned 26 of these. And heard the > majority of the rest. > > I completely support dmw's stand on THE ARGUMENT > (could it really be their swan song?). Either that or since i was foolish enough to air that rumour in public, lemme qualify it: strictly circumstantial, no real knowledge. but fugazi didn't play this year's ft reno concert series, the first time in years that happened. it's set tongues to wagging. but it may mean absolutely NOthing. > My minor gripe is: FILE UNDER EASY LISTENING??? Why > not COPPER BLUE?? Oh wait.. I forgot. That one came > out in 1992.. damn! feels like a pity pick. mould didn't release one of the 60 most essential records of the period magnet's been around; they had to go with the closest thing. ( i guess 'beaster' came out too early in 93?) > I was quite surprised to see EXPLODED DRAWING there. I > didn't think anyone remembered Polvo anymore... > especially that record. lotsa dc scenesters are big on polvo... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 22:12:09 -0400 From: Dan Schmidt Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another one of them damned lists to start arguments over Phil Fleming writes: | ALIEN LANES? I just disagree there. While that record | is fine, anything that came before or after it was | much better. ALIEN LANES is my favorite Guided By Voices album and one of my favorite records of all time, so I think they were right on. Lots of classic tunes, and all the mini-songs give the whole thing a flow that GBV hasn't really accomplished since. (I think the closest Pollard's come is with NOT IN MY AIRFORCE, discounting the ill-conceived last six songs.) By the way, the just-released EARTHQUAKE GLUE is really great, the best GBV-associated record since SPEAK KINDLY OF YOUR VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT, and a perfect place to start for the uninitiated. Dan - -- http://www.dfan.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 21:53:00 -0500 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another one of them damned lists to start arguments over Quoting dmw : > > I completely support dmw's stand on THE ARGUMENT > > (could it really be their swan song?). Either that or > > since i was foolish enough to air that rumour in public, lemme qualify > it: > strictly circumstantial, no real knowledge. but fugazi didn't play this > year's ft reno concert series, the first time in years that happened. > it's > set tongues to wagging. but it may mean absolutely NOthing.\ Same issue of _Magnet_ MacKaye sez Fugazi is "up on blocks" - I take that to mean certainly nothing soon, but not utterly hopeless either (he didn't say "junked, compacted, and recycled"). > feels like a pity pick. mould didn't release one of the 60 most > essential > records of the period magnet's been around; they had to go with the > closest thing. ( i guess 'beaster' came out too early in 93?) I don't think so - they could have chosen one of his solo albums. Okay, I confess: when I listen to them, I like them - but except for _Workbook_ (acoustic-y) and _Black Sheets of Rain_ (never liked - too monochromatic), I can never remember which one's which. Never listened to the last one - I heard a track on the radio, and it sounded so little like Mould and so much like, well, nothing in particular, that I just lost interest even in checking it out. But despite that indistinguishability, I like most of his '90s solo work, and FUEL too. Jeff Ceci n'est pas une .sig np: Elf Power _When the Red King Comes_ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 21:55:20 -0500 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another one of them damned lists to start arguments over Quoting Dan Schmidt : > By the way, the just-released EARTHQUAKE GLUE is really great, the > best GBV-associated record since SPEAK KINDLY OF YOUR VOLUNTEER FIRE > DEPARTMENT, and a perfect place to start for the uninitiated. NOt sure about that last statement - but I like it pretty well. Based on two listens, the first half is very Who, and the second half (or maybe the middle thereof) is the proggiest stuff they've ever done (lotsa keys in the b.g., and some semi-weird time signatures). My suspicion is I'd love almost everything Pollard's ever done...if I ever had the time to listen to it all enough to really become familiar with it. I can't keep up with his release schedule - everything blurs. Jeff Ceci n'est pas une .sig ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V3 #254 *******************************