From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V4 #115 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, April 27 2004 Volume 04 : Number 115 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [loud-fans] The Crowd Scene gets more crowded ["Fortissimo" ] [loud-fans] GBV ["Bradley Skaught" ] Re: [loud-fans] Lolita Masters [dennis sacks ] Re: [loud-fans] GBV ["jer fairall" ] [loud-fans] Soft Commands ["Bradley Skaught" ] Re: [loud-fans] GBV ["Bradley Skaught" ] Re: [loud-fans] GBV ["Fortissimo" ] Re: [loud-fans] eMusic/file format question [dmw ] [loud-fans] website help ["Bradley Skaught" ] Re: [loud-fans] website help [Aaron Mandel ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:12:30 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: [loud-fans] The Crowd Scene gets more crowded Here's a message from former lister John Sharples (who's apparently going by the name "Lynda Brook" these days) about former(?) lister Grahame Davies: On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 19:38:41 -0400, "SHARPLES, JOHN" said: > Congratulations are in order for Anne Rogers and Grahame Davies on the > birth > of their second daughter, Maria, this weekend! > > Nine pounds, nine ounces. Cries medodically. Bassist and baby doing > fine. - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb :: --Batman ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 09:53:50 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: [loud-fans] Cupboards... Andy: >>Still haven't heard it, but it's called COAT OF MANY CUPBOARDS. I think >>I spoke too soon; looks like *some* original versions on there, but a whole >>lotta demos and rarities, too. Oh, that one! I thought there was a new one or something. It's pretty good... very nice for people with a pretty complete set of XTC records who don't feel like committing to the whole Fuzzy Warbles experience (me, for one). The liner notes (Andy and Colin and more) are superb... informative and, unsurprisingly, quite funny. My kids dismantled the really cool packaging, though. Sigh. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:08:00 -0700 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: [loud-fans] GBV sad news: http://www.gbv.com/ B - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.662 / Virus Database: 425 - Release Date: 4/20/2004 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:41:36 -0700 From: dennis sacks Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Lolita Masters JRT456@aol.com wrote: >However, it's exactly the kind >of thing that a weasel who fancies himself to be Scott's handmaiden would get >very defensive about. > > Really, JRT, this isn't very nice. No need to get nasty. Dennis ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:50:49 -0400 From: "jer fairall" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] GBV Is it really a break-up, and thus really all that sad, if GbV has pretty much been made up of Robert Pollard and whoever happened to be hanging around his house that week? Personally, I always liked the Pollard/Sprout era of GbV best and I also enjoyed some of their glossier studio experiments (DO THE COLLAPSE, ISOLATION DRILLS) but since the band's direction and lineup seemed to change according to Bob's whims, never allowing you to get too attatched to any of them, and since he is obviously going to continue to make music on his own, I don't see how the "Guided By Voices" disbanding really makes much of a difference. Jer np: The Paperbacks, AN EPISODE OF SPARROWS (in which the Bonaduces guy finds an even *more* Weakerthanks-esque band) Support Care2 Email: Stop "scientific" whaling, the whale-killing loophole http://www.care2.com/go/z/12803 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:51:49 -0700 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: [loud-fans] Soft Commands I got a promo of the new Ken Stringfellow album, Soft Commands (comes out in June, I think, on Yep Roc.) It's really fantastic! The last one, Touched, took awhile to sink in--there was something almost uncomfortably intimate and odd about it. I think I was also expecting "power pop" and it certainly wasn't that! The new one is more diverse and colorful than Touched--a little more "widescreen". It's got an early Rundgren/Nyro feel at times, some Sunflower-era Beach Boys, some Lee Hazelwood/Serge Gainsbourg-style chamber pop. There's even an entirely successful reggae/pop song! Somehow it all hangs together. Lyrically, I think it's his best yet. I've always admired his attempts to stretch himself, but it often felt like he was trying too hard. This time, they seem to work--the language and the imagery aren't drawing too much attention to themselves, but they're still evocative and interesting. A wonderful singer/songwriter album. I think it will find a lot of fans here! B - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.662 / Virus Database: 425 - Release Date: 4/20/2004 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 11:07:18 -0700 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] GBV > since the band's direction and lineup seemed to change > according to > Bob's whims, never allowing you to get too attatched to > any of them, > and since he is obviously going to continue to make > music on his > own, I don't see how the "Guided By Voices" > disbanding really makes > much of a difference. Yeah, I can understand that position. I prefer the Isolation Drills-and-on era of GBV, so I guess for me it really is a particular line-up that i'll be missing. It's also a kind of "catalog" of music--a brand name I felt connected to that suggested certain ideas and sounds and characteristics. And I also tried to run a band for years that changed line-ups many times, but it always felt like the continuation of an idea even if it wasn't the same band. But mostly, it's the GBV line-up of the past five years or so that i'm sad to see go--I felt like they finally "realized" Pollard's songwriting and gave a it a whole level of depth and resonance and color it didn't entirely have before. They really became one of the great "intelligent power pop" bands. Seeing them live last year I was struck by how seamlessly they've incorporated prog and complicated structures into really melodic pop songs--like some stew of Cheap Trick, The Who and Rush or something. It's not far from Scott, I guess, in that way. And having heard most of Pollard's solo and side project work, i'm not sure if he's going to continue making the kinds of records he has with GBV. B - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.662 / Virus Database: 425 - Release Date: 4/20/2004 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:23:49 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] GBV On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:50:49 -0400, "jer fairall" said: > Is it really a break-up, and thus really all that sad, if GbV has > pretty much been made up of Robert Pollard and whoever happened to > be hanging around his house that week? Personally, I always liked > the Pollard/Sprout era of GbV best and I also enjoyed some of their > glossier studio experiments (DO THE COLLAPSE, ISOLATION DRILLS) but > since the band's direction and lineup seemed to change according to > Bob's whims, never allowing you to get too attatched to any of them, > and since he is obviously going to continue to make music on his > own, I don't see how the "Guided By Voices" disbanding really makes > much of a difference. Actually the GBV lineup has been fairly consistent for the past few years. And Doug Gillard is most definitely not chopped liver as a guitarist: he brings a lot to the band (basically, he makes it a band rather than, as you say, Bob Pollard and whoever he's drinking with). True, Pollard himself has said there's no particular distinction between his GBV stuff and his solo stuff: it goes where it goes depending what project he's working on. Perhaps he's more interested in the kind of one-off collaborations he's been indulging in, giving him more musical leeway. Or maybe he's going to collaborate with those bald Orbital brothers and a couple stray Wu Tang Clan guys in a superduper genre-busting megaproject. - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Solipsism is its own reward :: :: --Crow T. Robot ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 17:52:38 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] eMusic/file format question On Sun, 25 Apr 2004, Elizabeth Brion wrote: > Hey all, > > Since this list contains the biggest hive of eMusic people I'm aware > of, I thought I'd ask my silly tech question here. I'm finally actually > downloading all those MP3s that I grabbed the .emp file for back in the > halcyon days of unlimited downloads. Because of the much smaller file > size, I prefer to load songs onto my iPod in AAC format. > > I've tried simply converting MP3 to AAC, but that doesn't work too well > - probably because of the different compression standards, the file > size ends up about the same. I'm sure converting MP3 to WAV to AAC > would work, but I'm trying to figure out if there's an alternative that > won't take all the space on my hard drive to perform. Anyone got any > suggestions? I think the reason you haven't drawn any responses to this is there really isn't a good way to do it. Part of the reason the eMusic files are larger is that (most of them) have more data in them; eMusic uses VBR encoding for the majority of the catalog. i think they sound far better, but they're undeniably bigger. unfortunately converting directly from mp3 to aac or via an intermediate step like WAV means going through extra conversion cycles. the laws of entropy being what they are, the conversions are likely to emphasize the compression artifacts and sound substantially worse than other files compressed to the same size. the pathetic caverns: a zine - opinionated and eclectic reviews a studio - specializing in indie/rock/mobile/live/demo recording http://www.pathetic-caverns.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 15:02:43 -0700 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: [loud-fans] website help I'm an idiot when it comes to web knowledge and I need some advice. Basically, I downloaded a little "make your own website" program and designed a page with some photos and some mp3s. Now, of course, I want to put it somewhere! What's the best way to get web space--are there free places or really cheap places that are okay? I've been told these "build your own web page" programs make it fairly easy to upload pages, but I haven't tried it yet. Any advice would be much appreciated! thanks B - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.662 / Virus Database: 425 - Release Date: 4/20/2004 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 00:19:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] website help On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Bradley Skaught wrote: > Basically, I downloaded a little "make your own website" program and > designed a page with some photos and some mp3s. Now, of course, I want > to put it somewhere! What's the best way to get web space--are there > free places or really cheap places that are okay? I've been told these > "build your own web page" programs make it fairly easy to upload pages, > but I haven't tried it yet. Any advice would be much appreciated! My non-techie friends seem to love pair.com, who have plans as low as $6/month. I don't know whether anyone I know is on the $6 plan, but for a largely-static site with only a few mp3s I don't see why it wouldn't suit you. (And the fees for other services look reasonable to me.) a ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V4 #115 *******************************