From: owner-recycled-bin-digest@smoe.org (recycled-bin-digest) To: recycled-bin-digest@smoe.org Subject: recycled-bin-digest V1 #51 Reply-To: recycled-bin@smoe.org Sender: owner-recycled-bin-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-recycled-bin-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk X-To-Unsubscribe: Send mail to "recycled-bin-digest-request@smoe.org" X-To-Unsubscribe: with "unsubscribe" as the body. recycled-bin-digest Tuesday, September 23 1997 Volume 01 : Number 051 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Latest Garbage News For Everyone ["kevin" Subject: Re: Latest Garbage News For Everyone > From: Ian Abbott > To: Recycled-Bin > Subject: Re: Latest Garbage News For Everyone > Date: 21 September 1997 08:06 > > Well the B-sides title came up because at the time they were depressed that > everything they had recorded just sounded like b-sides, but in their case I > can't see the problem. I mean, with B-sides like #1 Crush, who needs > A-sides? I am sure that when the album is primed for release next Feb it'll > have a different title, or probably no title like the first album - maybe > something like "sequel". Who knows? hmmm...hopefully you're right about the title changing. I thought about the thing about how it might be something like "Garbage II" or in the perimeters of having to do w/it being the second album. Although that seems as dreadful as the whole b-sides thing. I would like to suggest a album title at this point though. Maybe its just me, but i like it. I think the new cd should be called...*drumroll*..."Andy Pandy and His Transexual Friend"...not exactly something i came up w/myself, but it's still better than the b-sides idea. > As for being experimental, well we'll see what the record company think > about that. Personally I'm looking forward to it - I don't want a rehash of > "Garbage". When you compare what they're up to to someone like Ocean Colour > Scene, who haven't got an inventive experimental bone in any of their bodies > (like much of the godawful DadRock scene spawned by Oasis and their > brethren), it should be welcomed with open arms even if it doesn't all work. Well, i don't think it would've been a carbon copy of "Garbage", but i don't want it to sound like they were in the studio thinking "well, we've got to make this sound as different as we can, even if the cd is the worst pile o' shite". Yeah, i hope there's some newer sounding stuff, but I still fear that experimental means "if this cd sounds like crap, don't blame us cos we were 'experimenting'". Who knows, maybe the new Garbage album will be along the lines of "Parklife"...*laughs* > Oh, and if anybody mentions "Electronica" (TM) I'll scream. Whoever labels > all the music in America should be shot. Heck, I was listening to Orbital, > Prodigy, Chemicals and so on 6 years before they all started to get labelled > incorrectly in the States under one umbrella. I mean, how can they say "In > Sides" sounds anything like "Fat Of The Land" ??? > well, i don't really like the term myself, but i didn't wanna exactly say "ambient, techno, acid, house, jungle, eurocheese etc.". You can't seriously expect the music papers & such to say that everytime they want to mention that a certain cd or band sounds like they've been influenced by other artists who makes music using electronic items. There, i avoided the word "electronica" :oP. For that matter, a lot of the stuff is labelled alternative. I mean, from Tanya Donnelly to Metallica, from the Longpigs to Fiona Apple. There's no possible way to label everyone differently... kevin chan http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Marina/6273/index.html np: karma chameleon by culture club on some tape which i recorded off the radio ------------------------------ End of recycled-bin-digest V1 #51 *********************************