From: owner-recycled-bin-digest@smoe.org (recycled-bin-digest) To: recycled-bin-digest@smoe.org Subject: recycled-bin-digest V2 #99 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 Saturday, September 5 1998 Volume 02 : Number 099 Today's Subjects: ----------------- article [Josh Nadler ] Re: Garbage Were Crap at Reading.... ["Dan" ] Re: Garbage Were Crap at Reading.... [Alan ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 01:57:11 -0600 (MDT) From: Josh Nadler Subject: article I found this article on the web site of a local, crappy, Jacor owned, corporate radio station. Basic stuff at the beginning, but it has a few good quotes http://rocknews.com/kbpi/rn_feature.htm later Josh N }|-)> ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 18:07:15 +0100 From: "Dan" Subject: Re: Garbage Were Crap at Reading.... > It's mainly NME and MM.....the monthly mags seem to give a more > objective view but we will have to wait till next month to find out what > they thought about the Reading performance.Interestingly,in a recent > letter to the NME someone complained that the paper always heaped praise > on a particular band (Embrace?) even though the reader argued that they > were a load of crap(a kind of Garbage situation in reverse!).The reply > from the Editor was that they had always supported this particular band > from the beginning and wouldn't change just because they had become > popular!In other words they are either for or against individual bands - > quite a bizarre situation,don't you think? > The thing about both NME and MM is that they don't pay much attention to things and just let whoever's doing the column that day air their opinions. This is why they seem to have a love/hate relationship with a lot of bands, and you often see them performing u-turns even in the space of one issue. I think most of them started off as fanzine writers which explains quite a bit... I guess they must all like Embrace. Chances of that huh?! Of course the real reason they should change their opinion on Embrace is that they've become shit, and there are now more people playing violin in the band than evrything else. > >> Apparently,according to reviewist John Robinson(who?), the stars of the > >> day were the monotonic and repetitive New Order. > > > >always thought 'World In Motion' was a damn good song...did they play that > >by any chance ? > Yep. They closed with it. It just wasn't the same without John Barnes though. The rest of the set was great so it's little wonder Garbage didn't seem so good to a lot of people. > Sorry,I didn't pay that much attention.I was standing way back from the > stage....that guy's voice really irritates me so if they ever made a > good song it would just get in the way I guess! > > > alan > > "Sometimes I think that the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." A distinctly earthbound website http://www.shef.ac.uk/students/me/mea95dad/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 19:34:17 +0100 From: Alan Subject: Re: Garbage Were Crap at Reading.... In message <51BC8F71B4@valehouse.shef.ac.uk>, Dan writes > >> >> Apparently,according to reviewist John Robinson(who?), the stars of the >> >> day were the monotonic and repetitive New Order. >> > >> >always thought 'World In Motion' was a damn good song...did they play that >> >by any chance ? >> > > Yep. They closed with it. It just wasn't the same without John >Barnes though. The rest of the set was great so it's little >wonder Garbage didn't seem so good to a lot of people. A lot of people? alan BTW I have have serious doubts about people who compare bands who are like chalk and cheese.... What did you expect from Garbage,Dan?.......New Order Version 2.0????? ------------------------------ End of recycled-bin-digest V2 #99 *********************************