From: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org (shindell-list-digest) To: shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Subject: shindell-list-digest V2 #22 Reply-To: shindell-list@smoe.org Sender: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk shindell-list-digest Saturday, April 15 2000 Volume 02 : Number 022 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [RS] Life on the (Wall) Street ["Norman A. Johnson" ] [RS] Re: Lee Wessman's Post [Elwestrand ] [RS] You asked for it! ["cynthia rhodes" ] [RS] Re: Lee Wessman's Post [Rongrittz@aol.com] Re: [RS] Voices ["L. Davis" ] Re: [RS] "Beautiful Voices" ["L. Davis" ] [RS] [Vanessa Wills ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 17:37:21 -0400 From: "Norman A. Johnson" Subject: [RS] Life on the (Wall) Street Today's Subjects: ----------------- _SUBJECTS-AUTHORS_ Dow Jones down over 600 points.... Maybe the line of "Confession" should be: "I can lose a quarter million just walking in my sleep" Re: angelic voices-- Dar harmonizing with the Nields sisters on "Maybe it's love". BTW, what's with these new headers? Norman ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 18:51:29 -0400 From: Vanessa Wills Subject: Re: [RS] Life on the (Wall) Street Today's Subjects: ----------------- _SUBJECTS-AUTHORS_ Speaking of great guitar, Bob Mould is performing on April 28th at Irving Plaza, and I'm thinking it's probably a moral imperative that I go, so I'm definitely gonna try to make it. Will any Richard-listers be in attendance? Paul? Anyone? - --Vanessa np: Some pretty cool turntable-ism on WPRB. - -- "The day will begin like any other, another sunrise in the east. It will reach across and touch you like a lover, it will tease you from a dream." --Richard Shindell, "Spring" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 19:22:22 -0400 From: Elwestrand Subject: [RS] Re: Lee Wessman's Post Today's Subjects: ----------------- _SUBJECTS-AUTHORS_ Folk, Country, and Rock operate within their own paradigms. What is considered acceptable or advanced within each group is different. For instance among popular artists, an REM, might be considered cutting edge, whereas a Britney Spears would seem very light in comparison(apologies to REM for making that comparison!). So, in Jazz a Kenny G, would be considered extremely light compared to a say a Coltrane. However, I bet Kenny could play virtually any pop music you put in front of him. So what's my point? A "mediocre" jazz or classical player will 90% of the time be a better musician than most everyone in country, folk or rock (unless they happened to be classically trained). This is not to say that I like jazz better than the other categories. I don't. I am not a member of any jazz lists. I love folk music. The majority of folk music is very simple. That doesn't make it bad. If you cannot hear the difference in complexity, it doesn't matter a bit. But I do, and I will never conceed this point. It is a point of fact. And if you play guitar and you think folk is extremely challenging, all I can say is keep practicing. And if you want to learn even more, study musical theory which will change the way you view it all. Finally, re: Lee's post saying that their just aren't that many Al Di Meola's. I would amend that to say, there aren't that many that we know of. Why, because very few people buy that kind of music. It is almost impossible for them to become reknowned - well kind of like our folkies! However, I think there are many amazing guitarists out there and it is not impossible to reach there level if you have the talent and the inclination. Ok, I will step down from the soapbox now. Thanks for the spirited responses. I'm sure I am really in for it now! ________________________________________________ Get your own "800" number - Free Free voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:57:24 PDT From: "cynthia rhodes" Subject: [RS] You asked for it! Today's Subjects: ----------------- _SUBJECTS-AUTHORS_ "Ok, I will step down from the soapbox now. Thanks for the spirited responses. I'm sure I am really in for it now!" Well aside for thinking you're a pompous ass I really have no other complaints! I'm sure you also only watch Public Television and read Playboy for the articles. Maybe one day if we all study real hard we will be able to attain your level. ARE YOU HAPPY NOW? :) Cynthia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 22:37:18 EDT From: Rongrittz@aol.com Subject: [RS] Re: Lee Wessman's Post Today's Subjects: ----------------- _SUBJECTS-AUTHORS_ << The majority of folk music is very simple. That doesn't make it bad. If you cannot hear the difference in complexity, it doesn't matter a bit. But I do, and I will never conceed this point. It is a point of fact. And if you play guitar and you think folk is extremely challenging, all I can say is keep practicing. And if you want to learn even more, study musical theory which will change the way you view it all. >> Wow. I wasn't going to join in this pissing contest, but as someone who has played guitar longer than you've probably been alive, I must say that you haven't a clue what you're talking about, whether or not you're willing to "conceed" the point. And that, too, is a point of fact. Complex does not necessarily mean better. Technically proficient does not necessarily mean better. When you play music that touches the soul -- as Richard's music does for me and Al DiMeola's never will -- that's what's good. Not what passes for good in what clearly seems to be your self-important, condescending, highbrow world. RG ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 22:52:49 -0400 From: "L. Davis" Subject: Re: [RS] Voices Today's Subjects: ----------------- _SUBJECTS-AUTHORS_ cynthia rhodes wrote: > > I readily admit to a bias for Richard, John Gorka > and Hugh Blumenfeld - but somebody who I don't ever > remember being mentioned here who I feel deserves > a listen is Michael Jerling. Intersting -- I like Gorka very much, that is *some* of his stuff, and I think Blumenfeld is a very clever writer who sometimes is even better, but I think both write much better than they sing. Now as for Michael Jerling: I got his CD "My evil twin" as my public radio bonus one year, listened twice, didnt' care for it. The point being: If anyone out there would like this CD, and won't be offended by such an arrangement, I would sell it for $5 including postage, or trade it for 3 TDK SA90s with or without any music on them! I'm broke, and also, running out of room for the CDs I like the most (the 2 facts are related)! Lisa Davis He may not be quite > on Richard's level, but then again WHO IS? :) > I recommend My Evil Twin and New Suit Of Clothes- > but they may be difficult to find. > > Cynthia > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 22:57:39 -0400 From: "L. Davis" Subject: Re: [RS] "Beautiful Voices" Today's Subjects: ----------------- _SUBJECTS-AUTHORS_ Let me add one more; I think I've mentioned this before (several times?) Currently I am a big fan of a French (Breton) singer-songwriter, Gilles Servat, who's been putting out CDs for the past 25 years or so. Among other things he is a big fan of scottish and irish songs. His latest CD also includes several in English, but oddly enough also includes a French version of The Lake at Ponchetrain (sp.) which I've heard Richard cover. A really rich, passionate voice that can be fiery and wistful by turns, always full of feeling. And if you can read French, his lyrics can be as poetic and dense as Richard's. Because I'm broke (see prior post) send me a blank SA90 and I'll make you a fairly good quality tape-to-tape of my personal greatest hits of his (Richard got his copy for free :) :)). To repeat an earlier post (I'm pretty sure), my most recent convert to Richard's music introduced me to servat's, which should be an endorsement. (now lurking...) Lisa Davis ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 01:02:58 -0400 From: Vanessa Wills Subject: [RS] Today's Subjects: ----------------- _SUBJECTS-AUTHORS_ Elwestrand, I love how you never even try to argue for these "superior" artists on the ground of their depth of feeling, the actual beauty of their work, or the stories they tell with their music and/or words. Why bother writing songs at all? Why don't we just have neat, half-hour slots, in which these people can show us their most recently-perfected chord progressions, alternate tunings, fingerings, etc, without bothersome songs to get in the way of showcasing their technical skill? Why wait three minutes for a really good guitar solo in cases where that's the only "technically" extraordinary part of the song? Answer those questions, Elwestrand, and you'll see where you are wrong. Umm, it's also pretty rude to sign on to a discussion list and tell everyone there that they have bad taste, but that's pretty much beside the point. . . Elwestrand wrote: > Folk, Country, and Rock operate within their own paradigms. A > "mediocre" jazz or classical player will 90% of the time be a better > musician than most everyone in country, folk or rock (unless they > happened [sic] to be classically trained). RonG already made this point (and very well, I might add) so I won't harp on it for too long, but suffice it to say that a *technically* better musician does not necessarily equal a better musician when you look at it holistically. For crying out loud, Charlotte Church is probably "technically" a better vocalist than Dar, but do I want to listen to that? No. There is so much more in good music than you allow room for. You can teach technique but you can't teach soul, and I'm not going to "conceed" to your rather banal and academic method of judging music. And besides--technique itself is a good deal more subjective than I'm sure you'd like to think. Good singing technique for Broadway is pretty much the antithesis of good technique for a cappella, and the same kind of rules applies to the world of instrumental music; it's fundamentally unfair and wrong-headed to judge the technique of one genre by the standards of another--and not because folk music can never hope to lift itself up to the standards of classical music, as you so charitably suggest. > This is not to say that I like jazz better than the other > categories. I don't. I am not a member of any jazz lists. I love > folk music. How nice for you. > The majority of folk music is very simple. Are you listening to the same stuff we are? Maybe what you pejoratively label "simplicity" I label "honesty." Most folk music doesn't hide behind flash, smoke and mirrors. And just as you give **Kenny G**, of all people, the benefit of the doubt, I'm willing to wager that Richard is a heckuva lot more skilled than you believe he is. And so *what* if he can't read music? (Which, by the way, I haven't heard from any other source than your earlier e-mail). Does that necessarily make his music the worse for it? Am I to say, Ahh, yes, that guy is good, but can he sight-read Rachmaninov? Ridiculous. > If you cannot hear the difference in complexity, it doesn't > matter a bit. But I do, and I will never conceed [sic] this point. It > is a point of fact. And if you play guitar and you think folk is > extremely challenging, all I can say is keep practicing. It is > almost impossible for them [the Di Meolas of the world] to become > reknowned - well kind of like our folkies! Goodness gracious, the thinly-veiled condescension is almost too much for me to handle. At any rate, your own words tend to do more to highlight the fallacy of your arguments than I ever could. I don't even think I can respond without coming off almost as badly as you do. - --Vanessa, who until now, thought *she* was getting to be something of a music snob! BTW, I just came back from a *fantastic* Indigo Girls show on campus! Those ladies can really rock! :-) Unfortunately, I was subjected to Rose Polenzani *once again* (she opened for Richard a couple months back, and opened for the Indigo Girls tonight). I swear that woman just plays the same darn song over and over again. And it ain't even that good. *Not* that I'm a *snob* or anything ;-). Now, I *know* there are some big Polenzani fans on this list, and please, please don't start throwing things at me, but I'm sorry--I listen to the words, the voice, the guitar, the melodies--I think it all makes for fairly decent background music. It is unobtrusive and harmless. I just can't hear what's so great about her. Anyone care to tell me? I'd be interested, I could be totally missing something. - -- "The day will begin like any other, another sunrise in the east. It will reach across and touch you like a lover, it will tease you from a dream." --Richard Shindell, "Spring" ------------------------------ End of shindell-list-digest V2 #22 **********************************