From: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org (support-system-digest) To: support-system-digest@smoe.org Subject: support-system-digest V6 #105 Reply-To: support-system@smoe.org Sender: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk support-system-digest Tuesday, April 29 2003 Volume 06 : Number 105 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: I'm a menace! Part One. ["S - Kon" ] The Emil Breton/Steve Character and Mariam [Michael Carapella ] Re: The Emil Breton/Steve Character and Mariam [Jase ] Re: More menacing shit [robert joyner ] Bounced message [owner-support-system@smoe.org (by way of Jase ] damn ["Mike Katsoulis" ] Bounced message [owner-support-system@smoe.org (by way of Jase ] Re: don ho love songs [TitleTK@aol.com] RE: don ho love songs ["trent [hardcore since '74l]" Subject: Re: I'm a menace! Part One. Emil wrote: >(I might make an exception for "Hot White Cum", which has >GOT to be more intentionally subversive than Liz has >claimed). Exactly. I dont know how _anyone_ could take that song for face value. It screams irony to me. stacy _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 23:29:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Carapella Subject: The Emil Breton/Steve Character and Mariam Nice writing in yesterday's post. That is the most I've ever seen from someone who can't tell the difference between something that is "bad" vs. something that just doesn't appeal to them personally. Speaking as a musician who has great respect for Liz Phair, taking her out of the lo-fi world doesn't automatically qualify her to be categorized as "over-produced." Overproduction exists, but not on the three tracks currently on her web site. Never have I seen a group of "fans" (for lack of a better word) so ready to pounce on an artist for making an effort to make their record sound good. What's up with that? I've got to listen PAST all the crap and stoned ramblings and under-developed songwriting on her early efforts to hear what makes her good and special. Now that's been stripped away and some of you are saying, "No, thank you. Don't serve me the artichoke heart steamed and dipped in butter and garlic. I prefer it raw and cold with a little dirt left on it. I'll work past all that to get to the good part." It's hard to fathom. Listen through a cheap boom box on 10 if you need your music to sound like crap. Now, I can't defend the 80's pop-metal chorus of "Why Can't I" because I've heard enough of that style, but good god, criticizing Uncle Alvarez is just bizarre. Yes she does have to grow, and if she's growing in a direction that doesn't appeal to you personally, go find someone that is! Ragging on Liz for refining her craft isn't productive on any level. Liz is an original and just be glad she's still active. It ain't easy out there. - -Michael __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 23:45:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Carapella Subject: What does "support our troops" mean? For those that missed yesterday's posts, we have someone in our midst who does not know what it means to support our troops. He knows a lot of other stuff, but this one has escaped him. I have no intention of starting a patriotic revival or battle here, but I'll just state the following: Supporting our troops includes directing your thoughts and actions towards acknowledging the significance of the sacrifices that the men and women of our armed forces have made and continue to make on behalf of the United States of America. Sound overblown, theoretical and without substance? It's not. It's real. It matters. Don't agree with US policy, past or present? It doesn't matter. The selfless sacrifice is the same. P.S. My pinky slipped addressing this email the first time before I erased the last digest. My apologies to all the real time members. Hopefully someone will catch it before the digest gets it too, but if not my apologies to them as well. - -Michael __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 04:41:49 -0400 From: Jase Subject: Re: The Emil Breton/Steve Character and Mariam Michael Carapella wrote: >Never have I seen a group of "fans" (for lack of a >better word) so ready to pounce on an artist for >making an effort to make their record sound good. >What's up with that? I've got to listen PAST all the >crap and stoned ramblings and under-developed >songwriting on her early efforts to hear what makes >her good and special. Now that's been stripped away >and some of you are saying, "No, thank you. Don't >serve me the artichoke heart steamed and dipped in >butter and garlic. I prefer it raw and cold with a >little dirt left on it. I'll work past all that to >get to the good part." It's hard to fathom. Listen >through a cheap boom box on 10 if you need your music >to sound like crap. Well, I think there's no sense in arguing the point, since taste is such a subjective thing. What one person thinks of as "good," others may not. I kind of see the points both sides have been making in the discussion about the new album; I, myself, fall somewhere in between. I don't love the album as much as some people seem to, but I also like it more than others do. Truth be told, I really like about half of it a lot and a couple of the other songs will likely grow on me after a while. I also think, Matrix-produced tracks aside, these songs really aren't as much of a departure as some have been saying. A lot of them would have been equally at home on _whitechocolatespaceegg_. I think that a lot of us have higher expectations of Liz because we know what she's capable of and how talented she is. It's like the point someone made the other day about how if Britney made a Liz Phair-esque album, it'd throw people for a loop; no one thinks she has it in her, so no one expects it. By the same token, given that Liz is one of the most distinctive songwriters of her generation, I think we hold her to a higher standard. We expect nothing short of greatness. There was recently a thread about the new record at a (non-Liz related) message board I post at, and I had mentioned there that if these songs were by any other artist, I'd probably give them higher marks. It's hard, though, to judge them on their own merits and not as being by "the Liz Phair who made _Exile in Guyville_ and _Whip-Smart_." It's the same when it comes to directors or novelists whose work I enjoy; it's hard not to compare their newer projects to past ones. Sometimes you're not even conscious that you're doing it. I think part of why I and possibly others liked Liz's music so much in the first place was how unlike everyone else she was. At the time _Exile_ was released, none of her contemporaries were coming out with anything remotely close to it; there was no one who sounded quite like Liz did. It was refreshing to hear something so different and singular. While I like the Matrix tracks more than I thought I would, they're definitely less complex than some of Liz's past songs, like "Nashville" or "Shatter." I've also noticed a number of people here saying they sound like any number of different artists (Heather Nova, Vitamin C, Avril, etc.). I still hear quite a bit of Liz in the songs, but I do have to admit they are somewhat generic at the same time. There are moments where a couple of these songs could be by any number of artists on the radio right now. Then again, maybe the things that aren't quite connecting with me are the very ones that make this record sound good and more appealing to you and others on the list. And maybe some of the elements I loved in Liz's earlier recordings are the ones you feel were "underdeveloped." Again, it's totally subjective. What makes a song special to one person may be what ruins it for another. There's no right or wrong; no one aesthetic is better than any other. I'm just worried that since there are bound to be differing opinions about the new songs that it could lead to some tense discussions on the list. I just hope we can all respect where others are coming from and appreciate that we have different tastes, rather than insult them -- for example, by saying things like "if you need your music to sound like crap" or "[you] prefer it raw and cold with a little dirt left on it." A lot of the criticisms I've seen on the list so far, especially by people like Steve, haven't even been along the lines of the lo-fi vs. slick production argument, but more about the quality of the songwriting itself. I recall a number of posts now that have accused Liz of dumbing herself down with these tracks. I'm not saying that I agree; I'm just giving my interpretation of where people are coming from. Anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. My personal favorite Liz album is still _Exile in Guyville_, and I don't know if she'll ever make another that will have the same kind of impact on me. But that has nothing to do with production values or lack thereof -- lo-fi indie rock only makes up a small part of my overall taste and at this point, I'll take good songwriting wherever I can get it. I have no problem with "professionalism" or state-of-the-art production. Aimee Mann is one of my favorite artists and her albums are always impeccably and tastefully produced, with a real attention to craft. Heck, I'm also a huge fan of Hole's much maligned _Celebrity Skin_. Among many of the band's earliest fans, it's terminally uncool to like that record; they can't get their heads around anything that's more polished than _Live Through This_. But, you know, it's a really accomplished album - -- it sounds phenomenal and the songs are well crafted, but the band's personality shines throughout. You're still not going to mistake it for anyone else. Anyway, I've probably rambled enough. I had originally wanted to respond to Steve's post, but this one caught my attention and I found myself hitting "reply" before I knew it. I'll try to reply to his later now. Cheers, Jase ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 07:22:15 -0700 (PDT) From: robert joyner Subject: Re: More menacing shit - --- Emil Breton wrote: > 2) If I hear of any local radio stations playing > "What > Can't I", I'm going to call them and request that > they > NOT play it. Why anyone would want to validate Liz's > ridiculous venture is beyond me. Are you working for > her? Who would benefit from mainstream acceptance of > this crap, other than Capitol records, Liz Phair, > and > Liz Phair's 'people'? Are you out of your gourds? > > > Steve > > [confidential to Robert Joyner: are we friends again > yet?] yes steve we are friends. all you other folks just remember though, if you diagree with steve and reply back with equal vitriol, he'll remember it four years later. the only problem I have with Dana, Steve, and that one james is their seeming begrudging anyone else for daring to like the record. Granted, i don't like the record, either, but i can only speak for how it sounds to my ear. Some folks will like a "fun" liz phair record, though it is kinda hard for me to get into. People talk about "evolving as an artist" and "career maturation", which i think are beside the point with the new album. This album is off in a total new direction, not really a progression from her past work even WCSE. It's not in the singer-songwriter vein, it's an over the top radio record and form is gonna follow function in relation to most of the album. Most of the album is not gonna have blow your mind lyrics or quirky guitar structures (quirky guitar chords give steve a stiffy you know), very few radio ready albums are. People complain about Liz dumbing down her work , but hey that is the essence of appealing to the masses. I'm not saying I like the results, but then again i'm not expecting the album to be something it's not meant to be (though i do have to admit on my first listen i thought "Why is that dog meowing at me?") BTW, i have listened to liz's music just as much as the next guy, read all the cool liz articles, did a liz biography for my website but i'm not so presumptious as to say I have a clue to who Liz is as a person. later Robert (whose girlfriend is reading aloud the Peanuts comic strip from the sunday paper to him) ===== - ------------------------------------------------------------ Nashville - A Liz Phair Web Site http://www.geocities.com/robnashville - ------------------------------------------------------------ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 11:20:26 -0400 From: owner-support-system@smoe.org (by way of Jase ) Subject: Bounced message From: "cheddarcat" To: Subject: menace Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 07:59:48 -0400 just to add to the general feelings of malaise-- i have to say that i agree with most of this menacing sentiment from emil. i'm personally saddened by what i've heard of liz's new stuff. i don't care if other people like it--me, it makes me sad. it's a weird phy7sical reaction like 'no-- oh no NO!' to the point where i'm guessing i'll probably un-sub soon because--i don't see the point of this anymore. i join lists like these to get the freshest tidbits of what an artist is doing, and all their hard to find stuff, etc., not to dissect why their new stuff depresses the hell out of me. i'm not much into explaining and analyzing in detail what i like or don't like about things-- i just like to LIKE them. that might sound anti-intellectual but i don't really care. i often like to read others analyzings but i rarely agree w/ them i guess. i was also a huge liz fan to an insane and nerdy degree. i still am of her earlier stuff. believe me i hate the fact that i don't like the new stuff. but i can't force myself. however let me just say i really dont think liz is unABLE to write good stuff anymore. i think maybe it's just a rough patch or something. of course songwriting is very hard, good songwriting is like a gift from some weird place and when you force it it gets even harder. it confounds me, i don't know, maybe she really DOES like the new stuff a lot, which, well, is a revelation about her musical tastes. i'm intrigued by the white stripes as the liz phair for guys or whatever, i've never listened but will check them out based on that. new cat power is very very very good. one artist who would never ever sell out is daniel johnston. judy >I'm still reeling > from the comment: "hey, so what if this is disposable > crap. If I want musical depth, I'll listen to > something else." GUH? Is no one else floored by the > irony here? Liz Phair always WAS what we listened to > when we wanted depth from a songwriter (right?), and > now if we want more of that depth, we should look > elsewhere? Jesus tap-dancing Christ! > > It's certainly not about wanting "another 'Exile'" so > fuck everyone who can't understand that (Liz and her > mom included). It's about wanting *continued* quality > songwriting and has nothing to do with "lo-fi" or > Tales of Extraordinary Early-90s Slacking, or whatever > it is you people are trying to say with your > She'll-never-make-another-Exile argument. Liz has > loads of personal melodrama to write about, and she's > obviously drawn on it for this record, so the angst is > definitely there. It's just delivered to us in > ultra-watered-down form, or "predigested" as Liz calls > it. I'm not impressed. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 11:17:09 -0400 From: Dermich@aol.com Subject: Music Police! Raid! Hide the uncool records! Raid! >I've read so many posts on here that ended with the >ominous message, designed to silence anyone who'd dare >disagree: "Your record collection don't exist, you >don't even know who Liz Phair is." Emil, don't get this wrong. Read it very, very carefully and take every word in. There are no coded messages here. Ready? Here goes: Fuck you. Like most trendy halfwits who blather on about (multi-millionarie) Noam Chomsky, you're whining about "being silenced" in order to let your own inner high-school-varsity-quarterback bully come to the surface under high-minded cover. Instead of taunting the fags and the geeks because of how they look, you're taunting people who THINK differently from you because of WHAT THEY LIKE SUBJECTIVELY. See the irony there? I could practically see (and smell!) the spittle on your monitor from the invective in your post, which is dripping with condescension and ridicule for the kids you don't find cool enough to be in your righteous club. Ooooh, am I SILENCING you? Are you feeling a chill wind blow across your critical-thinking butthole? Because, you realize, if someone ever criticizes what you say, that someone is obviously SILENCING you. As opposed to you saying things like: >I'm almost more stunned by the >appalling amount of complacency evident in the >opinions expressed by many here Or my favorite: >I haven't heard the complete album This, because it comes from a CHOMSKY READER (or wait, listener, as you said), is not SILENCING. This is merely EDUCATING the rest of us, right? We should thank you for setting us straight on the road to thinking CORRECTLY! Oh wait, there's no black/white, is there? Except that people who disagree with you are WRONG (and probably evil, too)! That much is chiaroscuro. Liking something Emil does not approve of = "complacency." I'll remember that. Perhaps, Emil, you could give us a recommended-listening list? That would make my pesky "developing my own taste and preferences" job a lot easier. Only problem is that you love the White Stripes, whom I find waaaay too bandwagon and of the moment, actually. But I am condemning you for loving an ultra-trendy band that's on the cover of every magazine out there right now? Nope. That must be my cleverly subversive way of SILENCING you. So Emil, congratulations. You've admitted you're ignorant about what you're opining on. But more than that, you've PROVEN to all of us that you can be an enormous dick while doing it! Very sincerely, Derek ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 12:29:41 EDT From: TitleTK@aol.com Subject: Re: Music Police! Raid! Hide the uncool records! Raid! In a message dated 4/28/03 11:18:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Dermich@aol.com writes: << Emil, don't get this wrong. Read it very, very carefully and take every word in. There are no coded messages here. Ready? Here goes: Fuck you. >> Ahhhh . . . well . . . on a different note anyone going to the Flaming Lips/Liz shows coming up? james ============================== James E. Place 1233 Rodman Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 (215) 893-0657 TitleTK@aol.com "Of course, he was a Harvard graduate. That might be grounds for justifiable homicide." John Dall (Brandon Shaw) Arthur Laurents (Rope) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 11:34:16 -0500 From: "Michael Kaufmann" Subject: Re: support-system-digest V6 #104 I couldn't resist this and really do wonder if it's true. Is Jack White the Frank Blank of the Oughts ('00s)? If anything will cure you of the current radio pandemonium the Pixies slicin up eyeballs will. Mike >>> owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org 04/28/03 04:15 AM >>> Emil raved-- I'd say Jack White is the new Liz Phair, as far as songwriters-that-speak-to-an-entire-gender go (Pitchfork.com and Spin mag alluded to this as well), and White Blood Cells is the Exile in Guyville we boys never had. I was seriously going to write a comparative essay about Jack and Liz, because I felt the similarities were so strong. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:11:15 -0500 From: "Mike Katsoulis" Subject: damn <> what an immature, sad, 24 year old ASS. if i got anything from reading that pitiful rant, it was the writer really enjoys rolling joints. before making such damning criticisms, try listening to the entire album first - you know, being completely informed - common logic and stuff. liz has made it completely clear why she worked with the matrix - to have a HIT album, and to sell records, and make MONEY. anyone who thinks she can no longer write quality songs is kidding themselves. listen to "good love never dies". enough said. mike ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:58:17 -0400 From: owner-support-system@smoe.org (by way of Jase ) Subject: Bounced message Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 11:16:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Emil Breton Subject: my pathetic, equally arrogant, paper-thin rebuttal To: support-system@smoe.org Okay, then! I was trying to use the "Support Our Troops" notion to make it easier for people to understand why Liz's justification is just, as one friend put it, "rhetoric she concocted to appease us." I thought I'd explained this well enough, but upon close re-reading of my post, I noticed, along with lots of spelling errors and 'wrong words', that maybe I didn't elaborate sufficiently. I'd no intention of starting a political discussion. The amount I have to endure in my own social setting has been enough to practically cure me of ever caring. Robert Joyner: you are hilarious. Believe me, I'd *rather* my girlfriend read comics aloud to me! I ought to just let you have the podium, because you seem to have a better grip on the situation. But I'm going to take credit for initially mixin' it up! Derek: YEE-ow! I don't know much about Noam Chomsky, nor do I necessarily share (or even know) the rest of his views. I was merely quoting his "Support Our troops" thing and Carapella responded with more rhetoric, which didn't solve anything. I know I'm a rude, inconsiderate cunt, and maybe I should have gone about my tirade in more palatable way, but where would that have gotten us? Quoth Liz: "I'm just rebellious." The idea was to start discussion, to not sit back and let sentiments like "This is Liz Phair's best album!" go unchallenged. In a time when American culture has reached a new low in terms of conformity, plasticity, and crassness, I think it's vitally important for people who give a damn about such things to stand up and let it be known that shit is fucked-up. That's Jack White's platform, incidentally. Btw, I'm sorry you don't like the White Stripes, and I'm sorry they've gotten so popular. But I never said nothing about not being able to like stuff that's popular. Were you trying to say this is a contradiction in my tastes, or were you ironically revealing yourself to be a snob? I fear the subversive elements in your post may have gone over my big head. As for Liz, Robert Joyner I think is the first person among us to point out the 'form following function' thing (good insight). I guess I'm just too attached to the idea of Liz being one of the greats to accept that she's not interested in making artful music now. I just felt insulted -- by Liz and by her throngs of supporters, who were claiming that this album is, and I quote: "Brilliant. Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant." That's what offends ME. I feel like I have to be apologetic (although I'm not quite sure why, maybe it's the Catholicism) for being so rebellious, Derek, but it seems ridiculous to have to walk on eggshells. I'm not no fucking Communist dictator, don't worry. I just think that the stuff I've nerdily obsessed over for the past ten years has all slid far too much to the brain-dead side of the high/low art continuum. (Btw, you should write an advice column, your style is very much like Dan Savage, or Judge Judy. That's not an insult; I like both of them.) Arrogance aside, I'm still surprised that people missed the ENTIRE point of my post. I was trying to tear down the misconception that the Angry Fans are desperate for more Guyville, or lo-fi, or whatever. I made it explicitly clear that what I want is more great songwriting. Instead, Liz went PAST Sheryl Crow's "Soak Up the Sun" (which is a good song!) and straight into Michelle Branch territory. I never called it "evil", I was just saying, Who do you think you're fooling? Liz knows she's not fooling anyone, as evidenced by her first e-mail to Ken ("to all my brainiac fans, who don't need their art predigested [...] have a laugh and wait for the demo material to trickle out"), but I still detect more than a trace of condescension in her defense of her album, so I'm responding with a TRUCKLOAD of it. Fight fire with fire! Build bigger bombs! As for my alleged music snobbery: I actually kind of dig "Extraordinary", in a way that's part- "Oh it's the new Liz Phair!" and part- "It's like Avril Lavigne! It's not so bad!" I don't really have anything against Avril Lavigne. I worked at a bakery for a long time, and the radio was always tuned to a Clear Channel station. But I could always find songs I liked. It may shock people to learn that I liked "Complicated" as well as Creed's deliciously overwrought (but rocking!) "One Last Breath". I actually like those songs, genuinely. Even Third Eye blind's "Never Let You Go" (great riff!), and I know how you feel about that band. But I was never stupid enough to say "yes, THIS is quality songwriting." I would never call "Extraordinary" or "Why can't I" or fuckin' "Rock Me" 'exceptional', as Liz has. I'm anxious to hear the rest of the album, but there's no fucking way I'm going to say "This is the Liz Phair album we've all been waiting for!" like some have. What the hell were you guys getting at with that, anyway? My problem is that the LYRICS suck. Liz has admitted to as much: "It's hard to write good songs, frankly" (SXSW interview); on her demo material: "Many are just me and my guitar, maybe not as good as at 25..." Again, Robert already addressed this, so my point is now moot, but for some people, obviously, this question of ability vs. willingness to write good songs is still a bit muddy, and this is my take. I'll get back to you after I hear the rest of it. In the meantime, I can certainly still talk about lyrics. I'll take the heat, I don't care. I am thinking critically, albeit a little heatedly, and the only 'valid' response I've gotten from the opposing forces is "Fuck you." All part of an apparent worldwide effort to tamp down any questioning of authority, if you want to make those kinds of assumptions. It's just like that guy who said, essentially, "If you don't like this record, then go away." Which is another way of saying "I can't stand to think objectively about this. Please let's not talk about it. It hurts too much. Let's not talk at all." What's the point of having a Liz Phair discussion group then? As Judy said, maybe it's best not to discuss. Let's all unsubscribe. There's nothing to talk about anymore. I'm reminded of the furor that rippled through the base of die-hard Simpsons fans several years ago, when it became clear the show had taken a serious turn for the worse. Executive producer Ian Maxtone Graham responded by calling the internet community "beetle-browed" and said "They see everything as part of a vast plan ... That's why they're on the Internet and we're writing the show." It's like, you either demand better, and risk getting called a nerd or a cry-baby or, in this case, a bully, OR you just shut the fuck up and not criticize something that you KNOW has been vulgarized and cheapened. I, for one, wish that The Simpsons had been canceled five years ago. I have a friend who despises the show, and it's because she'd only seen a few of the more recent (read: crass, one-dimensional) episodes and has no idea how brilliant it once was. The same thing goes for Liz Phair. I have the same fears. Maybe that's silly? I just think Liz would be better off NOT making music, as it's obvious she's ill-suited to do so at this point in her life. A lot of you are like "We've waited so long for this!" and "We're lucky to even get a fourth record from her; how DARE you criticize it?" I don't share that viewpoint, obviously, but it's hard to argue with people who don't want to argue... So what, then? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:42:57 EDT From: LilRussianGirl@aol.com Subject: don ho love songs I remember Liz saying that she wanted to be able to write love songs that don't sound like don-ho. I was noticing today that there are love songs on here (LP) and they don't sound like don ho. Hopefully she is happy about that. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 18:48:45 -0400 From: ReallyHip@aol.com Subject: Re: don ho love songs If you don't like the new liz, get off the list. - -Michael ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 19:06:06 -0400 From: Jase Subject: Liz to play Austin City Limits festival A bit of news from billboard.com: [http://www.billboard.com/bb/daily/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1875872] Second 'Austin City Limits' Fest Slated R.E.M., Al Green, Lucinda Williams, Rosanne Cash, and Mavis Staples are among the artists already confirmed to perform at the second annual Austin City Limits Music Festival. A limited number of three-day passes for the multi-stage event, which will be held Sept. 19-21 in Austin, Texas' Zilker Park, go on sale Saturday (May 3) via the event's official Web site. The pass will cost $65. Cash and Staples will be among the artists performing on the event's first day, while R.E.M. will headline the event's closing bill. Other confirmed performers are Liz Phair, Ben Harper, Jack Johnson, String Cheese Incident, Patty Griffin, Alejandro Escovedo, Al Green, Leftover Salmon, Topaz, the Derailers, Richard Buckner, the Gourds, Robert Randolph, Ween, G. Love & Special Sauce, Spoon, Galactic, O.A.R., Gomez, Doyle Bramhall, and Ian Moore. Several acts that performed at 2002's inaugural event will return for a second year, including Asleep At The Wheel, Los Lobos, the String Cheese Incident, and Pat Green. The festival's full line-up will be announced June 12. At that time, information regarding individual day tickets will also be released. Named after the long-running PBS performance series, the Austin City Limits Music Festival was established last year as a two-day event. Among those who performed on the six-stages were Wilco, Emmylou Harris, Jimmie Vaughan, Kelly Willis, Ryan Adams, Luna, the Jayhawks, Nickel Creek, Sound Tribe Sector 9, Allison Moorer, and Gillian Welch. - -- Barry A. Jeckell, N.Y. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 20:57:54 EDT From: TitleTK@aol.com Subject: Re: don ho love songs In a message dated 4/28/03 6:50:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ReallyHip@aol.com writes: << If you don't like the new liz, get off the list. -Michael >> I've been quiet for awhile simply b/c I thought the whole thing had been beaten to death. But for some reason somebody claiming others should "get off the list" irked me in a way I can not quite make out. I'd like to make my position clear, I do not like the album (and yes I've heard it). In fact, I despise the new album. But to each his own, right? I don't want anyone to feel as though I am condeming their musical tastes, because frankly I don't know any of you well enough. Please understand that I am a total musical snob. It think the best bands of all time are Sonic Youth, The Talking Heads, and The Pixies and I will gladyly defend any of these bands with true substance . . . it's not hard, when they already give you something to work with. I can't defend Liz anymore because there isn't any substance. >>I've got to listen PAST all the crap and stoned ramblings and under-developed songwriting on her early efforts to hear what makes her good and special. Now that's been stripped away and some of you are saying, "No, thank you. Don't serve me the artichoke heart steamed and dipped in butter and garlic. I prefer it raw and cold with a little dirt left on it. I'll work past all that to get to the good part." It's hard to fathom. Listen through a cheap boom box on 10 if you need your music to sound like crap. << Yet, her early recordings do indeed have substance . . . so I have no problem defending. If you think EIG (is that what you're talking about?) was simplistic ramblings I urge you to give it another listen. These songs contain rhythms and sound effects that could not be created by any computer. How great is it when you hear that slurp at the end of Mesmerizing? Doesn't it still send shivers up your spine? I think if Liz wanted to turn this into a pop album, no one would have stopped her. As it is, I don't even consider it very lo-fi (and find it to sound nothing like listening through a cheap boom box). I really hope you were not referring to the songs on this album as underdeveloped. Each song sneaks up on you very slowly and almost always ends with some creepy underlying lyric or riff . . . even the infamous Fuck and Run ends without any real satisfaction, which makes it even creepier than it may have been. Now if you were talking about Girlysounds, there is some very underdeveloped songwriting on there . . . but it wasn't ever really meant for public consumption, so you can't really judge her on it. I know people hate me on this list . . . one girl even told me I was creepy, and needed a girlfriend . . . but even to her I say . . . please don't unsubscribe, where else can you open your email every other morning to a very friendly "fuck you?" james ============================== James E. Place 1233 Rodman Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 (215) 893-0657 TitleTK@aol.com "Of course, he was a Harvard graduate. That might be grounds for justifiable homicide." John Dall (Brandon Shaw) Arthur Laurents (Rope) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 22:24:26 -0400 From: "trent [hardcore since '74l]" Subject: RE: don ho love songs Exactly right ... We'll all never agree ... Some hate the new music, some love the new music ... I've not heard the new music yet so I'm gonna be mum ... But reading the shit flying back and forth is entertaining ... It's good to have ANYTHING to discuss about Liz Phair again ... Woo! :) - -----Original Message----- From: owner-support-system@smoe.org [mailto:owner-support-system@smoe.org] On Behalf Of TitleTK@aol.com Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 8:58 PM To: ReallyHip@aol.com; support-system@smoe.org Subject: Re: don ho love songs In a message dated 4/28/03 8:58:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, TitleTK@aol.com writes: >>where else can you open your email every other morning to a very friendly "fuck you?" james ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 23:00:08 -0400 From: ReallyHip@aol.com Subject: RE: don ho love songs I'd rather people just left than gave six page dissertations on their farewell to Liz's music and how much of a sellout they think she's become. It's music. I think far too many of us are taking Liz's career arc too seriously. - -Michael ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 23:21:56 EDT From: TitleTK@aol.com Subject: Re: don ho love songs >>I'd rather people just left than gave six page dissertations on their farewell to Liz's music and how much of a sellout they think she's become. It's music. I think far too many of us are taking Liz's career arc too seriously. - -Michael<< But isn't that our choice? I still don't understand why everyone continues to make personal jabs . . . I have total respect for everyone on this list . . . we all have our different ways of looking at things. I'd like to see your side of it as well. james ============================== James E. Place 1233 Rodman Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 (215) 893-0657 TitleTK@aol.com "I'm loud, darling, but never cheap -- Jaye Davidson (Dil) Neil Jordon (The Crying Game) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 01:00:55 -0400 From: Charles M Subject: Copy protection on advance cds of the new record I don't think this has been mentioned yet, but the advance discs for the new album are marked "Copy Controlled" on the back insert and on the disc itself. The drive in my computer makes an awful racket when the disc is spinning. I successfully ripped MP3 and AAC (MPEG-4) files, but they have some minor artifacts -- occasional popping, etc. I've not yet compared playback from my audio CD player against that of the computer, but I'll try a A/B taste-test in the next few days. My guess is that the disc employs something akin to the Cactus Data Shield (see the article here for more info -- http://www.theregister.com/content/archive/27960.html) to make computer-based playback/copying/ripping less simple and attractive. This is my first encounter with a "protected" audio cd; let's hope the commercial disc doesn't have the same "feature". Charles http://mywebpages.comcast.net/discographer/ ------------------------------ End of support-system-digest V6 #105 ************************************