Grammys - melisma for everybody, all the time...
Artie Turner
Rob Adelman
pain as she could possibly inflict on us, she pulled some more out of
her hat. Blech!!
Steve King
> > How many syllables can you sing in "I love you?" Sheee....
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melisma
> >
>
news:c06urd$12e1ak$1...@ID-75267.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I agree. Truly truly awful. Just when I thought that was about as much
> pain as she could possibly inflict on us, she pulled some more out of
> her hat. Blech!!
>
one were present at such a spectacle, one would want to rush the stage to
say, "Stop that, girl. Shame on you. You were hired to sing. Now, sing if
you can."
Steve King
Rob Adelman
In my opinion, Prince was the only high point.
So many low points. But that award goes to Yoko Ono. Trying to listen
to her speech was uterly painful. Truly nerve racking.
Mike
stuff.
What really made me puke was speech near the end about downloading and the
public
service notice. I have never downloaded music illegally but that came off
like an
extortion piece. They aren't doing themselves any favors. (NARAS and RIAA).
"Rob Adelman" <SPAMLESS...@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
news:c072gc$13ou6t$1...@ID-75267.news.uni-berlin.de...
Jay - atldigi
<SPAMLESS...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
I disagree. I think it picked up quite nicely in the second half. It was
better than the past couple (from what I remember of them). Earth Wind &
Fire rocked and the whole funk section was good, and Outkast at the end
was very entertaining. There were certainly enough bad moments to go
around early on, after Prince and before EW&F - Yoko moment included.
One think that struck me was the list of people we've lost this year.
Not only was the list absolutely huge, but some real musical icons and
great talents were lost.
--
Jay Frigoletto
Mastersuite
Los Angeles
promastering.com
Yuri T.
anti-piracy stance, when they said it was Music Education I actually
thought they meant it. Incredibly self seving and ..well smarmy I
guess.
Roger W. Norman
news:_46dncWuvKT...@comcast.com...
> Prince hasn't worn well for me over time. I kind of liked the funk medley
> stuff.
> What really made me puke was speech near the end about downloading and the
> public
> service notice. I have never downloaded music illegally but that came off
> like an
> extortion piece. They aren't doing themselves any favors. (NARAS and
RIAA).
I thought that one of the redeeming moments of the show. It's about time
the industry tries to educate the consumer and showing that there won't be
any new music if people can't support themselves by earning a living in
music. Perhaps there's something to be said for developing a new method for
national distribution, but if you've got to work at Wal-Mart during the day
to support your efforts at music during the night, it kinda kills the
ability to make art worth creating.
The point is, regardless of whom the messenger is, the message is still just
as valid.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Roger W. Norman
And I do believe it's the first time I've seen two posthumous nominations.
Surprising in that George passed away what seems a long time ago now,
although I know it wasn't.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
"Jay - atldigi" <atl...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:atldigi-77CE8B...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
Artie Turner
> music. Perhaps there's something to be said for developing a new method for
> national distribution, but if you've got to work at Wal-Mart during the day
> to support your efforts at music during the night, it kinda kills the
> ability to make art worth creating.
>
> The point is, regardless of whom the messenger is, the message is still just
> as valid.
That's one idea I disagree with 100%. I think it's time people speak out
say that some messages AREN'T valid. Some messages are shallow,
pretentious, vulgar garbage. I think the Superbowl was a big wake-up
call to a lot of sleep-walkers that out pop "culture" is drowning in
trashy messages that aren't worthy of copyright protection or respect.
My 2 cents, adjusted for inflation!
Artie
>
Bill Lorentzen
demostrated it perfectly. There's no space. It is too constant, and in your
face. It felt like there wasn't one measure in the whole thing that she
wasn't singing. The only relief was at the very end of that number when she
put in those dramatic pauses. You gotta learn to let it breath. As talented
as she is, she still has to learn to let the audience contribute, and that
requires space for a type of dialog to occur.
Bill L
"Artie Turner" <art...@swbell.nyet> wrote in message
news:mPCVb.20593$aZ3...@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...
Mike Rivers
> This Grammy show was the worst piece of crap I have seen. An all time low.
Oh, they say that every year around here. Don't bother wathcing music
events on TV. They'll only piss you off. Go out and hear a band
instead.
--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mri...@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Jim Gilliland
> We aren't getting any younger you know! <g>
>
> And I do believe it's the first time I've seen two posthumous nominations.
> Surprising in that George passed away what seems a long time ago now,
> although I know it wasn't.
Only two? George Harrison, Warren Zevon, and June Carter Cash all won
posthumous awards last night.
PeterViehoever
>...Earth Wind &
>Fire rocked...
I didn't record the show so I can't check it. Did something funny happen to
EW&F's percussion platform during their set? I blinked and it looked like it
had dropped a bit with the percussionists looking at each other. Or maybe it
shook a bit.
Peter
Bob Cain
"Roger W. Norman" wrote:
>
> I thought that one of the redeeming moments of the show. It's about time
> the industry tries to educate the consumer and showing that there won't be
> any new music if people can't support themselves by earning a living in
> music.
But sending a suit in a beard out there to say it with a
fairly unrelated prelude made sure it was well wide of the
target audience.
The messenger is as important as the message and the message
shouldn't be disguised. Kid are experts at spotting
disguises and merciless in disregarding disguised messages.
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."
A. Einstein
Roger W. Norman
I can see what you're saying Artie, but the fact is that one doesn't need to
accept the message, particularly in that concept. Let's face it, if CBS
yada yada don't get sales for their advertisers due to the half-time show,
then I think that's another message perhaps they ought to listen to. After
all, I'm sure 20 mule team Borax wouldn't want to spend $2.5 mill for a 30
second commercial that doesn't sell product, and if the halftime show turns
people off, then obviously they won't be selling their product (I realize
that 20 mule team Borax doesn't sell shit now, Artie; just making a point).
I don't consider the two things equal. Bad taste is one thing, and that's
what JJ and company promulgated on the unassuming public. But it's not that
far off base for NARAS, which has years and years of quality public service
endeavors of established track record, to put up a commercial that basically
shows exactly what can happen to music if downloading isn't shown to be what
it is, which is stealing content. I thought it was perfectly clear.
Now I admit, NARAS and RIAA are somewhat grouped into being the whole of the
industry, but it's not the same thing. NARAS has previously promoted
reinvigorating school music programs by making a claim to cutting crime and
giving children a creative outlet, they've been at the top of the heap when
it comes to having seminars, fund raising activities, etc., and RIAA simply
sucks because it's totally slanted towards the majors, as it should be.
But regardless of whether it's NARAS or RIAA the message is still the same.
Perhaps it's harder to take a bitter pill from a doctor you don't like, but
it doesn't mean the pill isn't necessary.
Roger W. Norman
walking out and making this same type of statement, which is to a large
degree totally away from the federated RIAA members who have a much larger
stake. Just last year the "then" current president of NARAS walked out and
introduced a program to help take up the slack that our schools have been
forced into ignoring, which is music in schools. Wednesday I start working
on yet another jazz festival whose purpose is to support jazz by offering a
national/international scholarship program for jazz students. It's a worthy
cause and this is year number 8 that I will be working this thing for no
money and have spent maybe $20k on equipment primarily to help with it's
success. Not only that but we support Students Without Walls, offering
realtime live experience in all the aspects that go into putting on a
production that has 5 live rooms of jazz music and these kids lovingly
participate. Kids no more than even you give them credit for, and it's an
absolute that if you take away the ability of our talent to make a living
making music, then music won't have a life.
The point being that NARAS has been a proponent of music, and the RIAA has
been a continued proponent of the majors, as an Association should be. Both
can't be caught up in the same concept and have the same roots for that
concept because they both come from different places and have different
goals. I applaud NARAS for their forthright efforts to communicate the
ultimate consequence of downloading music without trying to call anyone
names or perhaps bringing them or their parents or their grandparents to
court.
These are two separate entities here, and awareness of a problem is a key
concern. That the awareness might benefit RIAA members is of little
consequences because it benefits the artists more.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
"Bob Cain" <arc...@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:4027C976...@arcanemethods.com...
Roger W. Norman
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
"Jim Gilliland" <usemyl...@cheerful.com> wrote in message
news:99OdnTtNwNN...@adelphia.com...
Roger W. Norman
know calls it vocal whistling, although she was more talking about Mariah.
Still, too many notes, too little to say. Mostly even Eddie Van Halen
learned that too many notes spoiled the stew. How can you approach a woman
who thinks it's her effort to say something important about music? Beyonce
is Whitney Houston's cousin, right? Perhaps this is the bad part of gospel
music showing through. While it may give rise to testifying in church, it
doesn't do anything for me but want me to play a lot of Stevie Vai for mood
music when a show is about ready to go.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
"Bill Lorentzen" <lore...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eBOVb.182$dp5...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Bryson
Do you doubt she was "feeling" all of those notes?
How 'bout when that shit's all autotuned to where it sounds like a
sequencer triggering voice samples (I guess that's actually what it is
after all the processing is said'n done).
Buster Mudd
> Perhaps there's something to be said for developing a new method for
> national distribution, but if you've got to work at Wal-Mart during the day
> to support your efforts at music during the night, it kinda kills the
> ability to make art worth creating.
>
What?!?! Show me *one* artist whose income is that close to the cusp,
where they would be moving enough product to quit their day job were
it not for those nefarious downloaders!
Roger W. Norman
it's the committment and the schedule. Today's musicians are too oriented
towards success in the field of selling records. Most musicians know that
you have to play, and most musicians I know play all the time, whether it be
a local club, teaching, or a major event. When you view it in those terms,
then I think you know what I mean.
I'd dare say that, outside of the hardest working people in music being jazz
musicians, the Nighthawks were a great example. Not a lot in the way of
success as far as records go, but they at least knew enough to realize that
they had to play to pay the bills. But because record sales have become the
measurement of success, it negates all that and most guys today are looking
for the big kill, not the lifetime of enjoyment in participating in making
music and entertaining people. A lifetime of endeavor should equal
excellence, yet we no longer have that particular goal, so we don't seem to
have musicians that can play more than 3 or 4 chords on a guitar, and we
definitely don't have musicians that would be considered musicians by those
that are totally engrossed with expanding their talent and their ability to
convey that talent to a crowd.
And I daresay that there are lot's of examples, whether we know the whole
truth about the downloading situation or not. For instance, there are a
couple of ways to look at it. Joan Osbourne had a highly touted album on
her first outing, yet she had to resort to putting her second album together
herself. Now I don't believe that it has anything to do with downloading,
but it shows there are enough problems in the world for talented people
without having to worry about the loss of sales due to downloading. If you
disagree then so be it. All I know is that if the situation becomes one of
having a patron in order to pursue one's art, then it's just as possible
that art will become a manner for those patrons to express their ideals
whether it compromises the art or not. Creativity isn't a subject for the
masses. Jabberwocky makes no sense to the majority, just as apparently the
concept of downloading makes no sense to those that would download and
deprive an artist of the opportunity to feed their family.
So I'd say, even though I can't put my finger on one person that has gone
into the bread lines because of downloading, it has no place in an honest
society that values it's artists. No artist has to be a millionaire, but
then again, no artist deserves to have that opportunity taken from them
because others aren't concerned about the rights of an artist.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
"Buster Mudd" <mr_fu...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:936ad1fd.04020...@posting.google.com...
ryanm
>
> endeavors of established track record, to put up a commercial that
basically
> shows exactly what can happen to music if downloading isn't shown to be
what
> it is, which is stealing content. I thought it was perfectly clear.
>
stop. You can starve them, beat them, and kill them as much as you want, and
people will continue to make music, until the end of time. Now, some
industry execs just might have to take a pay cut, but that's a different
thing entirely.
A more realistic commercial would've been that the house music stopped
and suddenly *there's a band on the stage, playing live music* instead of
the usual canned music you hear in dance clubs. All of a sudden it's a
unique cultural experience instead of a carbon copy of every other club in
the nation that's playing the current top 10 songs over and over again. Now
that would be a PSA worthy of applause, and would promote music in an
appropriate way, but probably not the intended way.
ryanm
ryanm
>
> These are two separate entities here, and awareness of a problem is a key
> concern. That the awareness might benefit RIAA members is of little
> consequences because it benefits the artists more.
>
don't know or care about the difference, he is just "the man" trying to tell
them that they shouldn't download, and by prefacing it with the stuff about
art and music programs in schools he essentially dirtied his cause by tying
it (in the mind of the majority of viewers) to the RIAA's cause of suing
grandmothers (we're talking about public perception here). They did a major
disservice to the good work they've done in the past.
ryanm
Jay - atldigi
<lore...@verizon.net> wrote:
> I finally figured out what I really don't like about over-singing.
Everything! It's a widespread ugly trend. Many singers can't even hack
the basics, and when they try to riff, it completes the trainwreck. My
advice: practice, listen to Ella, and shut up every now and again!
ryanm
>
> I'd dare say that, outside of the hardest working people in music being
jazz
> musicians, the Nighthawks were a great example. Not a lot in the way of
> success as far as records go, but they at least knew enough to realize
that
> they had to play to pay the bills. But because record sales have become
the
> measurement of success, it negates all that and most guys today are
looking
> for the big kill, not the lifetime of enjoyment in participating in making
> music and entertaining people. A lifetime of endeavor should equal
> excellence, yet we no longer have that particular goal, so we don't seem
to
> have musicians that can play more than 3 or 4 chords on a guitar, and we
> definitely don't have musicians that would be considered musicians by
those
> that are totally engrossed with expanding their talent and their ability
to
> convey that talent to a crowd.
>
is *more* downloading, because it would remove the talentless losers who are
just looking to become quickie pop-stars from the running and leave only
those who do it for the love of the music. Right?
ryanm
ryanm
news:20040209123837...@mb-m06.aol.com...
>
> I didn't record the show so I can't check it. Did something funny happen
to
> EW&F's percussion platform during their set? I blinked and it looked like
it
> had dropped a bit with the percussionists looking at each other. Or maybe
it
> shook a bit.
>
"caught up" with a quick drop that made the congas rock precariously. I only
noticed because I'm a conga player and was checking out his gear. <g>
ryanm
Bob Olhsson
>...I applaud NARAS for their forthright efforts to communicate the
> ultimate consequence of downloading music without trying to call anyone
> names or perhaps bringing them or their parents or their grandparents to
> court.
Something a lot of people are missing is the fact that record labels MUST
defend copyrights by suing or else face claims of negligence from artists
along with claims by infringers that they have surrendered ownership to the
public domain. They are completely between a rock and a hard place on this
issue and not just being mean or insensitive. The value of their entire
catalogs is at stake.
--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com
Artie Turner
> "Artie Turner" <art...@swbell.nyet> wrote in message
> news:exNVb.1026$j97.32...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>Roger W. Norman wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>The point is, regardless of whom the messenger is, the message is still
>
> just
>
>>>as valid.
>>
>>That's one idea I disagree with 100%. I think it's time people speak out
>>say that some messages AREN'T valid. Some messages are shallow,
>>pretentious, vulgar garbage. I think the Superbowl was a big wake-up
>>call to a lot of sleep-walkers that out pop "culture" is drowning in
>>trashy messages that aren't worthy of copyright protection or respect.
>>
>>My 2 cents, adjusted for inflation!
>>
>>Artie
>
>
> I can see what you're saying Artie, but the fact is that one doesn't need to
> accept the message, particularly in that concept.
I don't think you understood what I said. You seemed to be defending all
"artists" or "messengers" as legitimate messengers. I say that not all
"content" has value, regardless of whether it has the RIAA's or NARAS's
imprimatur or not.
I'm saying that a lot of music that's for sale by RIAA/NARAA affiliated
artists, is garbage. The "message" from Janet Jackson is garbage. JJ's
message is NOT just as valid as, say, Van Cliburn's. The RIAA's past
public service doesn't legitimize JJ and melisma-drenched histrionics.
Artie
Mike
One of my hangups is this. You can't expect the consumer to work to
protect the industry if you don't look out for the consumer. The whole
radio/MTV/CD/Distribution system has become a racket type scam which
has lots of legal protection from legislation to big fat lawyers etc.
I mean, when the consumer has had to deal with Ticketmasters ticket
jack-up schemes, anti-trust CD price fixing, complete choking of
musical diversity because of lack of interest in smaller market
artists, failure to adapt to changing technology and so on and so on,
how can you blame them? How bout the industry show it cares for those
it is trying to sell to?
EggHd
The industry got a bad rap on this one. It was meant to keep the retailers who
are now going BK, Wharehouse, Tower and all those stores are now going to be
gone. This means less shelf space and opportunities.
Welcome to walmart and bestbuy.
---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"
R Krizman
fairly unrelated prelude made sure it was well wide of the
target audience.
The messenger is as important as the message and the message
shouldn't be disguised. Kid are experts at spotting
disguises and merciless in disregarding disguised messages. >>
Neil Portnow is not a "beard in a suit". He's a family friend who I know to be
honest and straightforward, and I think NARAS is lucky to have him. And
moreover, what he said was absolutely true.
Personally, I loved the PSA he introduced. Thought it made the point in a
creative and dramatic way.
-R
Jim Kollens
disguises and merciless in disregarding disguised messages. >> >>
With all due respect, I'd rephrase that: Kids think they are experts at
spotting disguises and mercilessy disregard the obvious. I love kids but I'm
old enough to know better. I was once the kid who thought he was the expert
and reality has kicked me so hard that my ass has never really recovered.
EggHd
Neil is a truly nice, smart man. He's one of the good guys and NARAS is lucky
to have him.
---------------------------------------
R Krizman
and suddenly *there's a band on the stage, playing live music* instead of
the usual canned music you hear in dance clubs. All of a sudden it's a
unique cultural experience instead of a carbon copy of every other club in
the nation that's playing the current top 10 songs over and over again. Now
that would be a PSA worthy of applause, and would promote music in an
appropriate way, but probably not the intended way.
ryanm >>
Well the ultimate conclusion of your argument is that recorded music has no
value and everything should be live. That's fine if you think that, but what
are you doing here?
So you don't like recorded music, but in another thread you were dissing all
the live Grammy performers. My friend, you are in a perfect position to go out
and make your own uniqe and vital musical statement.
I always do my best work when nothing out there satisfies me.
Best of luck.
The world (at least the virtual world) awaits.
-R
Les Cargill
>
> This Grammy show was the worst piece of crap I have seen. An all time low.
>
>
> So many low points. But that award goes to Yoko Ono. Trying to listen
> to her speech was uterly painful. Truly nerve racking.
What are you talking about?!? They had George Clinton on
a Grammy show. Earth Wind & Fire , too. That's gotta be
worth *something*.
Even if it's because Outkast did that one song, at least it's
a vein worth mining. Even the Justin Timberlake song had a
decent arrangement. Hadda Rhodes, onstage.
Maybe it's just me, but I actually sat through the whole thing
for the first time in decades. Very entertaining show.
Who was the guy playing a pedal steel with a funk band? Black
Homburg fuzzy lookin' hat. Them guys put on a show, now.
Sounded awesome.
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
>
> "Mike" <madel...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:_46dncWuvKT...@comcast.com...
> > Prince hasn't worn well for me over time. I kind of liked the funk medley
> > stuff.
> > What really made me puke was speech near the end about downloading and the
> > public
> > service notice. I have never downloaded music illegally but that came off
> > like an
> > extortion piece. They aren't doing themselves any favors. (NARAS and
> RIAA).
>
> I thought that one of the redeeming moments of the show. It's about time
> the industry tries to educate the consumer and showing that there won't be
> any new music if people can't support themselves by earning a living in
> national distribution, but if you've got to work at Wal-Mart during the day
> to support your efforts at music during the night, it kinda kills the
> ability to make art worth creating.
>
> The point is, regardless of whom the messenger is, the message is still just
> as valid.
The little commmercial did not work *at all*, though. Pacing was all
wrong.
>
> --
>
> Roger W. Norman
>
> SirMusic Studio
>
> >
> > "Rob Adelman" <SPAMLESS...@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:c072gc$13ou6t$1...@ID-75267.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > > This Grammy show was the worst piece of crap I have seen. An all time
> low.
> > >
> > > In my opinion, Prince was the only high point.
> > >
> > > So many low points. But that award goes to Yoko Ono. Trying to listen
> > > to her speech was uterly painful. Truly nerve racking.
> > >
> >
> >
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
As a spot, it was a total dud. It had no hook at the end, at all. It was a
terribly designed commercial. I don't think, anyway, that you can
end a spot with silence, and not really relieve the silence with
something. *I* understand that, but other people will simply miss the
point.
--
Les Cargill
Rob Adelman
Les Cargill wrote:
> What are you talking about?!? They had George Clinton on
> a Grammy show. Earth Wind & Fire , too. That's gotta be
> worth *something*.
Sure, and Chick and lots of others too. All of who I have heard sound
great for years. They didn't sound great on Sunday. y.m.m.v.
Les Cargill
Yeha, but they sounded better'n most of what's on TV anymore. They at
least sounded, and I was pretty happy with that.
I suspect there may have been the expected tech problems - things
were coming and going all night.
--
Les Cargill
Roger W. Norman
both ways. If the majors do something positive, then there's the agents
that say they've done bad. If it benefits RIAA, it's atrocious, and if it
benefits NARAS it's a ploy. NARAS isn't the labels, but I have to admit
that they ultimately gain their income from the majors. I'm not against
that. The majors actually play a major part in the distribution of new
material, what with advertising, setting up local radio interviews, etc.,
where these guys can make their own money with concession sales. I don't
see where people lose in all of this. I do believe that the majors charge
too much money hence leaving the group's public in a bind to be able to
afford new product, but I don't believe that there's anything inherently
wrong with "the deal" if everybody signs it.
NARAS doesn't seem to play games because they are the arm of the engineers
and producers and musicians. RIAA has one thing in mind, which is to
promote and maintain controll over the major's property. This is not rocket
science. Players have the ability to say no to RIAA's associated majors,
and NARAS doesn't feel a thing. That NARAS put this commercial out makes me
think that someone is taking a positive attitude towards negating
downloading, and they simply expounded on the ultimate outcome. "The day
the music died".
Do any of us want the music to die? Not likely or I have spent the last 15
years doing the wrong thing. But if we don't back someone that has an
educational program that shows what we've been talking about for the past 5
years then we don't deserve the fallout of getting the message across. In
other words, if we don't make something out of it, then it's bad.
Everyone seems to forget the music.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
"Bob Olhsson" <o...@hyperback.com> wrote in message
news:n_UVb.434$hR....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Roger W. Norman
losers, then why should they have the spotlight? Because the Sex Pistols
did, or what?
If you can't read between the lines and come up with a symphony then I
assume that the answer is "yes" to your question.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
"ryanm" <ry...@fatchicksinpartyhats.com> wrote in message
news:102g57e...@corp.supernews.com...
Bob Cain
>
> Neil Portnow is not a "beard in a suit". He's a family friend who I know to be
> honest and straightforward, and I think NARAS is lucky to have him. And
> moreover, what he said was absolutely true.
You missed my point, probably because it was obscure. I'm
pointing out what the kids saw, not what you saw through a
more objective and knowledable filter.
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."
A. Einstein
Bob Cain
The point is the same. It doesn't matter at all what one
thinks one said or conveyed if communication is the goal.
All that matters is what is heard.
ryanm
news:20040209204918...@mb-m26.aol.com...
>
> Well the ultimate conclusion of your argument is that recorded music has
no
> value and everything should be live. That's fine if you think that, but
what
> are you doing here?
>
> So you don't like recorded music, but in another thread you were dissing
all
> the live Grammy performers. My friend, you are in a perfect position to
go out
> and make your own uniqe and vital musical statement.
>
it is not the be-all end-all of music. My point is that just because the
current status quo is being shaken up doesn't mean the music is going to
stop. The music will *never* stop, it's an intrinsic part of humanity; as
long as there are people, there will be music. Everyone knows this,
including the kids this PSA was targeted at. All it does it set off the
bullshit meters of the very people they're trying to make an impression on,
and the wrong impression is being given: "just another example of 'The Man'
trying to tell me how I should enjoy music". It's counter-productive, and is
pure bullshit, that's all I'm saying.
ryanm
ryanm
> You call it. If, indeed the people you are talking about are talentless
> losers, then why should they have the spotlight? Because the Sex Pistols
> did, or what?
>
talking about, who are "looking for the big kill, not the lifetime of
enjoyment in participating in making music and entertaining people." I was
only following your argument to it's logical conclusion.
ryanm
ryanm
news:40284B13...@worldnet.att.net...
>
> As a spot, it was a total dud. It had no hook at the end, at all. It was a
> terribly designed commercial. I don't think, anyway, that you can
> end a spot with silence, and not really relieve the silence with
> something. *I* understand that, but other people will simply miss the
> point.
>
condescending and hokey. I don't know who they thought they were targeting
with it, but apparently it went over quite well with middle-aged engineers.
Your average teenager, on the other hand, probably didn't even see it
because they went for a coke as soon as it came on. And those who did see it
almost certainly disregarded it as soon as it started. You would think that
with all the money floating around in the industry that they could hire a
decent agency to produce an effective PSA. This one will be about as
effective as Nancy's "Just Say No."
ryanm
ryanm
>
> What are you talking about?!? They had George Clinton on
> a Grammy show. Earth Wind & Fire , too. That's gotta be
> worth *something*.
>
other than 12 year olds by a group that hasn't tried to appeal to anyone but
12 year olds in decades. Hard to do the "We Want The Funk" show closer when
the show never really got started, you know?
> Even if it's because Outkast did that one song, at least it's
> a vein worth mining. Even the Justin Timberlake song had a
> decent arrangement. Hadda Rhodes, onstage.
>
I have a rhodes, does that make me Grammy worthy?
> Who was the guy playing a pedal steel with a funk band? Black
> Homburg fuzzy lookin' hat. Them guys put on a show, now.
> Sounded awesome.
>
Robert Randolph and the Family Band. Smokin' steel player, look 'em up.
ryanm
Rob Adelman
ryanm wrote:
>
> Robert Randolph and the Family Band. Smokin' steel player, look 'em up.
>
I haven't commented so far, but to me it sounded like someone trying to
wail a lead guitar part, except it sounded like a super thin buzzing
noise. A distorted lead guitar without the wood. I guess part of it was
it didn't seem to me that it fit the music. For distorted pedal steel I
guess I would just much rather hear David Gilmour play it.
I guess that is why I hated this Grammy show so much. All kinds of
really great talent that seemed to be arranged in a disjointed mess.
Les Cargill
>
> "Les Cargill" <lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:402849CE...@worldnet.att.net...
> >
> > What are you talking about?!? They had George Clinton on
> > a Grammy show. Earth Wind & Fire , too. That's gotta be
> > worth *something*.
> >
> Except that it came across as a desperate attempt to appeal to someone
> other than 12 year olds by a group that hasn't tried to appeal to anyone but
> 12 year olds in decades.
PFunk and EWF were mainstream stuff when I was a
Young Adult, and appealed to people some older than that.
Point is, they can actually be confused with entertainers,
rather than packaged image ensembles.
> Hard to do the "We Want The Funk" show closer when
> the show never really got started, you know?
>
I am saying that *somebody* in the Grammy organization actually
trotted out some people, even if they are older guys. who can
play and get a sound in front of a live audience. That covers
a muiltitude of sins, and indicates that At Least Somebody Is
Paying Attention Out There.
Seemed like a lot of show happening prior to that. It's Teevee -
a medeley is pretty short in that context. I think the whole
thing ran a good five minutes - a long time on an awards show.
> > Even if it's because Outkast did that one song, at least it's
> > a vein worth mining. Even the Justin Timberlake song had a
> > decent arrangement. Hadda Rhodes, onstage.
> >
> I have a rhodes, does that make me Grammy worthy?
>
> > Who was the guy playing a pedal steel with a funk band? Black
> > Homburg fuzzy lookin' hat. Them guys put on a show, now.
> > Sounded awesome.
> >
> Robert Randolph and the Family Band. Smokin' steel player, look 'em up.
>
> ryanm
--
Les Cargill
R Krizman
thinks one said or conveyed if communication is the goal.
All that matters is what is heard. >>
As a father I've discovered that kids are too hip to ever let on that they're
listening to you. But don't let that fool you. When the chips are down and
they are making the big decisions your voice will be in there.
-R
R Krizman
terribly designed commercial. I don't think, anyway, that you can
end a spot with silence, and not really relieve the silence with
something. *I* understand that, but other people will simply miss the
point.
>>
You're entitled to your opinion. But those on-the-nose "gotta have an obvious
hook" commercials are long out of fashion.
-R
R Krizman
because they went for a coke as soon as it came on. And those who did see it
almost certainly disregarded it as soon as it started. You would think that
with all the money floating around in the industry that they could hire a
decent agency to produce an effective PSA. This one will be about as
effective as Nancy's "Just Say No."
ryanm >>
Actually, my teenager thought it was sort of interesting.
Dude, you're down on everything. What are you so pissed off about?
Just my five cents.
-R
R Krizman
>
> Neil Portnow is not a "beard in a suit". He's a family friend who I know to
be
> honest and straightforward, and I think NARAS is lucky to have him. And
> moreover, what he said was absolutely true.
You missed my point, probably because it was obscure. I'm
pointing out what the kids saw, not what you saw through a
more objective and knowledable filter.
>>
You missed my point also. Here was a guy who has integrity, who wasn't
bullshitting anybody, putting out a valid message in a very conciliatory
fashion. What's he supposed to do, pull his underwear up out of his pants and
put on a backwards baseball cap?
He said what he had to say, and the spot that followed made its attempt to
address the issue to the target audience.
-R
R Krizman
Like who, for instance?
-R
Charles Thomas
rkri...@aol.com (R Krizman) wrote:
> Dude, you're down on everything. What are you so pissed off about?
Amen.
CT
Bob Olhsson
... those on-the-nose "gotta have an obvious
> hook" commercials are long out of fashion.
Fashion?
I thought the purpose of a commercial is to alter a viewer/listener's
behavior as measured by activity at the cash register. Commercials were used
to drive fashion. Commercials being driven BY fashion sounds completely
backwards to me at the most fundamental level.
ryanm
>
> Actually, my teenager thought it was sort of interesting.
>
> Dude, you're down on everything. What are you so pissed off about?
>
Stupidity irritates me. And it's everywhere...
ryanm
ryanm
> << I don't dislike recorded music, I *love* recorded music >>
>
> Like who, for instance?
>
cd collection for reference:
Alice In Chains
The Allman Brothers Band
Angelo Badalamenti (plus all the David Lynch soundtracks I could find)
Aretha Franklin
Barry White
Beastie Boys
Beatles
Black Crowes
Blodwyn Pig
Blondie
Brian Setzer Orchestra
Buddy Guy (Complete Chess Recordings is good)
Buddy Rich
Charlie Parker
Choir of The Vienna Hofburgkap
Circle Jerks
Concrete Blonde
Cream
Creedence Clearwater Revival
Crosby, Stills, Nash (& Young)
The Cult
Dave Mason (Alone Together is one of my top 5 albums of all time)
David Bowie
Derek And The Dominos
Dire Straits
The Doors
Duke Ellington (the album Duke Ellington & John Coltrane is excellent)
The Eagles
Ella Fitzgerald
Eric Clapton
Eurythmics
Fleetwood Mac
Frank Zappa
Freddy King
The Glenn Miller Orchestra
Gov't Mule (*the* reference for rock guitar, and great covers)
House Of Pain
Humble Pie
Jane's Addiction
Janis Joplin
Jesse Cook (bad ass flamenco guitarist)
Jethro Tull
Jimi Hendrix
Joe Cocker
John Coltrane
John Prine
Kiss
Led Zeppelin
Lenny Kravitz
Leonard Cohen
Les McCann & Eddie Harris (great disc!)
London Philharmonic Orchestra (mostly doing Mozart)
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Mad Season (great collaboration between members of AIC, Soundgarden, and
others)
Metallica
Miles Davis
Motley Crue
Nine Inch Nails
No Doubt
Otis Redding (one of my heroes)
Pantera
Phoebe Snow
PIL
Pink Floyd
Puya (awesome "latin metal" band)
Queen
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Reverend Horton Heat
Robert Johnson
Robin Trower
Rolling Stones
Ry Cooder
Sade (Lovers Rock is quite good)
Santana (Abraxis is also on my top 5 of all time)
Sex Pistols
Sinead O'Connor (amazing voice)
Slayer
SOD
Soundgarden (amazing voice on Cornell, great riffage from Thayall)
Squirrel Nut Zippers
Stan Getz
Stevie Ray Vaughan
Sublime
Temple Of The Dog (great collaboration between Pearl Jam and Soundgarden)
Ten Years After
Tesla
They Might Be Giants
Tito Puente
Traffic
U2
Vanilla Fudge (I wish they did more)
Weird Al Yankovic (sheer genius)
White Zombie
Woodstock 25th Anniversary (a classic)
ZZ Top
Now, that's not everything, it's just what I already had listed on my
computer. I also have several hundred LPs and several hundred 45s (but no
player anymore), a couple hundred tapes (but no player anymore), as well as
several hundred samplers, compilations and movie soundtracks. There are a
ton of bands/artists that aren't included on that list, and on average I
have several albums by each of those groups. And the list continues to grow.
You could say that I have done (and continue to do) my part to support the
recording industry. Many of these albums I bought on LP, then bought on
tape, and then bought on cd at least once. I have an eclectic collection,
but I enjoy a wide variety of genres and artists. And the list above, aside
from not being a complete list of the music I have bought, doesn't come
anywhere near covering all of the music I like.
I don't see what any of this has to do with the lack of talent in the
White Stripes, though.
ryanm
ryanm
>
> I haven't commented so far, but to me it sounded like someone trying to
> wail a lead guitar part, except it sounded like a super thin buzzing
> noise. A distorted lead guitar without the wood. I guess part of it was
> it didn't seem to me that it fit the music. For distorted pedal steel I
> guess I would just much rather hear David Gilmour play it.
>
very good, you just couldn't hear much of it in the mess that was going on
onstage at the time.
> I guess that is why I hated this Grammy show so much. All kinds of
> really great talent that seemed to be arranged in a disjointed mess.
>
Trying to pack too much into a single show I guess. Good ideas, just
piss poor execution in a lot of cases.
ryanm
ryanm
>
> PFunk and EWF were mainstream stuff when I was a
> Young Adult, and appealed to people some older than that.
>
> Point is, they can actually be confused with entertainers,
> rather than packaged image ensembles.
>
relevance. I mean, obviously, someone sampled an EWS song, but that's hardly
new, and hardly warranted the mess they presented on the show. It started
out good, but they just kept adding to it until it was nothing
indecipherable noise.
> I am saying that *somebody* in the Grammy organization actually
> trotted out some people, even if they are older guys. who can
> play and get a sound in front of a live audience. That covers
> a muiltitude of sins, and indicates that At Least Somebody Is
> Paying Attention Out There.
>
> Seemed like a lot of show happening prior to that. It's Teevee -
> a medeley is pretty short in that context. I think the whole
> thing ran a good five minutes - a long time on an awards show.
>
I just don't know that it was appreciated beyond the few of us who know
and like those bands.
ryanm
Mark
You were only really missing 3 essential guitarists
Allan Holdsworth, Wayne Krantz and Scott Henderson.
Mark
Aus
"ryanm" <ry...@fatchicksinpartyhats.com> wrote in message
news:102it79...@corp.supernews.com...
Les Cargill
Thats entirely possible - I watch nothing but "old people TV" ( when I
watch it at all), so they might build a few with hooks so we don't
get confused.
A commercial without a hook seems entirely to miss the .. "point", to me.
But pardon my barbs, as this thread is spawning.
--
Les Cargill
R Krizman
I thought the purpose of a commercial is to alter a viewer/listener's
behavior as measured by activity at the cash register. Commercials were used
to drive fashion. Commercials being driven BY fashion sounds completely
backwards to me at the most fundamental level.
All I meant was that commercials are products of their times, and styles of
commercials come and go.
These days the message isn't always delivered in such a straightforward
fashion.
-R
R Krizman
Eurythmics .......>><BR><BR>
They all suck.
-R
EggHd
This really made me laugh. Good one.
---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"
Charles Thomas
"Mark" <bigba...@nospam.com> wrote:
> You were only really missing 3 essential guitarists
> Allan Holdsworth
If I wanted to hear a saxophone I'd listen to Charlie Parker or Johnny
Hodges. ;-)
CT
Charles Thomas
"ryanm" <ry...@fatchicksinpartyhats.com> wrote:
> I don't see what any of this has to do with the lack of talent in the
> White Stripes, though.
What it has to do with is your seeming inability to see that just
because you like someone doesn't make them talented and just because you
don't like someone doesn't make them talentless.
Every single selection on your precious CD list could be derided by
someone as "Talentless". Every artist you mentioned has their
detractors.
It's your dogmatic approach and failure to recognize that yours is just
an opinion that makes your approach to writing about music so hard to
stomach.
On other topics I've found you quite well-spoken, but when it comes to
discussing music you come across as a 17 year old who's "always right".
CT
Jay Kadis
rkri...@aol.com (R Krizman) wrote:
Not all of them: Charlie Parker blows.
-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x-------- http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jay/ ----------x
Mark
"Charles Thomas" <cthomas@REMOVE_SPAM_BLOCK.facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote in
message news:cthomas-42DE26...@teta.doit.wisc.edu...
ryanm
>
> What it has to do with is your seeming inability to see that just
> because you like someone doesn't make them talented and just because you
> don't like someone doesn't make them talentless.
>
Stripes that makes me call them talentless. It's that I could teach my 8
year old to play that stuff and give a better performance *tomorrow* than
they gave at the grammies, and they wrote it and had a month or more to
practice.
My baseline is myself: if I can do it better, then it didn't require
talent, period. I'm not in any way calling myself talented, either, that's
the whole point. I *know* I'm a hack, so if I can do it, then I'm not
impressed. For example, John Mayer is a talented guitarist. I don't
particularly like his music. A few of his songs I thought were pretty good,
but for the most part he bores me. But I can still plainly see that he's a
pretty good guitarist and he has some writing and arragnging skills, even if
the end result isn't something that I would listen to normally. There isn't
a song on the White Stripes' Elephant album that I couldn't play and sing
without breaking a sweat, so, they're not talented. If *I* can do it, then
it didn't take very much talent, did it? Of course there are exceptions
where really simple songs are great specifically because they are simple,
but those are, 99 times out of 100, borrowed from earlier sources, and it
doesn't take a lot of talent to blatantly steal riffs (I know because I do
that too). An example I already used was Jet's "Are You Gonna Be My Girl".
Great loud rock feel, but completely stolen from Iggy Pop's "Lust For Life",
and Iggy probably stole it from someone before that, so it's not exactly an
original riff. IOW, I *like* it, but that doesn't mean it took talent to
write it.
> Every single selection on your precious CD list could be derided by
> someone as "Talentless". Every artist you mentioned has their
> detractors.
>
Sure, but anyone who calls people like Ellington, Clapton, Dave Mason,
Freddy King, etc talentless may be immediately dismissed as either an idiot
or as legally deaf. Good is subjective, talent is not. Detractors of the
Eagles would be unlikely to call them untalented, because it would make them
look stupid. They are obviously talented, whether you like their music or
not. Almost without exception, you can't call the people on that list
"untalented", regardless of whether you like thier music or not. You may
think their music sucks, you may complain about specific performances or
songs, but calling them untalented is just dumb. I'm not saying that no one
thinks the White Stripes are good, I'm saying that it doesn't require talent
to write and/or perform their music.
> It's your dogmatic approach and failure to recognize that yours is just
> an opinion that makes your approach to writing about music so hard to
> stomach.
>
> On other topics I've found you quite well-spoken, but when it comes to
> discussing music you come across as a 17 year old who's "always right".
>
Again, "good" is an opinion, "talented" is an observation. Talent is
obvious and undeniable, or it's not talent. SRV was a talented guitarist,
the dude from the White Stripes is not, and I don't see how anyone with ears
can confuse the two. The fact that I could watch a WS video and then go in
my jam room and accurately reproduce it tells me that it didn't require any
talent. But I can't reproduce the vast majority of the music by the artists
I listed, which tells me they have at least some kind of talent. And the
ones that I can accurately reproduce certainly have a writing talent that I
can't match, like Dave Mason, Bob Dylan, Pink Floyd, etc.(usually in
addition to talented instrumentalists in the band)
So maybe my description shouldn't be "talentless", but "less talented
than me", which, to me, equates to the same thing. In my opinion, anyone
less talented than me has absolutely no business being a "professional"
musician. I hate to go to the dictionary, but in this case I think it's
helpful. Webster's defines "talented" as "Natural endowment or ability of a
superior quality", the key word there being "superior". That means better
than average. So far I haven't heard anything from the WS that could be
considered better than average.
ryanm
ryanm
>
> They all suck.
>
That may be true, but they are all *talented*, and that was the
attribute in question. Your opinion of their music is irrelevant in the
context of this discussion, their talent is obvious.
ryanm
EggHd
context of this discussion, their talent is obvious. >>
it's all opinion. You can't draw the line on what talent is.
EggHd
year old to play that stuff and give a better performance *tomorrow* than
they gave at the grammies, >>
And I could paint a soup can. means nothing.
ryanm
news:20040211232331...@mb-m03.aol.com...
>
> it's all opinion. You can't draw the line on what talent is.
>
is not. Talent is obvious and undeniable.
ryanm
ryanm
>
> And I could paint a soup can. means nothing.
>
"good" the end result is.
ryanm
EggHd
is not. Talent is obvious and undeniable >>
Unless you a jealous, jaded kinda guy.
R Krizman
Ah, let's cut to the chase here.
-R
R Krizman
ryanm >><BR><BR>
I guess it depends on how well you paint it.
By the way, Ryan, what are your favorite books?
-R
Charles Thomas
"ryanm" <ry...@fatchicksinpartyhats.com> wrote:
> The fact that I could watch a WS video and then go in
> my jam room and accurately reproduce it tells me that it didn't require any
> talent.
All I can say is that almost anyone can PLAY "Louie Louie", but they
didn't WRITE it, now... did they?
I think it's obvious the White Stripes don't strive for technical
expertise. If they did Jack would not be playing with such a limited
drummer.
They're a shoot-from-the-gut, organic group with much more emphasis on
emotion and raw feeling. I'd say they're like Nirvana that way, albeit
not as brilliant in the songwriting department IMO.
And yeah, lots of people hate Nirvana too. It's one of those things
that you either get or you don't. I feel sorry for those who don't, but
more power to 'em, ya know?
We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess.
CT
Charles Thomas
"Mark" <bigba...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Was this meant as a put down?
Not so much a put down as saying I listen to guitarists to hear a
guitar. I listen to saxophone players to hear a saxophone. I have no
use for a guitar that sounds like a saxophone.
Just a personal taste thing, hence the smiley face.
CT
ryanm
>
> I guess it depends on how well you paint it.
>
> By the way, Ryan, what are your favorite books?
>
that simple a question, and I'm not sure I've even read my favorite book
yet. I like fiction and sci-fi for entertainment, so I read Stephen King,
Clive Barker, Dean Koontz, Anne Rice, Peter Straub, Piers Anthony, Douglas
Adams, etc. But that's not all I read, that's like the pop music that I
listen to: entertaining but not enough to sustain me on it's own. Nabokov's
Pale Fire is next on my list, but I haven't cracked it open yet, simply for
lack of time. I recently finished Strange Attractors: Creating Patterns in
Chaos by Julien C. Sprott, which was pretty dry but a good read. But that
was research, for a software project I'm working on in my (non-existant)
spare time. I also read history and religion when I have time, which isn't
often lately. So, I don't think I could name you my 5 favorite books, but if
you specify a genre I could give you a handful of titles I liked.
Incidentally, I do a lot of reading at the Gutenberg Project
(http://www.gutenberg.net/index.shtml) when I'm bored and need something to
read. There is an amazing collection of works on there now, and I can almost
always find something interesting that I've never heard of by browsing the
list of titles. There is also a lot of good fiction available on the web, on
author's or publishers' websites.
ryanm
ryanm
> << Incorrect, see Webster's for reference. "Good" is subjective,
"talented"
> is not. Talent is obvious and undeniable >>
>
> Unless you a jealous, jaded kinda guy.
>
not about being jealous, it's about wanting to hear some good music and not
having any choice but to go back to the old stuff.
ryanm
R Krizman
ryanm
>>
Fine. I think it has already been well established that yours are the opinions
of a talentless hack, and I guess they should be weighed accordingly.
-R
Bob Cain
> Incidentally, I do a lot of reading at the Gutenberg Project
> (http://www.gutenberg.net/index.shtml) when I'm bored and need something to
> read. There is an amazing collection of works on there now, and I can almost
> always find something interesting that I've never heard of by browsing the
> list of titles. There is also a lot of good fiction available on the web, on
> author's or publishers' websites.
>
Ryan, while not available in that form, I think you would
particularly like Salman Rushdie's works. A couple of
months ago I picked up "The Ground Beneath Her Feet" on a
lark and am now working my way through all his stuff. That
particular book is pretty far out in terms of its story
frame but as a vehicle for his narrative commentary it is
great. He's an incurable romantic afflicted with a slash
and burn cynicism. Wonderful combination.
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."
A. Einstein
ryanm
>
> Fine. I think it has already been well established that yours are the
opinions
> of a talentless hack, and I guess they should be weighed accordingly.
>
good baseline.
ryanm
ryanm
news:c0glq...@enews3.newsguy.com...
>
> Ryan, while not available in that form, I think you would
> particularly like Salman Rushdie's works. A couple of
> months ago I picked up "The Ground Beneath Her Feet" on a
> lark and am now working my way through all his stuff. That
> particular book is pretty far out in terms of its story
> frame but as a vehicle for his narrative commentary it is
> great. He's an incurable romantic afflicted with a slash
> and burn cynicism. Wonderful combination.
>
things going on so I never got around to him. He's on my list, but it's a
long list. <g>
ryanm
EggHd
good baseline. >>
I guess we could say many of us could go up and do a White Stripes act and
arguably do it better.
What people fail to realize is that they never said they could do it or hated
someone else for doing it. They went out and not only did it but a lot of
people reacted to what they were doing.
There is something to be said for doing something that receives that kind of
response. It's much different and incredibly more difficult that sitting in
your room playing guitar and saying you are better than that.
georgeh
><< Sure. If I can do it, then it doesn't require talent. I think that's a
>good baseline. >>
>I guess we could say many of us could go up and do a White Stripes act and
>arguably do it better.
>What people fail to realize is that they never said they could do it or hated
>someone else for doing it. They went out and not only did it but a lot of
>people reacted to what they were doing.
>There is something to be said for doing something that receives that kind of
>response. It's much different and incredibly more difficult that sitting in
>your room playing guitar and saying you are better than that.
Q. How many guitarists does it take to change a lightbulb?
:
:
:
:
A. 13 --- 1 to change it, 12 to stand around saying "well *I* could have done *THAT*"
ryanm
>
> I guess we could say many of us could go up and do a White Stripes act and
> arguably do it better.
>
> What people fail to realize is that they never said they could do it or
hated
> someone else for doing it. They went out and not only did it but a lot of
> people reacted to what they were doing.
>
> There is something to be said for doing something that receives that kind
of
> response. It's much different and incredibly more difficult that sitting
in
> your room playing guitar and saying you are better than that.
>
that *does* require talent to perform. I get paid almost nothing for it, and
that's ok with me, because I'm doing it because I love to, not because I
want to be a pop star. I could go play crappy 3 chord tunes to teenagers who
would think I'm talented, but I wouldn't enjoy it, so what's the point? I
don't hate the WS, I hate that the general public doesn't have better sense
than to eat that crap up and call it good. It's not music, it's fashion.
ryanm
EggHd
that *does* require talent to perform. >>
I wasn't singling you out. But what you say is again, subjective. We don't
know what Jack White is capable of in a bar band.
<< I get paid almost nothing for it, and
that's ok with me, because I'm doing it because I love to, not because I
want to be a pop star. >>
And you believe that The White Stripes started a guitar/drums/no bass band to
become pop stars? Maybe they did it for the love of music and it caught on.
They didn't sign with a major, that's for sure. V2 is hardly a major label.
<< I could go play crappy 3 chord tunes to teenagers who
would think I'm talented, but I wouldn't enjoy it, so what's the point? >>
And Jack White could go play what he believes are crappy cover songs to drunk
people who are there for the scene and not the band. So?
<< I don't hate the WS, I hate that the general public doesn't have better
sense
than to eat that crap up and call it good. It's not music, it's fashion. >>
You sound angry and jealous. There are many types of music that people buy.
The White Stripes are just one. Forget them.
Rob Adelman
EggHd wrote:
> I wasn't singling you out. But what you say is again, subjective. We don't
> know what Jack White is capable of in a bar band.
I saw him on the Grammys. Didn't really care for the music, but I was
impressed that he was able to make it work with no one else but a
drummer. Wish I could do that. Well, wish I could do that even with a
bass player <g>
ryanm
>
> You sound angry and jealous. There are many types of music that people
buy.
> The White Stripes are just one. Forget them.
>
or more accurately irritated, at the decline of the value people put on
music, but not jealous. I've seen way too many VH1 "Where Are They Now"
episodes to be jealous of any pop star, because chances are pretty good that
Jack will be painting houses or waiting tables for a living in a few years.
If I were going to be jealous of someone, it would be someone more like John
Paul Jones, or Warren Zevon, or even our own Harvey Gerst; someone who has
had a long and successful career doing what they love and making decent (but
not ridiculous) money at it. That is something to strive for, not 15 minutes
of MTV popularity. I just yearn for the days when musicians could actually
play instruments, and had a desire to understand the music they play, rather
than focusing more on the wardrobe and stage dressing. I'm afraid that Jack
White is in peril of being trodden on by a dwarf, if you'll pardon the
Spinal Tap reference.
ryanm
EggHd
How so? You are just repeating something you saw someone else post.
The White Stripes ate not about sales. They are about critical success. You
can't compare them to Nora Jones, Josh Grobin, or any of the huge sellers.
I don't care for them but I know that what they have achived is not easy to do.
<< I am angry, or more accurately irritated, at the decline of the value
people put on
music, but not jealous. >>
So youare mad at the public? They like what they like.
<< I'm afraid that Jack
White is in peril of being trodden on by a dwarf, if you'll pardon the
Spinal Tap reference. >>
He very well may be. hard to tell. But he's out there putting his ass on the
line and people are responding. I'll give him that.
EggHd
episodes to be jealous of any pop star, because chances are pretty good that
Jack will be painting houses or waiting tables for a living in a few years. >>
You again sound pety and jealous. Who gives shit what he does? It should
matter to your career path.
<< If I were going to be jealous of someone, it would be someone more like John
Paul Jones, or Warren Zevon, or even our own Harvey Gerst; someone who has
had a long and successful career doing what they love and making decent (but
not ridiculous) money at it. >>
John Paul Jones is worth zillions. And i agree that striving for what you
suggest above is great.
<< That is something to strive for, not 15 minutes
of MTV popularity. >>
You are of course assuming that people have a worse life than you do after
their 15 minutes of fame. And they can't do what you do now.
<< I just yearn for the days when musicians could actually
play instruments, and had a desire to understand the music they play, rather
than focusing more on the wardrobe and stage dressing. >>
When was that?
ryanm
> << The telling point that you seem to be hung up on is sales. >>
>
> How so? You are just repeating something you saw someone else post.
>
added): "You sound angry and jealous. There are many types of music *that
people buy*. The White Stripes are just one. Forget them."
You always seem to come back to sales, in one way or another.
> So youare mad at the public? They like what they like.
>
Yes. I find apathy and stupidity irritating, and the public is rampantly
guilty of both of those. The biggest problem with lowest common denominator
marketing is that it works. It's really irritates me to see a commercial,
like the awful Hemi Ram and Durango commercials that are all over TV these
days, that is just reaching for an emotional trigger, when Dodge could be
spending all that money on making their products better suited to their
customers. How many people *need* a full-size truck with all that torqe to
drive back and forth to work? And if you buy one and you don't need it,
adding to our already overblown fuel usage, don't the terrorists win? ; )
> He very well may be. hard to tell. But he's out there putting his ass on
the
> line and people are responding. I'll give him that.
>
What exactly is he putting on the line? He has no time invested, he's
not even old enough to have been to the woodshed for more than 10 minutes.
He certainly didn't put up the money. He's getting a free 20 minute ride on
the MTV fashion circus, that's all. But when he is acclaimed as a genius, I
just can't help but call bullshit.
ryanm
ryanm
>
> You again sound pety and jealous. Who gives shit what he does? It should
> matter to your career path.
>
that his chances of being able to continue doing it are slim, and that's
nothing to be jealous of.
> John Paul Jones is worth zillions. And i agree that striving for what you
> suggest above is great.
>
Well, JPJ just happens to also be a competent business man in additional
to his musical talents. Which is good for him. But even without Zeppelin
(which could be considered his 15 minutes of pop fame) he still would've
been a respected studio player for several decades, making a decent living
doing what he loves. And *that* is worth being jealous of.
> You are of course assuming that people have a worse life than you do after
> their 15 minutes of fame. And they can't do what you do now.
>
From what I've seen, most are not even in as good a position as when
they started.
> When was that?
>
It happens every few decades, I'm just waiting for it to come around
again. Even in the sickening 80's hair band days, those guys could play.
Poison may have been a joke, but CC could play that guitar well, and did so.
Even though it wasn't the rule, there was still plenty of subtle and
effective instrumentation that benefited the song (trite, piece of crap 2:40
pop ballad about the girl that broke the singer's heart that it was) as a
whole. There were even a handful of great songs during that era, although I
would be hard pressed to name one without looking back through my cds. It's
the claim of "going back to my roots" that translates to "I don't want to
spend the time to learn to play" that bothers me. Tenacious D was meant to
be a joke, but at least they can play their guitars. As a result, I like
their music more than the crap on Mtv, because at least they put their
effort into being musicians instead of models with music in the background.
ryanm
Charles Thomas
"ryanm" <ry...@fatchicksinpartyhats.com> wrote:
> Poison may have been a joke, but CC could play that guitar well, and did so.
Seriously, Ryan?
You're honestly taking the position that Jack White can't play or write
and is only in it for the fashion but CC DEVILLE is some kind of
legitimate musician?
CT
EggHd
added): "You sound angry and jealous. There are many types of music *that
people buy*. The White Stripes are just one. Forget them." >>
Hang on a minute. On one hand you are mad at the public for what they BUY and
then you don't want me to talk about other artists that sell?
Let's start talking about the other bar bands in your town then.
<< You always seem to come back to sales, in one way or another. >>
I guess. This is Grammy thread, not a bar band thread as far as I can tell.
<< What exactly is he putting on the line? >>
I don't how to respond to this. He is as much as human as you are.
<< He has no time invested, he's
not even old enough to have been to the woodshed for more than 10 minutes. >>
I guess you know more than I do regarding his past and how hard he worked on
this.
<< He certainly didn't put up the money. He's getting a free 20 minute ride on
the MTV fashion circus, that's all. >>
I have no idea what he will become and it doesn't make any difference to my
future or the future of the music biz.
<< But when he is acclaimed as a genius, I
just can't help but call bullshit. >>
I haven't seen him being proclaimed a genuis. Where did this happen?
EggHd
that his chances of being able to continue doing it are slim, and that's
nothing to be jealous of. >>
I have no idea what he will turn this into. But most likely he will be like
most acts and run his course in 6 or so years.
<< Well, JPJ just happens to also be a competent business man in additional
to his musical talents. >>
Is he? How so
<< But even without Zeppelin
(which could be considered his 15 minutes of pop fame) he still would've
been a respected studio player for several decades, making a decent living
doing what he loves. >>
Maybe or maybe he would have faded out with the '60's hard to tell.
<< And *that* is worth being jealous of. >>
I guess.