Three favorite REM songs please...
Kelly Humphries
Seven Chinese Brothers
Disturbance At The Heron House
Ray O'Hara
"Kelly Humphries" <kpiscesatspeakeasydotorg> wrote in message
news:j37dl5dvr3udjem3s...@4ax.com...
> Feeling Gravitys Pull
> Seven Chinese Brothers
> Disturbance At The Heron House
>
>
REM ugh!
"That's me at the stop light,
losin my direction"
they outdo U2 for pretentiousness.
Kelly Humphries
Damn. "Wolves, Lower" should've topped the list. Or ended it. Or bumped
"Disturbance At The Heron House." Damn!
Kelly Humphries
> REM ugh!
> "That's me at the stop light,
> losin my direction"
>
> they outdo U2 for pretentiousness.
Taken under full consideration.
"Try to tell us something we don't know..."
Ray
Beat me to it - 'Wolves, Lower' would be on my list, at least tonight.
Tonight the list is:
Wolves, Lower
Seven Chinese Brothers
Until the Day Is Done (which is off their latest release 'Accelerate'
- in general I lost interest in REM after 'Automatic' but I think that
song is as good as anything they've done.)
Tomorrow's list might be:
Talk About The Passion
Driver 8
(Don't Go Back To) Rockville
The next day might be:
Life And How To Live It
Pretty Persuasion
Perfect Circle
That said I don't tend to think of REM as a 'song' band - I tend to
think of them by their releases as a whole, all of which from Chronic
Town through Life's Rich Pageant, and about half of Document, I think
are great.
Garry the Island Boy
They were in NO way considered a serious band. . . kinda like PHISH.
G.
Losing my religion
Ray
>
> They were in NO way considered a serious band. . . kinda like PHISH.
I don't understand pronouncements like this one.
Kelly Humphries
> The next day might be:
>
> Life And How To Live It
I always liked how the lyrics were unintelligible to a point, but this
song title was right there along with it.
Andrew
Strange
Catapult
End of the World...
3jane.
> > Seven Chinese Brothers
> > Disturbance At The Heron House
>
> Strange
> Catapult
> End of the World...
Losing My Religion
It's the End of the World as We Know it
Gravity's Pull
3jane.
> > "That's me at the stop light,
> > losin my direction"
>
> > they outdo U2 for pretentiousness.
>
> They were in NO way considered a serious band. . . kinda like PHISH.
They rock. For a lot of reasons. But mainly because on Ios in 1995
all the Scandanavian chicks loved them and it was a great way to "get
to know" them. Losing My Religion was blasting out of every bar on
the island, some of them at 8 AM I might add. Aside from the
ancilliary benefits, Buck and McCaughey are great rocking guitar
players live, they go after it pretty hard.
bzl...@aaool.com
Wake-Up Bomb
Orange Crush
mjd
Hairshirt
Garry the Island Boy
photos. . ."Here I am at the corner, here I am at the stoplight,
losing my religion"
G>
JimK
Is that some sort of haiku?
JimK
marcman
Are three enough?
Jim McVey
Perfect Circle
Begin The Begin
Country Feedback
Perfect Circle is easily my favorite. The other 2 change almost daily.
Jim
--
*********************************************************
Jim McVey
jmc...@panix.com
*********************************************************
Jay Man
fall on me (mountain stage )
begin the begin
swan swan hummingbird
Kelly Humphries
No. Because not only should I have found a spot for "Wolves, Lower," but I
could also add their cover of "Superman" and half of "Murmur" by picking
almost at random.
Jay Man
"Jay Man" <wvja...@suddenlink.net> wrote in message
news:4b5743df$0$12430$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
>
>
> fall on me (mountain stage )
> begin the begin swan swan hummingbird
scratch that , pretty much the whole mnt stage show from 91 , they would not
leave and then went over to the glass
DGDevin
"Ray" <ray...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:df6c4f5b-e153-4f30...@a15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 19, 10:58 pm, Garry the Island Boy <garry...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> They were in NO way considered a serious band. . . kinda like PHISH.
> I don't understand pronouncements like this one.
It translates to GTIB didn't like them.
Ray
> "Ray" <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Ah - thanks for the translation.
Sweetbac
Driver 8
Cuyahoga
Garry the Island Boy
> "Ray" <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
LOL! Thanks for the humility ping. OK I'll try to list three:
Everybody Wants to Rule the World
Shout
Wake Me Up Before You Go Go
wait,
Sowing The Seeds of Love. . .
G.I
Ray O'Hara
===============================================================================
Everybody is a snob about music.
there is two kinds of music, what you like and what you don't otherwise
there is no "good" or "bad" music.
as much as I loathe Terry Jacks somebody must like him.
Ray O'Hara
"Garry the Island Boy" <garr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4c479429-e148-4434...@p8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Weird Al could have a field day with that song
Ray O'Hara
Ray
Garry's stopped making sense - I'll have whatever he's having.
Garry the Island Boy
Did I get one college band mixed up with another? Opps. . .
G.
Ray
Yeah music that's outside of your snobbery zone obviously isn't your
strong point.
3jane.
>
> Yeah music that's outside of your snobbery zone obviously isn't your
I always thought "This One Goes Out to the One I Love" was an
exceptional song. I rearrange my top three to exclude any song I
chose and include that. So simple & so good, a very haunting refrain
IMO.
JimK
wrote:
Be careful what you wish for. The last thing he had was 100 doses.
JimK
Ray
> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:21:34 -0800 (PST), Ray <rayb...@hotmail.com>
Yikes. I missed that but it does explain a some things.
Garry the Island Boy
OUCH! I love the TUBES but not PHISH although they are both tongue in
cheek songwriters.
G.
Garry the Island Boy
At least we are keeping our sense of humor 'round here. . .
G.
DGDevin
"Ray O'Hara" <raymon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hj86fl$kuq$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Everybody is a snob about music.
>
> there is two kinds of music, what you like and what you don't otherwise
> there is no "good" or "bad" music.
> as much as I loathe Terry Jacks somebody must like him.
Yeah, that's true to some extent, everybody likes what they like and hates
what they hate. However beyond that it is possible to get a handle on how
"serious" a musician or band is by looking at things other than personal
taste.
Has anyone bothered to write a book about Musician X? If so that might
indicate he should be taken seriously, but then again any star no matter how
transitory gets a paste-up biography written about him. What if the
performer has had a whole slew of books written about him, and a movie and
documentary videos and there are college courses devoted to his work?
That's starting to look more like he's a heavy-weight.
Commercial success can't be considered in isolation, or every pop-tart with
a two-year career would be considered an artist of note. But what about
commercial success over many years, even decades? Somebody who has been
selling albums and concert tickets for forty years probably needs to be
taken more seriously.
How about influence on other musicians? While it's not *impossible* that
singers many years from now will claim inspiration in Britney Spears or some
similar creature, it's a bit hard to believe. But if a string of today's
artists talk about learning to play guitar listening to old Stones or
Hendrix or Led Zep records, if today's songwriters talk about studying
Beatles or Dylan lyrics while learning their craft--that suggests those
vintage artists have had a lasting influence on music.
So I don't think it's impossible to point to some musicians as standing
above the herd because of a combination of commercial success, critical
acclaim, longevity, and influence on other musicians (especially over time).
Still doesn't mean anyone has to like them of course, and there is no law
against being into really lightweight music if that's what spins your crank.
DGDevin
> Garry's stopped making sense - I'll have whatever he's having.
Did you want that with ice and water, or straight up with a beer chaser?
DGDevin
> Yeah music that's outside of your snobbery zone obviously isn't your
> strong point.
And speaking of appreciating music you haven't heard before, whoever it was
here who recently recommended the Anouar Brahem Trio, dang, thanks a bunch.
I've been spinning Astrakan Cafe every day--talk about hypnotic!
Ray
> "Ray" <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2810594d-a6a0-403a...@k35g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Garry's stopped making sense - I'll have whatever he's having.
>
> Did you want that with ice and water, or straight up with a beer chaser?
When I thought it was say a few shots of good tequila I was game, but
100 hits? Yikes, I'm in no mood to have a one-on-one conversation
with a God that doesn't exist this evening.
Ray
The Tubes were in NO way considered a serious band. . . kinda like
PHISH.
(tongue firmly in cheek)
Garry the Island Boy
> "Ray" <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2810594d-a6a0-403a...@k35g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Garry's stopped making sense - I'll have whatever he's having.
>
> Did you want that with ice and water, or straight up with a beer chaser?
You are very amusing.
G.
Garry the Island Boy
Nothing taken in anyway as an insult. . .but I love the TUBES!!!!
G.
PS I knew Vince, for the few Deadheads who still hang around here
DGDevin
>> > Garry's stopped making sense - I'll have whatever he's having.
>
>> Did you want that with ice and water, or straight up with a beer chaser?
> You are very amusing.
The jury is still out on whether you're amusing or just hearing voices not
audible to anyone else.
Ray
What are these 'deadheads' that you speak of?
Garry the Island Boy
Ray, you crack me up.
G.
Garry the Island Boy
> "Garry the Island Boy" <garry...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:945206cb-20b3-4e1a...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > Garry's stopped making sense - I'll have whatever he's having.
>
> >> Did you want that with ice and water, or straight up with a beer chaser?
> > You are very amusing.
>
> The jury is still out on whether you're amusing or just hearing voices not
> audible to anyone else.
You mean the one's telling me to stay home and clean the guns?
G.
Kelly Humphries
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 22:03:59 -0800, Kelly Humphries
> <kpiscesatspeakeasydotorg> wrote:
>
> >Feeling Gravitys Pull
> >Seven Chinese Brothers
> >Disturbance At The Heron House
> >
>
> Is that some sort of haiku?
Heh.
Pretty Persuasion
What's The Frequency, Kenneth?
Gardening At Night
Ray
Physically? Cool.
Ray
It's interesting that unlike say the Stones there seems to be no
general consensus with respect to what the best REM songs are, save
for most of them being from REM's first 6 releases.
Garry the Island Boy
PS What was the last top 40 song Phish had? Rest my case.
G.
Neil X
I don't think I could name 3 REM songs........
Peace,
Neil X.
Ray
>
> I don't think I could name 3 REM songs........
That's unfortunate - "Reckoning" and especially "Murmur" are two
albums that I can't imagine not being in my life, which is richer for
them. "Chronic Town" and "Fables of the Reconstruction" are IMO almost
as great; "Life's Rich Pageant" and "Document" are up there too. IMO
they started losing it with "Green" which ironically was their first
major label release and the one that put them in the big leagues.
I never found them to be a great live band though - no jamming, all
very rehearsed and choreographed. It's not like they sucked - they
were fine shows and I enjoyed them well enough - but I always thought
they could do more musically live than they did, that they could have
stretched things out more.
Anyway again "Murmur" in particular is IMO great. Their stuff from
that era takes a while to 'get' - at least it did for me - but as with
the Dead their impressionistic soundscape slowly worked its way into
my consciousness and has stayed there.
James Pablos
> On Jan 21, 1:43 pm, Neil X <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I don't think I could name 3 REM songs........
>
> That's unfortunate - "Reckoning" and especially "Murmur" are two
> albums that I can't imagine not being in my life, which is richer for
> them. "Chronic Town" and "Fables of the Reconstruction" are IMO almost
> as great; "Life's Rich Pageant" and "Document" are up there too. IMO
> they started losing it with "Green" which ironically was their first
> major label release and the one that put them in the big leagues.
"Man on the Moon" is a great song...
Kelly Humphries
> "Man on the Moon" is a great song...
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hKSYgOGtos
And a great movie too.
3jane.
> > general consensus with respect to what the best REM songs are, save
> > for most of them being from REM's first 6 releases.
>
> I don't think I could name 3 REM songs........
Your loss, they are a fantastic band live. Way better than many
incarnations of P&F (for example) that I have seen, simply no
comparison. Isn't it great that there's so much good music out there
that we are not familiar with?
octoad
**************************************************************
Back in the day, when I managed to take time away from devising health care
reform legislation, I was literally musically obsessed with this band. I
agree totally that it was the first few albums, I guess up until Green (but
probably not counting that one) that were just plain great. I listened to
them endlessly.
The lyrics, man. They meant something different everytime I heard them.
The tunes were infectious, sinister, giddy, rockin, morose, celebratory,
evocotive of whatever you felt like invoking at the time, you name it.
They gave my imagination a canvas on which I painted whatever I needed to at
the time.
Saw them live once and thought it was spectacular. This was probably after
whatever album was their 4th or 5th. Insanely hot show; Stipe was spinning
and twirling under this blazing white strobe light most of the time, it was
searingly loud, and for a guy WELL out of college at the time I was just
thrilled to have found a "new" band that I totally dug.
So here's my three:
Radio Free Europe
Driver 8
Begin the Begin
Fall on Me
Ages of You
Oddfellows Local 151
Crush With Eyeliner
Honorable mention: the drunken, slurred, King of the Road off Dead Letter
Office.
O
Kelly Humphries
> I never found them to be a great live band though - no jamming, all
> very rehearsed and choreographed. It's not like they sucked - they
> were fine shows and I enjoyed them well enough - but I always thought
> they could do more musically live than they did, that they could have
> stretched things out more.
When did you see them? Me, only twice. First time was at Seattle's
Paramount Theater in '86, and while I don't remember much "jamming," I do
remember after each song they would huddle together midstage to make
plans. Maybe just to talk about the local all-night bar scene or the
parties they'd been invited to. But I will never forget seeing a
tophatted Michael Stipe opening the show by literally running a circle
around the band while belting out that he could live a million, he could
live a million, he could live 1,000,000 years.
The next time I saw them was a million years later at Key Arena (nee
Seattle Center Coliseum), the first song was "Stand," and while they had
adapted their show to the arena circuit, it lacked that energy I
remembered from the Paramount.
I haven't seen them since, although Peter Buck was married to the owner of
the Crocodile Cafe and he played various shows there over the years.
Never with enough advance notice for me to get there. Ratbastards!
They never struck me as a band that would open it up during a song, but
whatever they brought to that song, set, show, was the thing. Which is
probably why I saw a few Heads in Spring Tour GD shirts at that Paramount
show.
oblig haiku:
Superman, 9-9
Driver 8, White Tornado
Everybody Hurts
3jane.
SplinteredSunlight
Rich Pagent is like the premier hippie feel good album of the 80s for
me.
Neil X
Well, you couldn't exactly live in the USA over the past two decades
and not hear a lot of REM songs. But nothing I ever heard ever
compelled me to buy one of their albums. I know they're a really good
band, I wouldn't suggest otherwise. It's one of those things, I don't
really agree with the folks who say there is no such thing as good and
bad music, there is only what you like and what you don't like. There
is a lot of good music that I don't like, two examples are Richard
Thompson and opera. OTOH, I like some really bad bands (I won't name
them because you would cruelly mock me). Some good music just doesn't
appeal to certain individuals, for whatever reason. REM is like that
for me.
Peace,
Neil X.
Ray
> Ray <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I never found them to be a great live band though - no jamming, all
> > very rehearsed and choreographed. It's not like they sucked - they
> > were fine shows and I enjoyed them well enough - but I always thought
> > they could do more musically live than they did, that they could have
> > stretched things out more.
>
> When did you see them?
I caught them every tour from their "Fables" through "Green" tours - a
show a year from 1985-1989 - and another show I think during the
"Monster" tour.
> Me, only twice. First time was at Seattle's
> Paramount Theater in '86, and while I don't remember much "jamming," I do
> remember after each song they would huddle together midstage to make
> plans. Maybe just to talk about the local all-night bar scene or the
> parties they'd been invited to. But I will never forget seeing a
> tophatted Michael Stipe opening the show by literally running a circle
> around the band while belting out that he could live a million, he could
> live a million, he could live 1,000,000 years.
>
> The next time I saw them was a million years later at Key Arena (nee
> Seattle Center Coliseum), the first song was "Stand," and while they had
> adapted their show to the arena circuit, it lacked that energy I
> remembered from the Paramount.
>
> I haven't seen them since, although Peter Buck was married to the owner of
> the Crocodile Cafe and he played various shows there over the years.
> Never with enough advance notice for me to get there. Ratbastards!
>
> They never struck me as a band that would open it up during a song, but
> whatever they brought to that song, set, show, was the thing. Which is
> probably why I saw a few Heads in Spring Tour GD shirts at that Paramount
> show.
Their shows were always very well produced, and the bigger they got
the bigger their productions got. For some reason I still clearly
remember the slide show they had going during "Finest Worksong" during
the Document where they keep projecting the words "WANT" and "NEED" on
the screen in time with the song - funny the things that stick with
you sometimes. I enjoyed the shows - obviously, as I kept going back.
I'm evidently in the minority here however with respect to how great
they were live - they aren't a "great" live band IMO. In contrast to
another reviewer, for example here there are several Phil and Friends
shows that I've thought have been better (including two Phil shows
that Neil was at too; both of which had Chris Robinson in the
lineup). It may be a personal preference thing - my live music tastes
are biased towards improvise and REM doesn't do that, or if they do
it's very minimal. Also, I found their usual practice of having three
sets of encores annoying - I much prefer the Dead's practice of just
playing the whole show without the manufactured repeat encore ritual -
just play the music, and then give the audience one last song to end
the thing.
> oblig haiku:
>
> Superman, 9-9
> Driver 8, White Tornado
> Everybody Hurts
Finest Worksong
Try Not To Breathe
Begin The Begin
3jane.
>
> > Superman, 9-9
> > Driver 8, White Tornado
> > Everybody Hurts
>
> Finest Worksong
> Try Not To Breathe
> Begin The Begin
Just do yourself a favor, The Baseball Project by Buck, McCaughey,
Steve Wynn of the Dream Syndicate and this very cute and very talented
drummer, Linda something. This is good stuff, I suppose an REM side
project but good stuff. REM rocks, too bad for guys who haven't
figgered that out yet. I once sat next to Michael Stipe making out
with his gayboy lover at a diner on W. 34th before a REM show. I was
honored to make his aquaintance, he was a gentleman. Go REM.
Ray
<SkyYellowSunUSBl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Lifes
> Rich Pagent is like the premier hippie feel good album of the 80s for
> me.
Yeah that album was like a breath of fresh air during the Raygun era -
an album to rally the next generation of hippies with, to be sure.
Brad Greer
wrote:
Trust me, Neil. Opera sucks
Kelly Humphries
> Honorable mention: the drunken, slurred, King of the Road off Dead Letter
> Office.
"If there was any justice in the world, Roger Miller should be able to sue
for what we did to this song."
- Peter Buck
Sounds like Mike Mills is the only one who remembers the chords, and saves
it as best he can.
Neil X
Heh. My cats certainly agree. I never saw them move so fast as the
evening when I was scrolling through the XM channels that DirecTV
gives us, and some channel playing opera came on. They were out of
the living room and up the stairs, under the bed, in two nanoseconds.
Peace,
Neil X.
Jim McVey
>
>I never found them to be a great live band though - no jamming, all
>very rehearsed and choreographed. It's not like they sucked - they
>were fine shows and I enjoyed them well enough - but I always thought
>they could do more musically live than they did, that they could have
>stretched things out more.
Well...I see your point, but have to disagree. True - they don't jam -
but why would you expect them to? They're not a jam band. They've never
had any sort of jams on their albums and they've never really opened-up
their songs. Buck isn't a fan of guitar solos in general, much less
needlessly stretching out their songs with lengthy instrumental breaks.
They're R.E.M. and this is what they do. And they do it well.
I'm also not sure why being well-rehearsed is a bad thing. I'll agree
about the core of the shows being choreographed, but they also mix up
their setlists quite a bit. The banter may be similar from night
to night, but you also may get 7-8 different songs from show-to-show.
And those can cover their entire catalog, from pre-Chronic Town songs, to
covers, to newer, unreleased stuff. You're never sure what you're going
to get.
They're tight, fun, they engage the crowd, mix it up every night and play a
mix of hits and deeper cuts. I think they're still a great live band.
Jim
--
*********************************************************
Jim McVey
jmc...@panix.com
*********************************************************
Ray
> In article <hjb2if01...@news5.newsguy.com>, octoad <davk...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> >I never found them to be a great live band though - no jamming, all
> >very rehearsed and choreographed. It's not like they sucked - they
> >were fine shows and I enjoyed them well enough - but I always thought
> >they could do more musically live than they did, that they could have
> >stretched things out more.
FTR I wrote that, not octoad - his practice of sometimes appending to
a post like he did there can make attribution confusing though.
> Well...I see your point, but have to disagree. True - they don't jam -
> but why would you expect them to? They're not a jam band. They've never
> had any sort of jams on their albums and they've never really opened-up
> their songs. Buck isn't a fan of guitar solos in general, much less
> needlessly stretching out their songs with lengthy instrumental breaks.
> They're R.E.M. and this is what they do. And they do it well.
I agree with everything you say here. As mentioned in another post
it's my personal preference when seeing bands live to see them jam/
improvise. I also like bands to re-work and stretch out some of their
music live - if REM did much if any of that in the shows that I saw I
don't recall it now; what I remember is basically studio versions of
their songs done live.
> I'm also not sure why being well-rehearsed is a bad thing.
I didn't mean to imply that; poor choice of words on my part. I meant
that their playing is relatively rigid and set, not much spontaneity.
> I'll agree
> about the core of the shows being choreographed, but they also mix up
> their setlists quite a bit. The banter may be similar from night
> to night, but you also may get 7-8 different songs from show-to-show.
> And those can cover their entire catalog, from pre-Chronic Town songs, to
> covers, to newer, unreleased stuff. You're never sure what you're going
> to get.
Agreed. As I saw only one show per tour though I did not experience
that show-to-show thing with them.
Again I enjoyed their live performances - enough to keep going back
year after year for several years - but I prefer bands that jam and
improvise. But again yeah I agree that what they do live they do
well.
3jane.
> mix of hits and deeper cuts. I think they're still a great live band.
Yes REM rocks live, and as I have said before I saw Buck and McCaughy
in a local bar here (Iota, Arlington VA) and they just fucking
destroyed the place. I'm going to have to go out there and see if
it's still standing at some point.
DGDevin
"Garry the Island Boy" <garr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b9918aae-6138-4880...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>> The jury is still out on whether you're amusing or just hearing voices
>> not
>> audible to anyone else.
> You mean the one's telling me to stay home and clean the guns?
That's them, the ones also telling you to throw away all of your ammunition,
throw it in the garbage right now and then take the trash out to the curb.
All the knives too.
Jim McVey
Ray <ray...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Jan 22, 10:29�am, jmc...@panix.com (Jim McVey) wrote:
>> In article <hjb2if01...@news5.newsguy.com>, octoad <davk...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>> >I never found them to be a great live band though - no jamming, all
>> >very rehearsed and choreographed. It's not like they sucked - they
>> >were fine shows and I enjoyed them well enough - but I always thought
>> >they could do more musically live than they did, that they could have
>> >stretched things out more.
>
>FTR I wrote that, not octoad - his practice of sometimes appending to
>a post like he did there can make attribution confusing though.
Sorry about that. :)
Kelly Humphries
> OTOH, I like some really bad bands (I won't name
> them because you would cruelly mock me).
Just pictures, please.
frndthdevl
Neil X
ogre.net> wrote:
> people who say there's only two types of music; that which they like,
> and that which they don't. In the next sentence you mentioned someone
> who's generally regarded as "good" that you don't like. then mentioned
> that you like some bad bands.
>
> In other words, there's music/bands you like and music/bands you don't,
> regardless of what others think. IMO, that's the way it should be.
Uh, what I was ATTEMPTING to say is that there are folks out there who
don't believe any band is intrinsically good or bad, there are only
bands that they like and bands they don't like. What I was saying is
that there are good and bad bands, but that, for me at least, is not
an identical list of bands to the list of bands that I like and don't
like.
Peace,
Neil X.
Neil X
> >
> > OTOH, I like some really bad bands (I won't name
> > them because you would cruelly mock me).
>Kelly:
>
> Just pictures, please.
http://sliminny.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/b52s_grey_20071217_120347.jpg
volkfolk
> On Jan 19, 10:58 pm, Garry the Island Boy <garry...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > They were in NO way considered a serious band. . . kinda like PHISH.
>
> I don't understand pronouncements like this one.
I think he left "######" out
Scot
volkfolk
> "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:hj86fl$kuq$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> > Everybody is a snob about music.
>
> > there is two kinds of music, what you like and what you don't otherwise
> > there is no "good" or "bad" music.
> > as much as I loathe Terry Jacks somebody must like him.
>
> Yeah, that's true to some extent, everybody likes what they like and hates
> what they hate. However beyond that it is possible to get a handle on how
> "serious" a musician or band is by looking at things other than personal
> taste.
>
> Has anyone bothered to write a book about Musician X? If so that might
> indicate he should be taken seriously, but then again any star no matter how
> transitory gets a paste-up biography written about him. What if the
> performer has had a whole slew of books written about him, and a movie and
> documentary videos and there are college courses devoted to his work?
> That's starting to look more like he's a heavy-weight.
>
> Commercial success can't be considered in isolation, or every pop-tart with
> a two-year career would be considered an artist of note. But what about
> commercial success over many years, even decades? Somebody who has been
> selling albums and concert tickets for forty years probably needs to be
> taken more seriously.
>
> How about influence on other musicians? While it's not *impossible* that
> singers many years from now will claim inspiration in Britney Spears or some
> similar creature, it's a bit hard to believe. But if a string of today's
> artists talk about learning to play guitar listening to old Stones or
> Hendrix or Led Zep records, if today's songwriters talk about studying
> Beatles or Dylan lyrics while learning their craft--that suggests those
> vintage artists have had a lasting influence on music.
>
> So I don't think it's impossible to point to some musicians as standing
> above the herd because of a combination of commercial success, critical
> acclaim, longevity, and influence on other musicians (especially over time).
> Still doesn't mean anyone has to like them of course, and there is no law
> against being into really lightweight music if that's what spins your crank.
Some of the very best musicians I know nobody had ever heard of.
Scot
DGDevin
"volkfolk" <volk...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:c6db6a04-7b86-4a25...@z13g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...
> Some of the very best musicians I know nobody had ever heard of.
Sure, success in the music industry involves several factors and one of them
is luck (along with determination and ruthlessness and of course talent).
But that there are lots of unknown musicians with great abilities doesn't
invalidate what I posted.
JimK
wrote:
>On Jan 22, 2:25�ｿｽpm, The Lord of Eltingville <tthomas@[REMOVE_TO_REPLY]
>ogre.net> wrote:
>> Neil X wrote:
>> > On Jan 21, 8:12 pm, "3jane." <q3j...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>>> It's interesting that unlike say the Stones there seems to be no
>> >>>> general consensus with respect to what the best REM songs are, save
>> >>>> for most of them being from REM's first 6 releases.
>> >>> I don't think I could name 3 REM songs........
>> >> Your loss, they are a fantastic band live. �ｿｽWay better than many
>> >> incarnations of P&F (for example) that I have seen, simply no
>> >> comparison. �ｿｽIsn't it great that there's so much good music out there
>> >> that we are not familiar with?
>>
>> > Well, you couldn't exactly live in the USA over the past two decades
>> > and not hear a lot of REM songs. �ｿｽBut nothing I ever heard ever
>> > compelled me to buy one of their albums. �ｿｽI know they're a really good
>> > band, I wouldn't suggest otherwise. �ｿｽIt's one of those things, I don't
>> > really agree with the folks who say there is no such thing as good and
>> > bad music, there is only what you like and what you don't like. �ｿｽThere
>> > is a lot of good music that I don't like, two examples are Richard
>> > Thompson and opera. �ｿｽOTOH, I like some really bad bands (I won't name
>> > them because you would cruelly mock me). �ｿｽSome good music just doesn't
>> > appeal to certain individuals, for whatever reason. �ｿｽREM is like that
>> > for me.
>>
>> You kind of contradicted yourself. �ｿｽFirst you said you disagreed with
>> people who say there's only two types of music; that which they like,
>> and that which they don't. �ｿｽIn the next sentence you mentioned someone
>> who's generally regarded as "good" that you don't like. then mentioned
>> that you like some bad bands.
>>
>> In other words, there's music/bands you like and music/bands you don't,
>> regardless of what others think. �ｿｽIMO, that's the way it should be.
>
>
>
>Uh, what I was ATTEMPTING to say is that there are folks out there who
>don't believe any band is intrinsically good or bad, there are only
>bands that they like and bands they don't like. What I was saying is
>that there are good and bad bands, but that, for me at least, is not
>an identical list of bands to the list of bands that I like and don't
>like.
>
>Peace,
>Neil X.
Could you rephrase that, please?
JimK
J.C. Martin
I agree. I caught both U2 and REM several times in the early 80's,
and U2 was much more convincing as a live act, even though from a
musicianship standpoint, neither was better than the other. Several
years back, I got some passes to an REM show with Mercury Rev
opening. I thought Mercury Rev was infinitely more interesting as a
live act.
-JC
3jane.
> Azerrad book, "Our Band Could Be Your Life?" it was tres amusant re:
> the Surfers' affiliation with Peter Buck when they hung in Athens, GA
> (Buck was said to be cool, but most of the REM "protective layer"
> wanted nothing to do with Gibby Haynes and the acid-gobblin' bunch...).
I've read the whole book, it's an excellent read, I wish I still had
it. Wiki Buck and read about his "airplane incident", impressive
stuff even by rmgd standards.
Kelly Humphries
And they didn't tell you what REM songs you must know about?!?!
Disgusted.
(but not by the pics. More, please....)
Neil X
> Neil X <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > Neil X :
>
> > > > OTOH, I like some really bad bands (I won't name
> > > > them because you would cruelly mock me).
>
> > >Kelly:
>
> > > Just pictures, please.
>
>
> And they didn't tell you what REM songs you must know about?!?!
>
> Disgusted.
>
> (but not by the pics. More, please....)
http://www.morethings.com/music/fiona_apple/fiona-apple-024-img.jpg
Ray
Far from cruelly mocking you - which I have done here had you deserved
it - in my view both of those are very good acts (and make for nice
pictures too).
Speaking of the B-52s and REM, check out "Me In Honey" which IMO is
the best of the three songs that Kate Pierson contributes to on REM's
"Out of Time."
Ray
I agree there too - in my view U2 is a "more convincing" live act as
well. I'm not sure why since neither band improvises (again my pref
is for bands that do) and both bands pour themselves into their music
while playing, but there you go. That said U2 is up there with respect
to their live performances - among rock bands that don't improvise the
only band I've seen that comes time mind right now that puts on better
shows is the Rolling Stones, and possibly the Who. (I have no doubt
that the Who put on legendary performances back in the Keith Moon era
but I missed that.)
Neil X
Thanks for the tip. I will do so.
Around these parts, expressing any positive opinion of Fiona Apple is
pretty much a shooting offense......
Peace,
Neil X.
Neil X
Jeez, even back in the 80s the Who were incredible live.
Peace,
Neil X.
Ray
I remember the Who putting on a great shows back then, yeah. Taking
away the celeb factor though (I was in awe when I saw the Who for the
first time; as with many they were hugely influential for me as far
back as I can remember), I'm not sure that 80s Who were better than U2
- starting with their Unforgettable Fire tour those guys could really
bring it too.
Ray
> On Jan 26, 2:40 pm, Ray <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 9:03 am, Neil X <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 25, 11:09 pm, Kelly Humphries <kpiscesatspeakeasydotorg> wrote:
>
> > > > Neil X <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Neil X :
>
> > > > > > > OTOH, I like some really bad bands (I won't name
> > > > > > > them because you would cruelly mock me).
>
> > > > > >Kelly:
>
> > > > > > Just pictures, please.
>
> > > > >http://sliminny.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/b52s_grey_20071217_120347...
>
> > > > And they didn't tell you what REM songs you must know about?!?!
>
> > > > Disgusted.
>
> > > > (but not by the pics. More, please....)
>
> > >http://www.morethings.com/music/fiona_apple/fiona-apple-024-img.jpg
>
> > Far from cruelly mocking you - which I have done here had you deserved
> > it - in my view both of those are very good acts (and make for nice
> > pictures too).
>
> > Speaking of the B-52s and REM, check out "Me In Honey" which IMO is
> > the best of the three songs that Kate Pierson contributes to on REM's
> > "Out of Time."
>
> Thanks for the tip. I will do so.
The other two songs are "Country Feedback" and "Shiny Happy People."
IMO the former is ok but forgettable while the latter is regrettable -
I never cared for that tune even though it became one of their bigger
hits. "Out of Time" is IMO generally like that - hit and miss.
> Around these parts, expressing any positive opinion of Fiona Apple is
> pretty much a shooting offense......
They're just wrong - Fiona's got it going on.
3jane.
> well. I'm not sure why since neither band improvises (again my pref
> is for bands that do) and both bands pour themselves into their music
> while playing, but there you go. That said U2 is up there with respect
> to their live performances - among rock bands that don't improvise the
> only band I've seen that comes time mind right now that puts on better
> shows is the Rolling Stones, and possibly the Who. (I have no doubt
> that the Who put on legendary performances back in the Keith Moon era
> but I missed that.)
Love REM, think youtoo sucks (musically). I would've included them
with Mr. Joel had I remembered. They are sincere though, I remember a
story at some benefit for Africa concert and Bono was addressing the
crowd, saying something like "every minute I stand up here and talk to
you another child in Africa dies" and somebody in the front row yells,
"then why don't you shut the fuck up and sit down?', apparently it was
caught on some broadcast tape.
3jane.
To quote my ex, OMFG, just OMFG. Did you forget the ########s?
Ray
I understand the U2 = over-earnest pretension thing; they and esp.
Bono are sometimes too much for me in that dept. too. Have you seen
them live, however? Again they can really bring it.
3jane.
>
> I understand the U2 = over-earnest pretension thing; they and esp.
> Bono are sometimes too much for me in that dept. too. Have you seen
I will concede, they brought it on the Obama inauguration show at the
Lincoln Memorial (god that seems like a million years ago) but I think
Mr. Edge is a mediocre player at best (yes, I understand he doesn't do
leads and could no doubt shred if he wanted to blah blah blah) and I
really dislike "orchestral" rock, huge special effects, stadiums and
yes, pretension, that sort of thing. So I guess we weren't meant for
each other, me and youtoo. Ah well, it was fun for a few minutes
there.
Ray
I agree that the Edge has mediocre chops, and I'm not convinced he
could shred on very many lead solos. His "Bullet the Blue Sky" solo
makes a compelling case that he might be able to, however. In any
event the Edge's strength and contribution as a guitarist is far more
stylistic than than technical - he created an original, influential
and instantly recognizable guitar playing style, a feat not many
guitarists have accomplished.
When I think of "orchestral" rock I think of prog rock a la Yes, ELP,
etc., which with the exception of some early Yes and the odd tune here
and there ("Lucky Man" comes to mind) that's generally not my cup of
tea. I think I know what you're getting at though - bombastic stadium-
sized "event" shows, and for the most part that's not my cup of tea
either save these days for very few exceptions - the Stones and U2
amongst them. And even with those bands my inclination these days is
to not do the stadium thing unless I was talked into it or got comp
tickets, etc. - stadium shows are generally too much $$$ and hassle;
much better bang for the buck in smaller venues.