something i dont understand...[skagina]
Brandie
a) is named skagina (i mean we all know if a band has "ska" in its name... its gotta be fantastic...)
b)is god awful
have a cd out? i know plenty of fantastic bands out there that should put a cd out, but dont have the means... (one comes to mind.. the spaceheaters, who tried, but ... well, nevermind)
i knew my return to champaign would be depressing... but this is jut too much.
on the upside, i picked up a style council record and a police one.. brilliant.
cheers
Buckypunk
>how can a band who
>a) is named skagina (i mean we all know if a band has "ska" in its
>name... its gotta be fantastic...)
>b)is god awful
>have a cd out?
I'm friends with some of the kids in the band and my old band played wiht them
once, so I feel I can effectively answer your question. It's a matter of being
rich surbanites. The released the album entirely on there own and are suffering
for it I'm sure. I was discussing this with a friend at work today and he told
that the had 1000 discs pressed and they're not moving anywhere quick. I played
the album for another friend just yesterday and he agreed that it sucked,
however, many of the songs they re-recorded (i.e., Mr. Dick, 40 hours a week,
Puppy love,...) are still solid tracks and favorites in my book. So I guess you
can say, sure Skagina may be no Spaceheaters, btu it's Illinois ska and it's
known for being mediocre. No disrespect, I still love all the bands in the
area, love 'em to death.
-harrel
******************************************************************************
"I trust you will tell me if I'm making a fool of myself..."-S. Malkmus
******************************************************************************
Darren Pakravan
>
> how can a band who
> a) is named skagina (i mean we all know if a band has "ska" in its
> name... its gotta be fantastic...)
> b)is god awful
> put a cd out, but dont have the means... (one comes to mind.. the
> spaceheaters, who tried, but ... well, nevermind)
> i knew my return to champaign would be depressing... but this is jut
> too much.
> on the upside, i picked up a style council record and a police one..
> brilliant.
> cheers
>
Mannette, Regatta 69...
--
Ska FAQ: http://twillis.com/ska/faq/
--
Darren Pakravan
super-ska-rud...@nwu.edu
***this is my real email***
http://pubweb.nwu.edu/~dcp210/
Half-Assed Radio: http://pubweb.nwu.edu/~dcp210/halfass.htm
BriGfish
>It's a matter of being
>rich surbanites. The released the album entirely on there own and are
>suffering
>for it I'm sure.
You don't necessarily have to be "rich" to put out a CD. If you're in a band
and save 1000-2000 dollars you can release your own CD. It's just a matter of
whether or not they'll sell. And for self released CDs there is NO
distribution so it's a lot harder.
If a really good band waits a while and has someone who will really put money,
time and effort into putting out their CD it's probably a lot more worth their
while than putting out something of lower quality on their own.
-Brian D.
--------------------
ednasg...@hotmail.com or BriG...@aol.com
http://www.opennets.com/ednasgoldfish
mrs...@erols.com
jeff...@uiuc.edu wrote:
>
> how can a band who
> a) is named skagina (i mean we all know if a band has "ska" in its
> name... its gotta be fantastic...)
> b)is god awful
> have a cd out? i know plenty of fantastic bands out there that should
> put a cd out, but dont have the means... (one comes to mind.. the
> spaceheaters, who tried, but ... well, nevermind)
> i knew my return to champaign would be depressing... but this is jut too
> much.
The thing is, it USED TO BE that if a band put out a CD, it meant that they
had been around for awhile, had some fans, and were generally at least pretty
good. In other words, that there was a DEMAND for a CD of their music.
Nowdays, all that it means is that they scraped together a spare $1,000 and
decided they wanted to see their name on a jewelcase.
I haven't heard "Skagina" (ha!) and I'm not saying that there aren't plenty
of good bands that put out CD's. So don't get the wrong idea.
Morgan.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Guava Baby
>
> >It's a matter of being
> >rich surbanites. The released the album entirely on there own and are
> >suffering
> >for it I'm sure.
>
> You don't necessarily have to be "rich" to put out a CD. If you're in a band
> and save 1000-2000 dollars you can release your own CD. It's just a matter of
> whether or not they'll sell. And for self released CDs there is NO
> distribution so it's a lot harder.
>
> If a really good band waits a while and has someone who will really put money,
> time and effort into putting out their CD it's probably a lot more worth their
> while than putting out something of lower quality on their own.
>
> -Brian D.
Unless, of course, you're Coolie Ranx who can sell Eskimos snow.
Leigh
Brandie
-odcbrandie
Darren Pakravan wrote:
> Brandie wrote:
> >
> > how can a band who
> > a) is named skagina (i mean we all know if a band has "ska" in its
> > name... its gotta be fantastic...)
> > b)is god awful
> > have a cd out? i know plenty of fantastic bands out there that should
> > put a cd out, but dont have the means... (one comes to mind.. the
> > spaceheaters, who tried, but ... well, nevermind)
> > i knew my return to champaign would be depressing... but this is jut
> > too much.
Brandie
conclusions...
its cool, for them, im sure to be able to hold intheir hands one of their cd's..
but maybe they should've waited until .. well.. nevermind.
-odcbrandie
Buckypunk wrote:
> >how can a band who
> >a) is named skagina (i mean we all know if a band has "ska" in its
> >name... its gotta be fantastic...)
> >b)is god awful
> >have a cd out?
>
> I'm friends with some of the kids in the band and my old band played wiht them
> once, so I feel I can effectively answer your question. It's a matter of being
> rich surbanites. The released the album entirely on there own and are suffering
Obiwan97
i think they came from around where i live, my friend saw them
Zurgis
>
>The thing is, it USED TO BE that if a band put out a CD, it meant that they
>had been around for awhile, had some fans, and were generally at least pretty
>good. In other words, that there was a DEMAND for a CD of their music.
>Nowdays, all that it means is that they scraped together a spare $1,000 and
>decided they wanted to see their name on a jewelcase.
>
>I haven't heard "Skagina" (ha!) and I'm not saying that there aren't plenty
>of good bands that put out CD's. So don't get the wrong idea.
>
Right. Anyone here in the pittsburgh area agree with me in the fact that they
NEED a cd out. I think they're really good. I saw em at Laga when they opened
for Spring Heeled Jack and both bands were awesome.
Skadaddie
>Right. Anyone here in the pittsburgh area agree with me in the fact that
>they
>NEED a cd out. I think they're really good. I saw em at Laga when they
>opened
>for Spring Heeled Jack and both bands were awesome.
>
>
>
you. So, I guess that rules your theory out.
What kind of name is Skagina anyway?
Adam Scott
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/rudeandreckless
ZeroHero
Skadaddie wrote in message
>
>>Right. Anyone here in the pittsburgh area agree with me in the fact that
>>they
>>NEED a cd out. I think they're really good. I saw em at Laga when they
>>opened
>>for Spring Heeled Jack and both bands were awesome.
>>
>>
>>
>Umm...I am the resident Pittsburgher around these parts and I don't agree with
>you. So, I guess that rules your theory out.
>
>What kind of name is Skagina anyway?
>
>
>Adam Scott
I think I'm with Adam on this one. On another note, I think Berlin Project needs more recognition. Their CD proves they can be
awesome, even if they're young.
-ZeroHero
Skadaddie
> I think I'm with Adam on this one. On another note, I think Berlin Project
>needs more recognition. Their CD proves they can be
>awesome, even if they're young.
> -ZeroHero
>
>
>
usually all for supporting local bands, but not in this case. They play whiny,
teen-age ska-punk with squeaky horns. The only reason they play any shows is
because all of the other Pittsburgh bands boycott the promoters. Also, the only
reason they have a CD is because mommy and daddy paid for it. Not to mention
they got to open for the Slackers? What the hell was up with that? I'm still
bitter...
Adam Scott
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/rudeandreckless
ZeroHero
Skadaddie wrote in message
Hey, if you copy the horns to the band version of Wild Thing into one of your songs you have to be good, right? Anyway, they're
better than the Buzz Poets, and they got to play Warped.
-ZeroHero
Raw DNA
Not all bands should just rush out to put a CD, look at us, The Radiation
Kings. Despite the call for an RK cd, we just havent felt ready yet. We
will be known as the Stanley Kubrick of ska. We have gone about 2 years now
and close to 50 or so songs that come and go until we feel we wont regret
anything or look back in disappointment.
Chris Porkchop
co-creator of your world
"No Man knows, or will ever know, the truth about the gods and about
everything; for even if one happened by chance to say the complete truth,
nevertheless, one would not know it"---Xenophanes
Guava Baby
>
> Not all bands should just rush out to put a CD, look at us, The Radiation
> Kings. Despite the call for an RK cd, we just havent felt ready yet. We
> will be known as the Stanley Kubrick of ska. We have gone about 2 years now
> and close to 50 or so songs that come and go until we feel we wont regret
> anything or look back in disappointment.
>
>
> Chris Porkchop
> co-creator of your world
I think that's very wise. Look at the Slackers and the Insteps. They
both took their own sweet time putting albums out and consequentially
the albums were that much better.
Leigh
Joe 5778
> We have gone about 2 years now
>> and close to 50 or so songs that come and go until we feel we wont regret
>> anything or look back in disappointment.
That's awesome you guys can do that.....One reason the drummer and myself split
from our former band was disappointment over not having anything
recorded.....It's been 3 years and around 100 songs.....Leigh made a good point
in that consequentally the albums that took their time getting out were much
better, however, isn't that the purpose of a sophomore album (and so on)?
< Joe Ross >
Michael Caputo
>
I'm pretty sure it's a vaginal reference.
;)
-Mike C
> Adam Scott
> http://www.angelfire.com/pa/rudeandreckless
Skadaddie
>> What kind of name is Skagina anyway?
>>
>
>I'm pretty sure it's a vaginal reference.
>
>;)
>
>-Mike C
>
thanks for pointing that out...
Adam Scott
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/rudeandreckless
Raw DNA
I dunno, we're pretty self conscious that we dont want to put something out
that makes us look bad. Like showing good musical talent, but horrible
production(as I hear on a lot of albums). So many bands put out CDs of songs
that they just record and not think enough about. They're happy with one or
so takes and you can usually tell because you can hear the screwups(mostly on
trumpets)
Chris Porkchop
co-creator of your world
"No Man knows, or will ever know, the truth about the gods and about
noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu
guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
> Raw DNA wrote:
> >
> > Not all bands should just rush out to put a CD, look at us, The Radiation
> > Kings. Despite the call for an RK cd, we just havent felt ready yet. We
now
> > and close to 50 or so songs that come and go until we feel we wont regret
> > anything or look back in disappointment.
> >
> >
> > co-creator of your world
>
> both took their own sweet time putting albums out and consequentially
> the albums were that much better.
>
> Leigh
I actually disagree with you here, Leigh. I really appreciate the Jamaican
approach: Put out what you've got now. If you've got better stuff later,
put that out then. Sometimes you need a License to Ill before you can have a
Paul's Boutique. I personally think we did ourselves a disservice by not
releasing an album of the stupid, fun Insteps music when we had a chance.
N-Roy
Guava Baby
>
> I actually disagree with you here, Leigh. I really appreciate the Jamaican
> approach: Put out what you've got now. If you've got better stuff later,
> put that out then. Sometimes you need a License to Ill before you can have a
> Paul's Boutique. I personally think we did ourselves a disservice by not
> releasing an album of the stupid, fun Insteps music when we had a chance.
>
> N-Roy
Nope. Nope, nope, nope. It's just like writing a paper. If you don't
have a deadline, there's no reason to avoid doing drafts. Create an
album, sleep on it, return to it, perfect it. This is an odd debate
because you're generally more of a perfectionist than I am. The only
explanation I can come up with is that you're fonder of the early
Insteps material than I.
Leigh
Goya Gulyás
> I personally think we did ourselves a disservice by not
> releasing an album of the stupid, fun Insteps music when we had a chance.
>
> N-Roy
I would pay good money for the bootleg of the infamous
"Kazoo show" as would N-Roy, but I owe him one for
snatching that Max Romeo CD out of my hands at
Jammy Land and running to the cash register with it.
Bastard!! ;)
Cheers,
John
--
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Well, it is said that civilised man seeks out good and intelligent
company, so that, through learned discourse, he may rise above
the savage and closer to God. Personally, however, I like to start
the day with a total dickhead
to remind me I'm best. - Sir Edmund Black Adder
====================================================
Mike Carey
> noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu wrote:
> >
> > I actually disagree with you here, Leigh. I really appreciate the Jamaican
> > approach: Put out what you've got now. If you've got better stuff later,
> > put that out then. Sometimes you need a License to Ill before you can have a
> > Paul's Boutique. I personally think we did ourselves a disservice by not
> > releasing an album of the stupid, fun Insteps music when we had a chance.
> >
> > N-Roy
>
> Nope. Nope, nope, nope. It's just like writing a paper. If you don't
> have a deadline, there's no reason to avoid doing drafts. Create an
> album, sleep on it, return to it, perfect it. This is an odd debate
> because you're generally more of a perfectionist than I am. The only
> explanation I can come up with is that you're fonder of the early
> Insteps material than I.
>
> Leigh
>
>
It may actually be better from the musicians standpoint to release stuff
earlier then latter. You come up with a terrific song idea and then the
whole band learns it. You practice it repeatedly to the point where you
start forgeting what was good (and bad about the song) because you heard
it so many times. You may end up making changes to the song that make it
worse or were just pointless overtime. Same thing with writing a paper,
eventually you may end up over analyzing your work to the point that you
end up destroying your original intent. So sometimes its better to go with
something as good as you canget it rather then searching for perfection.
It may be better to release your stuff early (usually if people are
telling you you should release a cd, this is a good sign that its time)
and then just write bad reviews off as youth.
Stir It Up,
Mike "Speed Racer" Carey
315
--------------------------------------------------------------
Guava Baby
>
> It may actually be better from the musicians standpoint to release stuff
> earlier then latter. You come up with a terrific song idea and then the
> whole band learns it. You practice it repeatedly to the point where you
> start forgeting what was good (and bad about the song) because you heard
> it so many times. You may end up making changes to the song that make it
> worse or were just pointless overtime. Same thing with writing a paper,
> eventually you may end up over analyzing your work to the point that you
> end up destroying your original intent. So sometimes its better to go with
> something as good as you canget it rather then searching for perfection.
> It may be better to release your stuff early (usually if people are
> telling you you should release a cd, this is a good sign that its time)
> and then just write bad reviews off as youth.
Noah over analyze something? Not possible! Heh, heh - ok, so you have a
point, but I still don't like most of the pre-album Insteps songs, so I
can't say that I regret being deprived of even more of them.
Besides, there is a learning curve for how to create good music, and too
many bands rush to get some material out before they've reached any
semblance of a maturity plateau. Not being a musician, I can't say how
many songs a band should have written before they consider recording.
Obviously, this should vary with the abilities, goals, etc. of each
band.
I'm losing my point, but I think what I was trying to say was that I,
personally, would rather postpone releasing material rather than get
things out only to be embarrassed by them later.
Leigh
mrs...@erols.com
guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
> noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu wrote:
> >
> > I actually disagree with you here, Leigh. I really appreciate the Jamaican
> > approach: Put out what you've got now. If you've got better stuff later,
> > put that out then. Sometimes you need a License to Ill before you can have a
> > Paul's Boutique. I personally think we did ourselves a disservice by not
> > releasing an album of the stupid, fun Insteps music when we had a chance.
> >
> > N-Roy
>
> Nope. Nope, nope, nope. It's just like writing a paper. If you don't
> have a deadline, there's no reason to avoid doing drafts. Create an
> album, sleep on it, return to it, perfect it. This is an odd debate
> because you're generally more of a perfectionist than I am. The only
> explanation I can come up with is that you're fonder of the early
> Insteps material than I.
>
> Leigh
You both have a point, and that's why we have 7 inch records. Put out the
early stuff on singles, and do a full album when you have your shit together.
Morgan.
dmo...@genzyme.com
guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
> noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu wrote:
> >
> > I actually disagree with you here, Leigh. I really appreciate the Jamaican
> > approach: Put out what you've got now. If you've got better stuff later,
> > put that out then. Sometimes you need a License to Ill before you can have
a
> > Paul's Boutique. I personally think we did ourselves a disservice by not
> > releasing an album of the stupid, fun Insteps music when we had a chance.
> >
> > N-Roy
>
> Nope. Nope, nope, nope. It's just like writing a paper. If you don't
> have a deadline, there's no reason to avoid doing drafts. Create an
> album, sleep on it, return to it, perfect it. This is an odd debate
> because you're generally more of a perfectionist than I am. The only
> explanation I can come up with is that you're fonder of the early
> Insteps material than I.
>
> Leigh
>
I think it's a total crapshoot. Sometimes, it's best to hone and perfect it,
other times, better to just live in the moment. The CD I'm currently
involved in mixing has me very excited, and there are certain songs which we
only rehearsed a grand total of about maybe twenty to twenty-five
run-throughs before we went in. That's about four or five practice sessions.
If we'd worked a lot more on those songs, I think they would have changed,
and not always for the best. Just my buck two-eighty.
Dtrain
Guava Baby
>
> I think it's a total crapshoot. Sometimes, it's best to hone and perfect it,
> other times, better to just live in the moment. The CD I'm currently
> involved in mixing has me very excited, and there are certain songs which we
> only rehearsed a grand total of about maybe twenty to twenty-five
> run-throughs before we went in. That's about four or five practice sessions.
> If we'd worked a lot more on those songs, I think they would have changed,
> and not always for the best. Just my buck two-eighty.
>
> Dtrain
Yes, but I was speaking only about bands who are just starting out. When
you've just written your first song, I imagine you're enormously pleased
with yourself (I would be). You think you're a genius and that your work
is terrific. After you've written a lot more (and become a better
musician), your perspective changes and you (hopefully!) learn to be
more adept at self-criticism. I trust that you and the rest of the
Steady Earnest crew reached this level a long time ago.
Leigh
Goya Gulyás
>
> I think it's a total crapshoot. Sometimes, it's best to hone and perfect it,
> other times, better to just live in the moment. The CD I'm currently
> involved in mixing has me very excited, and there are certain songs which we
> only rehearsed a grand total of about maybe twenty to twenty-five
> run-throughs before we went in. That's about four or five practice sessions.
> If we'd worked a lot more on those songs, I think they would have changed,
> and not always for the best. Just my buck two-eighty.
>
> Dtrain
I totally agree with D-Train. It's a toss up. Many blues and
jazz artists swear by a "no more than 4 takes on a song" at
a given recording session. You can burn out easily and plus,
as D-Train mentioned, your song will take on changes if you
keep on belting through take after take. I remember vividly
what a pain in the ass it was to record Inspecter 7's 1st
7inch as well as Skoochie's Ruin for Skankaholics. It was done
live, so we had to nail the songs down on the spot and there
was no room for error. The 7 inch was murderous to do
because someone would hit a bad note or whatever and had
to start over again. I like the 4 take rule with live recording.
That way if you don't nail it the right way, you can shelve it
for a bit instead of getting bent about it and fucking it up
more.
Cheers,
John
dmo...@genzyme.com
guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
> dmo...@genzyme.com wrote:
> >
> > I think it's a total crapshoot. Sometimes, it's best to hone and perfect
it,
> > other times, better to just live in the moment. The CD I'm currently
> > involved in mixing has me very excited, and there are certain songs which we
> > only rehearsed a grand total of about maybe twenty to twenty-five
> > run-throughs before we went in. That's about four or five practice
sessions.
> > If we'd worked a lot more on those songs, I think they would have changed,
> > and not always for the best. Just my buck two-eighty.
> >
> > Dtrain
>
> you've just written your first song, I imagine you're enormously pleased
> with yourself (I would be). You think you're a genius and that your work
> is terrific.
Yup. I get it now.
> After you've written a lot more (and become a better
> musician), your perspective changes and you (hopefully!) learn to be
> more adept at self-criticism. I trust that you and the rest of the
> Steady Earnest crew reached this level a long time ago.
I don't know about that, but I *do* feel pretty confident when I'm taking
Art's medication.
Cheers,
Dtrain
PS - Listening to a live in-studio performance by Better Than Ezra on WBCN,
and someone in the band is talking about their experience inviting Lee Perry
to hang in the studio with them. Interesting.
noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu
> Nope. Nope, nope, nope. It's just like writing a paper. If you don't
> have a deadline, there's no reason to avoid doing drafts. Create an
> album, sleep on it, return to it, perfect it. This is an odd debate
> because you're generally more of a perfectionist than I am. The only
> explanation I can come up with is that you're fonder of the early
> Insteps material than I.
It's not like writing a paper, because it's not a purely intellectual
enterprise. In my experience, "Create an album, sleep on it, return to it,
perfect it," isn't how it works at all. You should still like your song at
the point when you record it, and hopefully even after you're done recording
it. If you're sick of it, people will know. Plan your schedule accordingly.
This all addresses a slightly different point than the one I was making,
though. I was talking about how people should conduct themselves over the
course of their lives (as ususal), not what the best way to make an album is.
Your work should represent where you're at right now. If where you're at
changes, it's time to do something new. Don't hold off on stating your case
because you're aware the case will eventually change, just restate as
neccessary. Also, when considered from the perspective of commerce, recorded
material (that doesn't suck) can travel farther than you can when you're just
starting out, often in bizzarre and unexpected directions. Having a cd or a
tape floating around will dramatically increase people's level of knowing who
the fuck you are, which is always good. It takes a while for this to have an
appreciable effect, though, so it's important to get on it early and often.
This is not to say that bands shouldn't be able to play and have something
worth playing before they do any of this, but most bands will never have
anything to say that's worth hearing anyway, even after they become
technically proficient enough to suck subtly. Bands whose work goes from
sucking obviously to sucking subtly are of no interest to anyone with any
kind of taste anyway, so who cares. What is interesting is when bands go
from being subtly good (and outwardly sucky) to obviously good. That's why
Licensed to Ill is the best Beastie Boys record, because it says so much
about who those guys are, more than they'd ever let you know these days, now
that they know what the fuck they're doing.
At any rate, this really isn't about the early Insteps material, which was
pretty spotty, even from a sympathetic perspective.
N-Roy
noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu
guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
> Noah over analyze something? Not possible! Heh, heh - ok, so you have a
> point, but I still don't like most of the pre-album Insteps songs, so I
> can't say that I regret being deprived of even more of them.
>
> Besides, there is a learning curve for how to create good music, and too
> many bands rush to get some material out before they've reached any
> semblance of a maturity plateau. Not being a musician, I can't say how
> many songs a band should have written before they consider recording.
> Obviously, this should vary with the abilities, goals, etc. of each
> band.
>
> I'm losing my point, but I think what I was trying to say was that I,
> personally, would rather postpone releasing material rather than get
> things out only to be embarrassed by them later.
I would say that a band should record an album when they have enough songs to
fill up an album with stuff they think sounds good. Most people who are any
good at this sort of thing are intensely self-critical, and as I said in a
previous post, I'm not concerned here with what the people who aren't good at
it do. Fear of future embarrassment is a pretty lame motivation, in my
opinion. One should exhibit the recklessness and discomforting honesty of a
drunk, expressed with sober clarity, at all times, if one wishes to truly
kick ass.
Finally, though the early Insteps material is not all good, by any stretch of
the imagination, it is not-good in a timely fashion (with respect to ska in
the early 90s) in my opinion. In pop music, timeliness is generally more
expedient than quality.
N-Roy
Guava Baby
>
>One should exhibit the recklessness and discomforting honesty of a
> drunk, expressed with sober clarity, at all times, if one wishes to truly
> kick ass.
Well, that *sounds* terrific, but I don't know that I actually buy it.
Honesty, sure. Recklessness? Hmm. I'll have to mull that over a bit. I
can see where that fits in with the Insteps approach, but there are many
paths to ass kickingness, of which that appears to be merely one route.
> In pop music, timeliness is generally more
> expedient than quality.
Expedient? Expedient? Who are you and what have you done with Noah?
Expediency matters little to those striving for greatness.
As to timeliness, though I do understand your point about relevancy, I
can't say that I totally accept it. I like music from different eras,
literature from different eras, art from different eras, etc. Does it
mean any more to me that the person creating the work grew up in
circumstances similar to my own? Not really. One of the great things
about art is that it says something essential and true about the nature
of human existance, and it's not necessarily too important whether the
medium for the message is one with which you closely identify or not.
It's the message that's the key.
Besides, temporal relevance is merely one way of relating to others
amidst a host of possibilities. How often can we not relate to peers,
but find true kinship with someone of another age? For me, very often.
Perhaps I'm just weird. ;)
Leigh
Guava Baby
>
> It's not like writing a paper, because it's not a purely intellectual
> enterprise. In my experience, "Create an album, sleep on it, return to it,
> perfect it," isn't how it works at all.
Having no experience whatsoever, I'm hard pressed to argue this point.
> This all addresses a slightly different point than the one I was making,
> though. I was talking about how people should conduct themselves over the
> course of their lives (as ususal), not what the best way to make an album is.
> Your work should represent where you're at right now. If where you're at
> changes, it's time to do something new. Don't hold off on stating your case
> because you're aware the case will eventually change, just restate as
> neccessary.
Sure, but the point I was trying to make (which is by no means
controversial), was merely that bands are usually in a state of flux for
the first few years, at least. They are also learning a lot more about
how to create music and what's good and what isn't (not that they had no
opinion on this to begin with, but I'm sure that the act of writing
music increases your sensitivity as to what makes a song good and what
doesn't). To me it seems like a waste of time, money, and effort to
record until this growth spurt subsides somewhat.
> Also, when considered from the perspective of commerce, recorded
> material (that doesn't suck) can travel farther than you can when you're just
> starting out, often in bizzarre and unexpected directions. Having a cd or a
> tape floating around will dramatically increase people's level of knowing who
> the fuck you are, which is always good. It takes a while for this to have an
> appreciable effect, though, so it's important to get on it early and often.
Yeah, but it can also hurt you if your awkward period is so ungainly
that people are permanently scared off. What if Regatta 69 suddenly got
good? It would take them years and years to undo the damage they've
already done to their reputations.
> What is interesting is when bands go
> from being subtly good (and outwardly sucky) to obviously good. That's why
> Licensed to Ill is the best Beastie Boys record, because it says so much
> about who those guys are, more than they'd ever let you know these days, now
> that they know what the fuck they're doing.
Well, it's vaguely interesting, but not very enjoyable. One of my
favorite bands, Prefab Sprout, had a pretty ugly first album which
nonetheless has glimmers of goodness that hinted at the ways in which
they later grew. But do I ever listen to it? Never. Am I glad they
released it? Not really. You apparently enjoy seeing bands evolve. I
don't really care - I just want good music. How they got there isn't
really too compelling to me.
Leigh
dtr...@my-dejanews.com
guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
> Well, it's vaguely interesting, but not very enjoyable. One of my
> favorite bands, Prefab Sprout, had a pretty ugly first album which
> nonetheless has glimmers of goodness that hinted at the ways in which
> they later grew. But do I ever listen to it? Never. Am I glad they
> released it? Not really. You apparently enjoy seeing bands evolve. I
> don't really care - I just want good music. How they got there isn't
> really too compelling to me.
>
> Leigh
>
Interesting. I heard their second and third albums and didn't really care
for either. At that point I stopped being interested in Prefab Sprout. But
I loved that first album (and nearly wore out its grooves back in '85).
Cheers,
Dtrain
noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu
guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
> noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu wrote:
> >
> >One should exhibit the recklessness and discomforting honesty of a
> > drunk, expressed with sober clarity, at all times, if one wishes to truly
> > kick ass.
>
> Well, that *sounds* terrific, but I don't know that I actually buy it.
> Honesty, sure. Recklessness? Hmm. I'll have to mull that over a bit. I
> can see where that fits in with the Insteps approach, but there are many
> paths to ass kickingness, of which that appears to be merely one route.
Recklessness might not be the proper word choice here. What I'm saying is
that nothing good comes from fear.
> > In pop music, timeliness is generally more
> > expedient than quality.
>
> Expedient? Expedient? Who are you and what have you done with Noah?
> Expediency matters little to those striving for greatness.
I'm not talking about greatness directly here, but success. If your spastic
juvenile efforts convince some label to give you enough money to build your
own studio when you decide to get serious, it helps.
> As to timeliness, though I do understand your point about relevancy, I
> can't say that I totally accept it. I like music from different eras,
> literature from different eras, art from different eras, etc. Does it
> mean any more to me that the person creating the work grew up in
> circumstances similar to my own? Not really. One of the great things
> about art is that it says something essential and true about the nature
> of human existance, and it's not necessarily too important whether the
> medium for the message is one with which you closely identify or not.
> It's the message that's the key.
Yeah, I agree with that. I'm not talking about art, either. I'm talking
about pop music and living an interesting life, both of which are good for
art, but not neccessarily art in themselves.
> Besides, temporal relevance is merely one way of relating to others
> amidst a host of possibilities. How often can we not relate to peers,
> but find true kinship with someone of another age? For me, very often.
> Perhaps I'm just weird. ;)
>
> Leigh
Well, I think it really does matter. Kinship with someone from another age
is easy to believe in, but unscientific, because it isn't falsifiable. You
aren't ever going to be able to collect any more new data on the subject.
Kinship with a contemporary is (or at least can be) stronger and better
because you're catching them mid-stream, instead of as a closed system or a
predigested morsel. Furthermore, the passage of time can reinforce or weaken
the relationship. Things which can be lost are inherently more precious,
because of the uncertainty. Finally, and especially with regard to music,
tons of nuance are lost to those who weren't right there when it happened.
Bob Marley records are great, but I find myself so much more drawn to his
concert footage, even at the expense of sound quality. Still, out of
hundreds, if not thousands of shows he played, only and handful are captured
that way, and of those, how much of the richness of the experience is lost
between the smoke-filled spot, packed with living people, and your vcr?
Nearly all of it. The fact that it's still great is merely a testament to
how much you're really missing. This is a digression from my original point,
which was about fun and commerce, but it's worth making. The problem of
course is that there are so few people in our era worth paying attention to.
I loathe most of my contemporaries. The few I don't are more precious to me
than Shakespeare, though.
N-Roy
noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu
guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
> noah...@smtplink.mssm.edu wrote:
> >
> > It's not like writing a paper, because it's not a purely intellectual
> > enterprise. In my experience, "Create an album, sleep on it, return to it,
> > perfect it," isn't how it works at all.
>
> Having no experience whatsoever, I'm hard pressed to argue this point.
I'm only marginally more experienced, but I think that sleeping on things is
generally bad.
> Sure, but the point I was trying to make (which is by no means
> controversial), was merely that bands are usually in a state of flux for
> the first few years, at least. They are also learning a lot more about
> how to create music and what's good and what isn't (not that they had no
> opinion on this to begin with, but I'm sure that the act of writing
> music increases your sensitivity as to what makes a song good and what
> doesn't). To me it seems like a waste of time, money, and effort to
> record until this growth spurt subsides somewhat.
I think that bands in the stage you're describing are generally aware that
only about half their songs are any good at all (at best). As I said in a
previous post, only when you've got enough material that you believe in your
heart to be actually good to fill up an album should you record one. Also,
recording is an entirely different thing from playing live. If you're going
to be a musician, you need to learn the tricks of it, and you will make a lot
of mistakes at first. It's best to make those mistakes early, so that you
can use what you've learned when things matter more.
> Yeah, but it can also hurt you if your awkward period is so ungainly
> that people are permanently scared off. What if Regatta 69 suddenly got
> good? It would take them years and years to undo the damage they've
> already done to their reputations.
I think you overestimate the damage done. Basically, people have heard of you
or they haven't. Everything else is more directly under your control.
> > What is interesting is when bands go
> > from being subtly good (and outwardly sucky) to obviously good. That's why
> > Licensed to Ill is the best Beastie Boys record, because it says so much
> > about who those guys are, more than they'd ever let you know these days, now
> > that they know what the fuck they're doing.
>
> Well, it's vaguely interesting, but not very enjoyable. One of my
> favorite bands, Prefab Sprout, had a pretty ugly first album which
> nonetheless has glimmers of goodness that hinted at the ways in which
> they later grew. But do I ever listen to it? Never. Am I glad they
> released it? Not really. You apparently enjoy seeing bands evolve. I
> don't really care - I just want good music. How they got there isn't
> really too compelling to me.
I think that the fundamental, irreducible particle of interestingness is the
person or, more precisely, the soul. Remember that Kerouack bit about great
art being about companionship? I like expressions of self that suggest the
existence of a soul with qualities that I consider admirable, or, failing
that, remind me of myself. It's not really about bands evolving. I don't
actually like the beastie boys' music all that much, for example. The thing
that's important, and the reason why I brought them up in this discussion, is
that who you are is all about who you've been. There's a poem that I saw on
the subway the other day that I really dug. I will try now to rewrite it
from memory:
The Ideal
This is where I came from,
I passed this way.
These should not be shameful,
or hard to say.
A self is a self,
it is not a screen.
A person should respect
where he has been.
This is my past,
which I shall not discard.
This is the Ideal.
This is hard.
I forget the poet's name, unfortunately. It's an american guy from the 2nd
half of the 20th century. He's right. It is hard. I was suggesting that
people should force themselves to make indelible marks along the way, so that
their work in it's totality might stand a better chance of being honest.
Guava Baby
>
> In article <361D3E...@mindspring.com>,
> guav...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> > Well, it's vaguely interesting, but not very enjoyable. One of my
> > favorite bands, Prefab Sprout, had a pretty ugly first album which
> > nonetheless has glimmers of goodness that hinted at the ways in which
> > they later grew. But do I ever listen to it? Never. Am I glad they
> > released it? Not really. You apparently enjoy seeing bands evolve. I
> > don't really care - I just want good music. How they got there isn't
> > really too compelling to me.
> >
> >
>
> Interesting. I heard their second and third albums and didn't really care
> for either. At that point I stopped being interested in Prefab Sprout. But
> I loved that first album (and nearly wore out its grooves back in '85).
>
> Cheers,
> Dtrain
Ah, but are you sure you didn't hear their second album? Their first was
called Swoon; it was the second one, known alternately as Steve MacQueen
and Two Wheels Good, that spawned the classics Appetite, Faron Young,
and When Love Breaks Down. I do have to admit though that PS may have
been a bad analogy, since I've found that their music improves markedly
with repeated listens, and I've never really given Swoon the time it may
deserve. As far as their later albums go, the most interesting and
successful to me was Jordan: the Comeback. It's a concept album in the
best sense of that phrase dealing with all types of come-backs from
Elvis to Satan with all stops in between. Yummy.
Leigh
dtr...@my-dejanews.com
I heard their first single on the radio and went out to buy Swoon on the
strength of that song. I subsequently bought a 10" ep with an alternate take
of a song from the second album (Johnny Johnny) and a couple of other songs.
I thought it was pretty decent, but not as good as Swoon. Then I bought Two
Wheels Good. I didn't like much of it, and didn't find that repeat listens
helped. That's the last one I bought. I've since heard one or two others
that left me cold. In this case, it just seemed to me that the personality
that endeared them to me on Swoon just faded away. I dunno.
A quick PS story: while in Europe with SE, I attempted to play a tape with
several songs from Swoon on it, and was immediately shouted down once the
first song began. It just wasn't macho (or ska, rocksteady, reggae) enough
for the other tough guys. I think that "Wear You to the Ball" on the Take It
CD was recorded on that cassette.
Take it easy,
Darrell
Guava Baby
>
> Recklessness might not be the proper word choice here. What I'm saying is
> that nothing good comes from fear.
Well, it can be a hell of a motivator, but, naturally if you've got
squat to offer in the first place…
> I'm not talking about greatness directly here, but success. If your spastic
> juvenile efforts convince some label to give you enough money to build your
> own studio when you decide to get serious, it helps.
Ha, ha - okay, I'll concede that one.
(snip)
> Well, I think it really does matter. Kinship with someone from another age
> is easy to believe in, but unscientific, because it isn't falsifiable. You
> aren't ever going to be able to collect any more new data on the subject.
> Kinship with a contemporary is (or at least can be) stronger and better
> because you're catching them mid-stream, instead of as a closed system or a
> predigested morsel. Furthermore, the passage of time can reinforce or weaken
> the relationship. Things which can be lost are inherently more precious,
> because of the uncertainty.
Agreed. I didn't necessarily mean kinship with someone who's dead.
Didn't you ever meet someone who was quite a bit older or younger than
you, in rather different circumstances, but with whom you shared a
special understanding? Though possibly not as close, such friendships
can have a much more dramatic effect in that they expose you to ideas
and realities with which your path might not otherwise have crossed.
Finally, and especially with regard to music,
> tons of nuance are lost to those who weren't right there when it happened.
That's undeniably so, yet on the other hand sometimes great works are
dismissed as fluff at the time and their importance is only recognized
later.
> The problem of
> course is that there are so few people in our era worth paying attention to.
> I loathe most of my contemporaries. The few I don't are more precious to me
> than Shakespeare, though.
Well, I've never been a big fan of Billy S., but I see your point.
However, I still just don't really give a crap what my contemporaries
are doing. None of them are impressing me, but then (1) I have no idea
what they're up to and (2) it's rather early in our lives to expect too
much. I dunno - I just don't feel as connected to my peers as you do.
Leigh
Guava Baby
>
> I heard their first single on the radio and went out to buy Swoon on the
> strength of that song. I subsequently bought a 10" ep with an alternate take
> of a song from the second album (Johnny Johnny) and a couple of other songs.
> I thought it was pretty decent, but not as good as Swoon. Then I bought Two
> Wheels Good. I didn't like much of it, and didn't find that repeat listens
> helped. That's the last one I bought. I've since heard one or two others
> that left me cold. In this case, it just seemed to me that the personality
> that endeared them to me on Swoon just faded away. I dunno.
Really?! Huh. Well, I'll have to give Swoon another chance. To me, it
just sounds sloppy and misguided or, more precisely, unguided.
> A quick PS story: while in Europe with SE, I attempted to play a tape with
> several songs from Swoon on it, and was immediately shouted down once the
> first song began. It just wasn't macho (or ska, rocksteady, reggae) enough
> for the other tough guys. I think that "Wear You to the Ball" on the Take It
> CD was recorded on that cassette.
Well, I suppose if Prefab had to croak they did so for a good cause! I
don't find that many people find their music immediately accessible. If
you only half listen it does sound a bit Ultravoxy (in the worst,
whiniest sense of the term). There's a lot going on, though. How 'bout
this from Jordan -
This is where your sleepless eyes will close
This is where the weary find repose
This is where the kinder bugle blows
This is where you'll wait to find the River Jordan flows
Scarlet nights waiting - sleep is overdue
Scarlet nights ending - here on in they're blue
Yes, I know we're not saying goodbye
Yes, I know that farewell don't apply
Yet I know no matter how I try
Yes, I know and you should know that all the same I'll cry
Scarlet nights waiting - sleep is overdue
Scarlet nights ending - here on in they're blue
Blue as skies and blue as heavens
watching over Galilee and Rome
Blue as water Jordan's waters
Blue as dawn and dawn will take you home
<sniff!> Always makes me weepy. Love, death, faith - what more could you
want? I love all the harmonies and acappella stuff they do, too.
Leigh
Guava Baby
(snip)
> I think that the fundamental, irreducible particle of interestingness is the
> person or, more precisely, the soul. Remember that Kerouack bit about great
> art being about companionship?
Uh, no. I try to avoid modern literature, most of which I've found
artless and designed more for effect than substance. Not that no good
books have been written lately, just that the weeding out process of
history has yet to work its magic.
> I like expressions of self that suggest the
> existence of a soul with qualities that I consider admirable, or, failing
> that, remind me of myself.
Ha, ha. A wonderful observation. Well, that's certainly what I look for
in people, but I don't really look for that in the musicians whose work
I enjoy. Now I'm not trying to be post-modernistic, but I really try to
divorce the music from the person who wrote it. Very often you find out
things about your favorite musicians that you really don't wanna know,
and if you identify their work too closely with them, it can spoil the
music for you. Naturally, this is artificial, and to get the truest
sense of the work I believe you should know about the person who created
it, what they were experiencing, where they'd been, etc. However, we're
not talking great art - we're talking pop music. I mean, there are songs
with somewhat vague lyrics which I interpret in a very personal way
which I *know* is not what the writer intended. In fact, if I knew for
sure what he intended, the songs would probably be rather superficial,
depressing creations. Though that would be a more fair assessment of
these works, it would spoil something special for me, so who cares for
accuracy?
> It's not really about bands evolving. I don't
> actually like the beastie boys' music all that much, for example. The thing
> that's important, and the reason why I brought them up in this discussion, is
> that who you are is all about who you've been. There's a poem that I saw on
> the subway the other day that I really dug. I will try now to rewrite it
> from memory:
>
> The Ideal
>
> This is where I came from,
> I passed this way.
> These should not be shameful,
> or hard to say.
>
> A self is a self,
> it is not a screen.
> A person should respect
> where he has been.
>
> This is my past,
> which I shall not discard.
> This is the Ideal.
> This is hard.
>
> I forget the poet's name, unfortunately. It's an american guy from the 2nd
> half of the 20th century. He's right. It is hard.
Agreed completely.
>I was suggesting that
> people should force themselves to make indelible marks along the way, so that
> their work in it's totality might stand a better chance of being honest.
Yes, I agree. I was merely talking about the point where you haven't
found your voice yet and your ineloquence would give a warped, dishonest
view of what you were experiencing and trying to communicate. I suppose
your response would be that anyone trying to gain an insight into your
work would be able to see through your clumsiness and grasp what you
were aiming for. Perhaps. There's no way to really settle this in
abstract terms.
Leigh