Bruce Springsteen - a FAKER?
SteveYetter
product (remembering of course that a celebrity is only known for being
known, generally) is called "transfer of authority." Which is why
pitchmen for car companies don't necessarily have to be known for
driving...just SOMETHING! Unfortunately, guitars have joined the general
music world as big money makers for a lot of people who could care less
about music or guitars.
Fortunately, there are still real players involved in the guitar
"industry." It's nice to know that Jomack, the Martin Rep., AKA Joe
Macnamara, actually can play the dang things, and very well.
As for Bruce Springsteen, I've seen him take a few swipes at the
strings now and then, but his bag is more about other things. Guitar is
just not his focus primarily ('till the ad copy photo shoot I guess). He
has succeeded in parlaying some kind of image into a marketable form,
and I prefer him to say, The Artist (formerly thought of as talented).
'Course I don't buy either's recordings, and I wouldn't buy a used car
from them either (or a guitar). But then, I've been accused of having a
sour grapes attitude and being a frustrated musician myself. Actually
I'm not all that frustrated. I'm twice the man Bruce or The Artist is,
according to belt size, if nothing else.
-SY-
Gary Beckwith wrote:
>
> I was flipping through the channels the other day, and there was a video
> of the Boss doing a live show, playing Born in the USA. I swear, he was
> faking it. Of course, he was really getting into the singing, but every
> time they showed his guitar and hands, they were in the same position,
> and it didn't look like any real chord to me.
>
> Does anyone know for sure if he really knows how to play guitar?
>
> This made me think about how manufacturers tout some musicians using
> their instruments. Takamine has a picture of Bruce, Paul McCartney and
> Billy Joel on their home page. Joel is mainly a piano player, Paul
> started out as a faker and eventually became mainly a bass player (and
> was never really known for his guitar playing), and now Bruce appeared
> (to me anyway) to be faking it on TV the other night. What does this
> say about Takamine?
>
> I was looking at a Washburn catalog the other day. They have a picture
> of Rober Plant "holding" a Washburn guitar in it. He's not even a
> faker, I don't even think he pretends to play the guitar. Why he is in
> the catalog I don't know, maybe for people that don't even realize he
> doesn't play. I guess the picture would sell a few hundred guitars.
>
> Gary
Gary Beckwith
Jay Adair
--
Founder & Charter Member of The Society for Mediocre Guitar Playing on
Expensive Instruments, Ltd.
Gary Beckwith <gav...@att.net> wrote in message
news:37099E46...@att.net...
> I was flipping through the channels the other day, and there was a video
> of the Boss doing a live show, playing Born in the USA. I swear, he was
> faking it. Of course, he was really getting into the singing, but every
> time they showed his guitar and hands, they were in the same position,
> and it didn't look like any real chord to me.
>
> Does anyone know for sure if he really knows how to play guitar?
>
> This made me think about how manufacturers tout some musicians using
> their instruments. Takamine has a picture of Bruce, Paul McCartney and
> Billy Joel on their home page. Joel is mainly a piano player, Paul
> started out as a faker and eventually became mainly a bass player (and
> was never really known for his guitar playing),
Hold the phone there, big boy. McCartney, probably the best and most
tasteful bassist to come down the pike in the past few decades was certainly
no faker. He started out on guitar, moved over to bass with the Beatles,
and added piano and drums as well. Stu Suttcliff on the other hand WAS the
faker with the Beatles while he was a member.
Jay
JFOG10
in his career, as a Clapton-esque, extended jam type of guy.
Perhaps the real " faker" is the one that can't tell that "Born in the USA" is
actually a one chord song with different modal chords thrown on top of
it...........the REAL musician only plays what is necessary, as opposed to
trying to impress.
- Jim
Musical Mercenery
"Have Guitar, Will Travel"
Hojo2X
>McCartney, probably the best and most
>tasteful bassist to come down the pike in the past few decades was
certainly>no faker. He started out on guitar, moved over to bass with the
Beatles,>and added piano and drums as well. Stu Suttcliff on the other hand
WAS the
>faker with the Beatles while he was a member.
Yeah, Sutcliffe was just John Lennon's art school buddy, which is why he got in
the band. But McCartney was the single best all-around musician in the
Beatles, no question. According to their longtime producer George Martin,
McCartney was actually a better, more technically advanced drummer than Ringo,
but couldn't quite get the tone out of the drums that Ringo was capable of.
Even so, starting I guess with Rubber Soul, and increasingly as their music got
more complex, a lot of drum tracks that Ringo couldn't couldn't handle were
played on the recordings by McCartney.
And in case any of you are guitar snobs who don't consider drums to be "real"
musical instruments, consider that McCartney wrote and played the acoustic
guitar part on "Blackbird," as well as the lead guitar on "Taxman," to name
just two examples of his guitar work.
So I'd say he's hardly a "faker." If only _I_ could fake it so well........
Wade Hampton Miller
Dick Detweiler
>
>
> And in case any of you are guitar snobs who don't consider drums to be "real"
> musical instruments, consider that McCartney wrote and played the acoustic
> guitar part on "Blackbird," as well as the lead guitar on "Taxman," to name
> just two examples of his guitar work.
>
Watch his MTV unplugged performances too.
Also worth mentioning:
Lead on Good Morning, Good Morning, trading licks with John and George
after the drum solo on The End.
Acoustics on Mother Nature's Son and For Noone
Nick Naffin
You're an established and valued contributor of this newsgroup; we know
you're pretty, and it may even be true that you're about as wide as
Prince is tall.
But you just got it wrong, and don't you dare dis Springsteen! I'd buy
a car from him anytime. Anybody who used to play with Max Weinberg's my
kinda guy!
Full of respect and other things
NN
--
**************************************************************
NICK NAFFIN
acoustic guitarist
toronto, canada
http://www.interlog.com/~takenote/nicknaffin.htm
cd: 'music from the sacred grounds'/ northern breeze
contact & booking: take...@interlog.com
*************************************************************
SteveYetter
still, when he's wearing a muscle shirt and a headband with the E-street
band! Good posture though, I guess. I would never presume to dis Bruce
or Max, but I reserve the right to dis The Artist Formerly Thought To Be
Talented. At least Bruce and Max SMILE once in a while!
-SY-
Nick Naffin wrote:
>
> Steve, ... don't you dare dis Springsteen! I'd buy
rj...@ix.netcom.com
Yeh, Wade, me too. Er, that is, I saw an interview w/George Martin a
couple of weeks ago and he said Paul was so adept at all the
instruments that he annoyed the piss out of the rest of the boys.
An underated instrumentalist for sure.
rob
>Jay Adiar nailed it when he wrote:
>
>>McCartney, probably the best and most
>>tasteful bassist to come down the pike in the past few decades was
>certainly>no faker. He started out on guitar, moved over to bass with the
>Beatles,>and added piano and drums as well. Stu Suttcliff on the other hand
>WAS the
>>faker with the Beatles while he was a member.
>
>
>
>Yeah, Sutcliffe was just John Lennon's art school buddy, which is why he got in
>the band. But McCartney was the single best all-around musician in the
>Beatles, no question. According to their longtime producer George Martin,
>McCartney was actually a better, more technically advanced drummer than Ringo,
>but couldn't quite get the tone out of the drums that Ringo was capable of.
>Even so, starting I guess with Rubber Soul, and increasingly as their music got
>more complex, a lot of drum tracks that Ringo couldn't couldn't handle were
>played on the recordings by McCartney.
>
>And in case any of you are guitar snobs who don't consider drums to be "real"
>musical instruments, consider that McCartney wrote and played the acoustic
>guitar part on "Blackbird," as well as the lead guitar on "Taxman," to name
>just two examples of his guitar work.
>
Mothra666
have had my problems with their recrds but you make something musically
comparable and then see who you think is a faker.
Philip Stevenson
Http://members.aol.com/mothra666/chris.htm
"I'm too fucking busy and vice-versa"
- Dorothy Parker
Will Borgeson
Beatles were passing fair on their instruments, especially George - but
it's interesting, despite his apparent virtuosity instrument-wise, how
weak most of Paul's post-Beatles tunes are. They tend to be treacly and
one-dimensional, to my head anyway. There are a few exceptions, but
really not many, and a lot of his stuff borders on embarrassing. No edge,
really, without John. "Silly Love Songs," etc. - no thanks.
Back to The Boss - he's written and performed some gems, "Born To Run" and
a few others. That one's cool in that, while it's a complex production as
recorded, it's an easy strummer and fun to play. As with so many artists
who hit it big, he's developed a certain complacency and tendency toward a
narrow range of subject matter...down the NJ shore, under the boardwalk,
etc. Not the greatest voice on the planet, either. But certain tunes
hold up extremely well despite mammoth airplay, and the Woody covers were
a thoughtful nod. Interesting that his current single was recorded what,
20 years ago?
Will
SEFSTRAT
>it's interesting, despite his apparent virtuosity instrument-wise, how
>weak most of Paul's post-Beatles tunes are
Hmmm. When I listen to his post-Beatles stuff, it immediately becomes apparent
to me who wrote the great hooks, the catchy tunes. A pop master.
Steve
SEFSTRAT
(remove "nospam" from address for return email)
webpage: http://members.aol.com/sefstrat/index.html/sefpage.html
Dominic
as an acoustic act in small clubs. Can't fake it there baby. He might have
been faking for the video, but who doesn't? As for Bruce's talent.... who's
gal didn't want to be that Jersey girl? If it makes you feel good, and makes
you want to hear it over and over, it's talent in my book.
Dom "I ain't a beauty but hey I'm alright" Lazzi
Gary Beckwith wrote in message <37099E46...@att.net>...
:(snip a lot of stuff about Bruce being a faker)
Gary Beckwith
book on the Beatles, you'll find that in his first few shows with them, he was
"filling in" for their previous bassist (his name escapes me right now) and he
had no idea how to play the bass. He was, indeed, faking it. However, he is an
accomplished musician no doubt and has come a long way since then. I didn't
mean to degrade him in any way.
Gary
Jay Adair wrote:
> --
> Founder & Charter Member of The Society for Mediocre Guitar Playing on
> Expensive Instruments, Ltd.
> Gary Beckwith <gav...@att.net> wrote in message
> news:37099E46...@att.net...
> > I was flipping through the channels the other day, and there was a video
> > of the Boss doing a live show, playing Born in the USA. I swear, he was
> > faking it. Of course, he was really getting into the singing, but every
> > time they showed his guitar and hands, they were in the same position,
> > and it didn't look like any real chord to me.
> >
> > Does anyone know for sure if he really knows how to play guitar?
> >
> > This made me think about how manufacturers tout some musicians using
> > their instruments. Takamine has a picture of Bruce, Paul McCartney and
> > Billy Joel on their home page. Joel is mainly a piano player, Paul
> > started out as a faker and eventually became mainly a bass player (and
> > was never really known for his guitar playing),
>
> Hold the phone there, big boy. McCartney, probably the best and most
> tasteful bassist to come down the pike in the past few decades was certainly
> no faker. He started out on guitar, moved over to bass with the Beatles,
> and added piano and drums as well. Stu Suttcliff on the other hand WAS the
> faker with the Beatles while he was a member.
>
Greg M
sefs...@aol.comnospam (SEFSTRAT) wrote:
> szborges wrote, in part:
>
> >it's interesting, despite his apparent virtuosity instrument-wise, how
> >weak most of Paul's post-Beatles tunes are
>
> Hmmm. When I listen to his post-Beatles stuff, it immediately becomes
apparent
> to me who wrote the great hooks, the catchy tunes. A pop master.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> SEFSTRAT
It's apparent to me they both did.
Greg
gibs...@icanect.net
Gary Beckwith <gav...@att.net> wrote:
> I was flipping through the channels the other day, and there was a video
> of the Boss doing a live show, playing Born in the USA. I swear, he was
> faking it. Of course, he was really getting into the singing, but every
> time they showed his guitar and hands, they were in the same position,
> and it didn't look like any real chord to me.
>
> Does anyone know for sure if he really knows how to play guitar?
>
> This made me think about how manufacturers tout some musicians using
> their instruments. Takamine has a picture of Bruce, Paul McCartney and
> Billy Joel on their home page. Joel is mainly a piano player, Paul
> started out as a faker and eventually became mainly a bass player (and
> (to me anyway) to be faking it on TV the other night. What does this
> say about Takamine?
>
> Gary
>
I don't know about those three musicians you mentioned, but several well known
musicians use Takamine. Watch live music concerts(especially country music) on
TV or in person and you will see a large percentage use Takamines.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Jay Adair
> I wasn't saying that McCartney was a faker anymore. But if you read any
good
> book on the Beatles, you'll find that in his first few shows with them, he
was
> "filling in" for their previous bassist (his name escapes me right now)
and he
> had no idea how to play the bass. He was, indeed, faking it. However, he
is an
> accomplished musician no doubt and has come a long way since then. I
didn't
> mean to degrade him in any way.
>
> Gary
>
I hate to be argumentative, but you have your facts really screwed-up. Paul
first saw John and his group, The Quarrymen, play at a local church (St.
Peter's Parish Church in Woolton, July 6, 1957), but he did not play with
them at that performance. After the show, Paul taught them how to play
"Twenty Flight Rock", (on guitar, not bass) even teaching them the words.
(In fact, Paul was the only one of the guys who could tune a guitar at this
point)
A week later John invited him to join the group, hesitating because he wasn'
t sure if he wanted a guitar player that might be better than himself.
Within a couple of months they were writing songs together.
Paul's first date to play with the Quarrymen was October 18, 1957, playing
lead guitar, in a small club in Liverpool called New Clubmoor Club.
As for good books on the Beatles, I have many. I grew up with them. Check
out "The Beatles" by Geoffrey Stokes.
No offense taken. Just trying to get the facts straight.
Jay
Paul Cyr
gibs...@icanect.net wrote:
> In article <37099E46...@att.net>,
> Gary Beckwith <gav...@att.net> wrote:
> > I was flipping through the channels the other day, and there was a video
> > of the Boss doing a live show, playing Born in the USA. I swear, he was
> > faking it. Of course, he was really getting into the singing, but every
> > time they showed his guitar and hands, they were in the same position,
> > and it didn't look like any real chord to me.
> >
> > Does anyone know for sure if he really knows how to play guitar?
> >
I'd have to say that he definitely does know how to play. A long long time ago
I used to go here Bruce play in small clubs around the New Jersey area. I have
heard him play guitar solos that lasted 10 or 15 minutes with each an every note
fresh, new, exciting and pulling at your soul. As his commercial success has
grown he seems to play less and less guitar. I,m glad he has achieved his
standing in the commercial end of the business(Lord knows he has paid his dues)
But I wish he would record some of his old tunes, or new ones that really show
the caliber of guitar player that he is.
Paul
Dennis Coe
upon the acoustic work in his album "The Ghost of Tom Joad" which I have
seen him perform on the tube. I suppose in a lot of concert situations
where there is a huge sound system with a large group of musicians it is
common and easy for the main singer or artist
to not concentrate on the instument but on the vocal and emotional
presentation. I certainly wouldn't hold it against any of them for doing
that though often I do wish I could better hear their playing.
Dennis in Idaho
Steven
>Yeah, Sutcliffe was just John Lennon's art school buddy, which is why he got in
>the band. But McCartney was the single best all-around musician in the
>Beatles, no question. According to their longtime producer George Martin,
>McCartney was actually a better, more technically advanced drummer than Ringo,
>but couldn't quite get the tone out of the drums that Ringo was capable of.
>Even so, starting I guess with Rubber Soul, and increasingly as their music got
>more complex, a lot of drum tracks that Ringo couldn't couldn't handle were
>played on the recordings by McCartney.
<snip>
>So I'd say he's hardly a "faker." If only _I_ could fake it so well........
>Wade Hampton Miller
I'm only aware of a few drum tracks performed by Paul ... and none of them were
because Ringo was incapable. He played on Birthday and Dear Prudence on the
White album because Ringo had walked out in a huff at that time. He played on
Ballad of John and Yoko because Ringo wasn't around and John wanted to churn the
song out right away. Are there other examples I'm omitting ?? And where did
you get the idea there were drum tracks Ringo "couldn't handle" ?? --
resulting in Paul sitting in to do the drum tracks ?? Do you have a list of
these tracks by any chance - I love having a good excuse to relisten again to
the Beatles music. I am not familiar with such an occurence and I've read a
lot of what's out there on the Fabs. I am asking in strictly a good natured way
and intend no insult. (I should make this last line my sig fer krissakes!)
Steven
Unknown
considered "The Fastest Guitar In Jersey." In his Hall of Fame
acceptance speech he mentioned that Nils Lofgren would come over when
Bruce was playing solos just to make sure he was doing them right.
Also, he was mentioned by Melissa Etheridge in the "Guitar Gods"
article in the latest Rolling Stone magazine.
Whether he's a great guitar player or not may be open to debate, but
I'm pretty sure he's not faking it.
Now Bono, that no-talent from U2, on the other hand....
Cheers,
Dan Beck
"Tax" spelled backward is "Xat"
On Wed, 07 Apr 1999 21:30:13 GMT, gibs...@icanect.net wrote:
>In article <37099E46...@att.net>,
> Gary Beckwith <gav...@att.net> wrote:
>> I was flipping through the channels the other day, and there was a video
>> of the Boss doing a live show, playing Born in the USA. I swear, he was
>> faking it. Of course, he was really getting into the singing, but every
>> time they showed his guitar and hands, they were in the same position,
>> and it didn't look like any real chord to me.
>>
>> Does anyone know for sure if he really knows how to play guitar?
>>
Bob Males
in reading Paul's authorized biography IN MY LIFE by Barry Miles. I just
finished it. Barry is a 30-year friend/business associate of Paul who taped a
massive amount of interviews with Paul and Linda for the book.
Late in the book there's a lot of focus on personnel/instrumentation and Paul
talks a bit about his drumming on Beatles' songs.
For my money (and I got the book for free), there wasn't enough talk about
playing the music.. and instruments. But Paul does tell a good deal about how
his collaboration with John.. their inspirations for some songs and the "rules"
they hammered out over the years.
The book may surprise you in that Paul describes himself as the Beatle with
avant-garde leanings, when many thought it was John, due to his association
with Yoko.
shrimer
oohaah wrote:
>
>
> Now Bono, that no-talent from U2, on the other hand....
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dan Beck
> "Tax" spelled backward is "Xat"
I thought Bono's job was to wear funny-looking sunglasses. I didn't
know he played guitar. Thought he left those duties to "The Edge". I
wonder how many picks The Edge uses per show....
Fred Shrimer
"Charo" spelled backwards is, well, it doesn't look right, so I won't do
it
mi...@cellbio.wustl.edu
(Will Borgeson) wrote:
> I'm not enough of a musician myself to pass judgement - seems all the
> Beatles were passing fair on their instruments, especially George - but
> it's interesting, despite his apparent virtuosity instrument-wise, how
> weak most of Paul's post-Beatles tunes are. They tend to be treacly and
> one-dimensional, to my head anyway. There are a few exceptions, but
> really not many, and a lot of his stuff borders on embarrassing. No edge,
> really, without John. "Silly Love Songs," etc. - no thanks.
>
Anyone who is listed in the Guiness Book of World Records for being the
most successful composer of all time is going to have written a lot of
songs, some better than others. There are only so many ways to arrange 12
half-tones. The fact that McCartney has sold more records than anyone
else in history means that he has given more pleasure to more people than
any other living musician. That is what it is all about. Enough said.
Pierre Debs
mi...@cellbio.wustl.edu wrote:
"There are only so many ways to arrange 12
half-tones."
Actually, there are an infinite number of ways to arrange 12 half-tones!
Pierre
Jay Adair
>
> "There are only so many ways to arrange 12
> half-tones."
>
>
> Actually, there are an infinite number of ways to arrange 12 half-tones!
> Pierre
>
>
believe you will indeed find that there is a finite number of combinations
of said items. It may be very large, but it will be finite. Kinda like
counting grains of sand on the beach. Even that is a finite set.
Flame away,
Jay (Calculus, 1974, C+) Adair
Sean Holland
<oja(no-spam-please)@flash.net> wrote:
>Gee, I'm no math major, but if you start with a finite number of items, I
>believe you will indeed find that there is a finite number of combinations
>of said items. It may be very large, but it will be finite. Kinda like
>counting grains of sand on the beach. Even that is a finite set.
>
>Flame away,
>
What if there is no limit placed on the length of the concatenations of
half-tones?
--
Sean
Due to spam filtering, mail from prodigy will not reach me.
Alec Horgan
> >
> > "There are only so many ways to arrange 12
> > half-tones."
> >
> >
> > Actually, there are an infinite number of ways to arrange 12 half-tones!
> > Pierre
> >
> >
> Gee, I'm no math major, but if you start with a finite number of items, I
> believe you will indeed find that there is a finite number of combinations
> of said items.
Not if there's no limit on the number of times you can use any item. If
you're talking about the number of unique twelve-note sequences, yes it's
finite, although extremely large (almost nine trillion, which ought to be
enough for most folks). But you can have as many notes as you want.
For the really mathematically inclined, think of it like this: represent a
tone as a base twelve number, so that, say, 0=C, 1=C#, etc., on up to B
(the base twelve version of eleven) = B. Then any decimal number can
represent an arrangement of notes. 147, for instance, is 203 in base
twelve, and thus represents the note sequence D-C-Eb. Since there are an
infinite number of numerals, there an infinite number of such
arrangements. Of course, this also requires either songs that are
infinitely long or musicians who can play infinitely fast. The former is
probably not very likely, although that "Be King of the Shredders!" fellow
might be able to help out with the latter.
> Jay (Calculus, 1974, C+) Adair
Alec (combinatorial math, 1997, A-)
mcdonald
Alec Horgan wrote:
>
> Not if there's no limit on the number of times you can use any item. If
> you're talking about the number of unique twelve-note sequences, yes it's
> finite, although extremely large (almost nine trillion, which ought to be
> enough for most folks). But you can have as many notes as you want.
> >
>
> Alec (combinatorial math, 1997, A-)
Exactly, although of course some of those 8.9 x 10^12 “melodies” would
be pretty boring (e.g. the same 12 notes in a row). But even if each
note is constrained to being used only once in the sequence there are
12! = 479,001,600 twelve note sequences, which is more than plenty. I
seriously doubt that there have been that many hit songs in the history
of the planet.
And this is considering notes in different octaves to be the same. We
call a frequency of 220 Hz "A" and we also call a frequency of 440 Hz
"A", but not all musical traditions share this belief. Even in our own
Western tradition, the octave in which a note resides can have a
dramatic impact on the melody. Research in music perception has shown
that if you take a simple melody and randomly select the correct note
from different octaves (e.g. always an A if it’s supposed to be an A,
but randomly either 220 Hz, 440 Hz, or 880 Hz), even something like "Row
Row Row Your Boat" can become unrecognizable.
Adding in the effects of the temporal duration of the notes creates even
more complexity. Once again research shows that if the time values of
the notes are selected at random, the melody may again become
unrecognizable.
So overall, what we consider “melody” is more than just 12 tones. It’s
probably at least 2 or 3 octaves worth (which would be 24-36 tones)
combined with 5 or 6 time values (i.e. from whole note down to 16th or
32nd), without even taking dotted notes and triplets and mordents and
such into account. Taken together, the number of note sequences with
their own “personalities” quickly becomes a number so large that it
doesn’t have a name.
mcd (HP 48G, 1999)
“find beauty in the breakdown”
Addendum: After reflecting for a moment on the last paragraph above I
got curious and grabbed my calculator again. If the uniqueness of a
melody depends on 2 octaves (24 tones) and 5 temporal durations, the
number of possible 12 note sequences becomes approximately 3 x 10^129,
which I’m pretty sure is more than the number of elementary particles in
our galaxy.
Post Addendum (sounds like a breakfast cereal): I once wrote a computer
program that generated tone sequences of any length, comprised of any
set of tones and temporal durations. I discovered that only about 1 out
of every 500 or so was even marginally “melodic” in some sense of the
word, which made the program not-too-useful. Still, with 3 x 10^129
unique 12 note-time sequences there are quite a few melodies waiting to
be discovered, especially considering that many melodies consist of more
than 12 notes. If you could live to be several billion years old, you
could probably put together a pretty damn impressive collection of
catchy tunes (make a fortune writing jingles for TV and radio commercials).
El McMeen
El McMeen
mcdonald wrote in message <370DDF16...@gci-net.com>...
Will Borgeson
: Anyone who is listed in the Guiness Book of World Records for being the
: most successful composer of all time is going to have written a lot of
: songs, some better than others. There are only so many ways to arrange 12
: half-tones. The fact that McCartney has sold more records than anyone
: else in history means that he has given more pleasure to more people than
: any other living musician. That is what it is all about. Enough said.
Dunno 'bout that. Perhaps having been in what many believe was the best,
most influential musical group in history has something to do with all
those record sales. Good promotion helps, too, but even that didn't keep
"I Can See the World Tonight" on the airwaves for more than a few weeks,
at least in N. California. There is, of course, a vast number of ways to
arrange 12 half-tones, not to even mention lyrics! Frankly, lyrics is the
area where PM on his own drops the ball most often, at least to my mind.
Equating lots of record sales with 'most successful composer' or with
'having given more pleasure to more people than any other living musician'
is thin ice as well, imo. Just for starters, enthusiasts of various
classical composers/musicians would probably beg to differ. I like Paul's
musicianship well enough, but don't really think of him as some big hero
or icon.
Will
mi...@cellbio.wustl.edu
(Will Borgeson) wrote:
> Dunno 'bout that. Perhaps having been in what many believe was the best,
> most influential musical group in history has something to do with all
> those record sales. Good promotion helps, too, but even that didn't keep
> "I Can See the World Tonight" on the airwaves for more than a few weeks,
> at least in N. California. There is, of course, a vast number of ways to
> arrange 12 half-tones
Try writing 200 melodies, many of which are classics that will likely last
for as long as there are human beings on the planet listening to music,
then try writing 200 more that don't sound like anything you or anyone
else has written before (and that anyone would want to listen to, that, of
course, is critical), and then come tell me about the "vast number of ways
to arrange 12 half tones". Or better still, try writing just one song that
a million people would buy, or maybe just entertain a concert hall filled
with 10,000 people, or perhaps just entertain your closest friends. OK,
let's make it easy, try writing a song that doesn't make your mother
grimace as you bash away on your Takamine.
I am not a "fan" of McCartney or anyone else for that matter, but next up
we can expect to hear Albert Einstein being criticized for not having
produced anything of consequence to modern physics in the last 40 years of
his life. And what is wrong with that James Watson character who deduced
the helical structure of DNA, what the hell has he been doing for the past
50 years? For that matter, why did DeVinci only paint a dozen or so
canvases? Did he just lack imagination, talent, or both? Let's uncover
all of the "fakers" while we're at it.
Pierre Debs
Pierre
Pierre Debs
David Neely
but McCartney and Springsteen aren't the droids you're looking for!!
David Neely
rob_j...@my-dejanews.com
Gary,
Bruce Springsteen definitely *CAN* play guitar.
He is on a Roy Orbison video that you can rent at almost any video store.
On that video, he takes one hell of a solo ride on "Pretty Woman", using a
Telecaster, and he trades fours with James Burton and Roy Orbison.
I think the video is called Roy Orbison and Friends.
Also, alot of Springsteen's songs are in E. He joins in a lot of times to
belt out open E chords and such.
Rob
Gary Beckwith <gav...@att.net> wrote:
> I was flipping through the channels the other day, and there was a video
> of the Boss doing a live show, playing Born in the USA. I swear, he was
> faking it. Of course, he was really getting into the singing, but every
> time they showed his guitar and hands, they were in the same position,
> and it didn't look like any real chord to me.
>
> Does anyone know for sure if he really knows how to play guitar?
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Will Borgeson
: Try writing 200 melodies, many of which are classics that will likely last
: for as long as there are human beings on the planet listening to music,
: then try writing 200 more that don't sound like anything you or anyone
: else has written before (and that anyone would want to listen to, that, of
: course, is critical), and then come tell me about the "vast number of ways
: to arrange 12 half tones". Or better still, try writing just one song that
: a million people would buy, or maybe just entertain a concert hall filled
: with 10,000 people, or perhaps just entertain your closest friends. OK,
: let's make it easy, try writing a song that doesn't make your mother
: grimace as you bash away on your Takamine.
Mom died in '84, and it's a Yamaha - aside from that, I have no
particular desire to do any of the above. I play music for fun, "bash
away" if you will, and that's it. I like however to think that if I were
someone like Paul McCartney at this point in time, I might consider
retiring from the world of commercial music, and just muck about on my big
ol' chunks of real estate, do some traveling, spend time with the kids.
In fact, were I Paul, I might well have done that some years ago. Having
co-written some of the best songs in history, and earned a great deal of $
doing so, might be enough in that field.
: I am not a "fan" of McCartney or anyone else for that matter, but next up
: we can expect to hear Albert Einstein being criticized for not having
: produced anything of consequence to modern physics in the last 40 years of
: his life. And what is wrong with that James Watson character who deduced
: the helical structure of DNA, what the hell has he been doing for the past
: 50 years? For that matter, why did DeVinci only paint a dozen or so
: canvases? Did he just lack imagination, talent, or both? Let's uncover
: all of the "fakers" while we're at it.
Sounds like someone needs some R&R! It's a little sad, really,
the way some of these artists must crank "something" out, regardless of
inspiration or the lack thereof, regardless of how much $ and property
they've already accumulated, to meet contractual obligations or whatever.
Pop music is a steep pyramid indeed, with just a little room at the top.
Artists, or more to the point their handlers and in some cases their
parasites, will do a lot to stay there.
The thread started with the question of whether the Boss can play
much guitar, and we seem to have covered that. Paul can indeed play bass
and other instruments, and co-wrote some excellent songs a while
back...'nuff said?
Will
Leon Bateman
> Robert Plant holding your product, or any other celebrity holding your
> product (remembering of course that a celebrity is only known for being
> known, generally) is called "transfer of authority." Which is why
> pitchmen for car companies don't necessarily have to be known for
> driving...just SOMETHING! Unfortunately, guitars have joined the general
> music world as big money makers for a lot of people who could care less
> about music or guitars.
> Fortunately, there are still real players involved in the guitar
> "industry." It's nice to know that Jomack, the Martin Rep., AKA Joe
> Macnamara, actually can play the dang things, and very well.
> As for Bruce Springsteen, I've seen him take a few swipes at the
> strings now and then, but his bag is more about other things. Guitar is
> just not his focus primarily ('till the ad copy photo shoot I guess). He
> has succeeded in parlaying some kind of image into a marketable form,
> and I prefer him to say, The Artist (formerly thought of as talented).
> 'Course I don't buy either's recordings, and I wouldn't buy a used car
> from them either (or a guitar). But then, I've been accused of having a
> sour grapes attitude and being a frustrated musician myself. Actually
> I'm not all that frustrated. I'm twice the man Bruce or The Artist is,
> according to belt size, if nothing else.
> -SY-
> >
> > I was flipping through the channels the other day, and there was a video
> > of the Boss doing a live show, playing Born in the USA. I swear, he was
> > faking it. Of course, he was really getting into the singing, but every
> > time they showed his guitar and hands, they were in the same position,
> > and it didn't look like any real chord to me.
> >
> > Does anyone know for sure if he really knows how to play guitar?
> >
> > their instruments. Takamine has a picture of Bruce, Paul McCartney and
> > Billy Joel on their home page. Joel is mainly a piano player, Paul
> > started out as a faker and eventually became mainly a bass player (and
> > was never really known for his guitar playing), and now Bruce appeared
> > (to me anyway) to be faking it on TV the other night. What does this
> > say about Takamine?
> >
> > of Rober Plant "holding" a Washburn guitar in it. He's not even a
> > faker, I don't even think he pretends to play the guitar. Why he is in
> > the catalog I don't know, maybe for people that don't even realize he
> > doesn't play. I guess the picture would sell a few hundred guitars.
> >
> > Gary