Really good...

[MindGoneHaywire]

If some of you aren't aware of what lies in the archives, then perhaps you might care to take a look, or, if you care to judge a poster on their contribution to this thread, that is yr prerogative.

Sometimes people just butt heads. If someone has a problem because I care about details that are factors relative to music being discussed, I'm sorry. It's not going to stop me caring. As for politics, influence, and whatever, I do care, damned straight. When we have a thread that's been running for 9 months that deals more with influence than any other factor, I'm not sure why we're not supposed to care. But I care about musical influences on music I don't like, too. If someone produces something I don't like, a good part of the time I'd like to know where it came from, and why. Maybe there's something I do like that incorporated similar or exact influences. I like comparing those sorts of things.

And I've taken serious issue with certain things that RL has posted because I've found that on occasion they don't speak to the relevant factors so far as the perceived intent of the thread, with a level of editorializing that has seemed over the top, and I'm not the only one who's challenged him on that. His opinion is certainly relevant, but, well, I don't see the point in rehashing why I have taken issue with his posts in certain circumstances. You guys can take a look in the archives, or, if you like, I could drop you a link or two. But you're free to draw yr own conclusions whether you care to look at those threads or not.

I'll have to find another time to respond more specifically to RL, but I was sincere about my offer to pick a few songs that I personally would think that a guy who so frequently opines that he doesn't care for the 'current crop' of performers might find something to like in. That's as close as I can come to putting up nice, touchy-feely threads about the music I listened to this weekend (Marvin Gaye live 1977, AC/DC, Bill Evans, the Muffs, Dusty Springfield, various Chess collections, Green Day, John Coltrane, the Stooges, the Ditty Bops, Big Maybelle, Miles Davis, the Innocence Mission, and a few more). I don't participate in the Tuesday threads as much as I used to because I have reached something of a critical mass on music and sometimes feel overwhelmed by some of it as I don't always have time to listen to what I want to listen to, let alone revisit old favorites, and not to mention piles of new stuff that manage to find their way across my desk at periodic intervals.

I'll respond in kind to RL's post when I can. For now, though, I am certainly going to construct one CD, for starters, of music that I think someone with sensibilities as he has displayed on this board would find something to like about. And if that's not the case, it won't hurt my poor little feelings. Maybe he'll be willing to listen, maybe not. That I have no control over. But I think that there are outlets out there for folks who are stuck in the past to varying extents, that provide them with guidelines for music that appeals to the sensibilities of people who have grown up on the older stuff & have little patience for so much of the newer stuff. But in a climate where there are publications like MOJO, I've never understood the 'there is no good music anymore' attitude. I'm no fan of Pitchfork, mind you. But unless we draw some sort of arbitrary cutoff, Bob Dylan's part of the 'current crop' also, and the last three albums he's put out in the last 10 years have been among the most lauded of his career, at least after 1966. I wouldn't use a song of his as an example on a comp, but I get a little sick & tired of this 'I don't care for the current crop' argument. If I had reason--any reason--to believe that the folks who say this sort of thing--and RL is of course not alone in this--had heard the sorts of artists whose work tends to appeal to folks whose appreciation for pop music began to wane at some point in the past 3 decades or so, you wouldn't be getting static from me on these threads.

But I'm not going to shut up about the R'N'R Circus, either, because, like many things surrounding bands like the Rolling Stones, there are myths, and then there are facts. And there's context & backstories. There are folks whose knowledge blows mine away, not to mention plenty who were there and aren't afraid to talk about it, either. Doesn't mean I should feel that I have to refrain from voicing an opinion because someone's concerned about putting politics over music. In theory that's great, and I try to live by it as much as I can. But the truth is that, at least in the world of internet message boards, bringing up the politics as they existed--not necessarily as they revolve around currently-held opinions--is something that people who care about music tend to engage in. Sometimes music journalists do it too. Most have better things to do with their time.

I'll make no apologies for bringing up One Plus One and drawing the contrast I see in the two performances, or noting my observations. Do with that what you wish.

[Bernd]

Hi,

I enjoy reading about the facts and details. I just thought that in this thread it was about the enjoyment of a weekend for RL and his better half. Maybe I got that wrong.Maybe not.
There is lots to learn here from the historic musical facts that are posted and sometimes I wish I had more time to dive into it further.
I still think that in order to enjoy some tunes and get an emotional response the history is not important. It is however of interest for the wider picture and for exploring other branches of that genre, and sometimes the record (no pun intended) needs to be put straight.

Have a good week

Peace

[Resident Loser]

...please do check the archives, particularly the "50 influential albums"...I said what I said, and there isn't one thing I would change...pardon me for having an opinion...Didn't realize there was a MOP for web posting...

It all began to go wrong due to the fact that I didn't like Lou Reed and VU...Oh! Lamentations...sin of all sins...Most folks I worked with or played for at the time really didn't give a rat's @$$ about the album and IME the only reason it get's any following now is via that good old 20/20 hindsight...Much like Clapton et al "discovered" the blues, the current group of listeners has "discovered" the VU album..."it's so raw and extreme"...yeah, well nowadays so is peanut butter...this aint yer father's Skippy...this ain't yer fathers music...Well actually it is, but this daddy dismissed it then and still does now (although I still like Reed's Walk On The Wild Side)...And of course the dealiest of sins: Why the Ramones?...But, before I go too far afield re: why most current music, WMLP of course, s*cks, (were you paying attention?) let me shift gears a tad...

Bernd took Thor's hammer and whacked the nail squarely on the noggin...I recounted a weekend of viewing/listening...and in doing so it reinforced my opinion of current "product"...

So MGH views "Circus" as an "...interesting watch..." Well, bully for him...I don't think that I particularly represented it as the second coming, best thing since sliced bread or more fun than fu...oh well you get the idea...simply that since I and my wife happen to have been alive at time, and having been fans of the performers, bought their records and thus were returned to our touchstone, we both enjoyed it and neither one of us could understand why MJ decided not to release the show. It does IMO and WMLP, stand head and shoulders above most of what is currently filmed, taped or otherwise digitally stored and is represented as contemporary "music"...More on this will follow...

So if you want to get out your R'n'R encyclopedia, and the microscope, have at it...twist it, tear it tie it in a knot...dissect it...reflect upon it, do what you will, but realize there are some of us who couldn't give a flyin' frog's phart...cuz we had a nice weekend...although, can anyone tell me what brand and gauge of strings Brian Jones was using on his Firebird? Now that's info I'd be interested in...

And if you're ever interested in nit-picky facts re: the ACW and the events leading up to it, woodworking, the history and construction of the guitar, changing a waterpump in a Jeep Cherokee or a myriad of bits of arcana, I promise I can bore you as well...WMLP

jimHJJ(...and BradH, back atcha...)

P.S. MGH...provide some titles and artists, I'll listen and report back...but I don't think Dylan and Cash really count...

[Rich-n-Texas]

So what special do you think is going to be on my local PBS station this Saturday? And what CD do you suppose I just purchased at Amazon.com?

[Rich-n-Texas]

Well, I saw the Circus on PBS Saturday night. Most importantly I was able to watch the whole show uninterrupted. Watching Jethro Tull do Song for Jeffrey simply gave me goose bumps. The only time I'd seen the band in concert was live after the Warchild album, so to see that performance from what, almost forty years ago was a real treat. They all looked so young that I didn't even recognize Tony Iommi was onstage. Ian Anderson sure did have some strange ways about him didn't he? He's in the "crane" position on the cover of Living in the Past, my favorite album which I recently picked up on CD.

I really don't think The Who upstaged the Stones, but their performance was nevertheless outstanding. And Keith Moon was actually behaving himself for a change... sorta.

I wouldn't say I idolize John Lennon, but everytime the camera was on him my brain zoomed right in. And wouldn't ya know it, Yer Blues is one of my fav's on the White Album.

Dirty Mac: EC was another one I had a hard time recognizing but it only took one lick to realize where he was on the stage. Don't know who that was playing the fiddle during their performance, in fact I don't even remember the name of the song they did but, I think that's because I had the urge to drain my bladder at about the same time Yoko started squeeling into the mike. She contributed absolutely nothing to song, but that's just John I guess.

It seemed to me that when Mick & the boys started their set the sound quality improved. Maybe Mick's condition for release of the video? Or maybe it was just my mind setting up the expectations. And whether the songs they did were a preemptive strike or not, every one was classic Stones in my mind.

I just wish the show was two hours long and more stuff from Jethro Tull, but in any event, can't wait to add that great piece of Rock history to my collection.