The Mellotron Group

From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Frippery
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, July 23, 2011, 12:02 AM

Dear God...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzKrTMVdvRk

--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Daily <pocotron@...> wrote:
>
> Self-help gone terribly wrong!
> I would be more influenced by the Tom Cruise character in the film Magnolia...
> Â
> Â -Bruce D.
>
> --- On Sat, 7/23/11, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...>
> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Frippery
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, July 23, 2011, 12:02 AM
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> Dear God...
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzKrTMVdvRk
>

----- Original Message -----

From: tron400

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 8:46 AM

Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Frippery

Ah, couldn't finish watching it.

Bernie

--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Daily <pocotron@...> wrote:
>
> Self-help gone terribly wrong!
> I would be more influenced by the Tom Cruise character in the film Magnolia...
> Â
> Â -Bruce D.
>
> --- On Sat, 7/23/11, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...>
> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Frippery
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, July 23, 2011, 12:02 AM
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> Dear God...
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzKrTMVdvRk
>

On 23/07/2011 14:11, Tony wrote:

Neither could I.

Tony

----- Original Message -----

From: tron400

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 8:46 AM

Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Frippery

Ah, couldn't finish watching it.

Bernie

--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Daily <pocotron@...> wrote:
>
> Self-help gone terribly wrong!
> I would be more influenced by the Tom Cruise character in the film Magnolia...
> Â
> Â -Bruce D.
>
> --- On Sat, 7/23/11, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...>
> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Frippery
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, July 23, 2011, 12:02 AM
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> Dear God...
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzKrTMVdvRk
>

R

From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Frippery
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, July 23, 2011, 8:49 AM

Neither could I. Do you think she has those affected mannerisms, endless head wobbling and ponderous emphasis when she is asking for someone to pass the butter?

Actually...I reckon she might.



On 23/07/2011 14:11, Tony wrote:

Neither could I.

Tony

----- Original Message -----

From: tron400

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 8:46 AM

Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Frippery

Ah, couldn't finish watching it.

Bernie

--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Daily <pocotron@...> wrote:
>
> Self-help gone terribly wrong!
> I would be more influenced by the Tom Cruise character in the film Magnolia...
> Â
> Â -Bruce D.
>
> --- On Sat, 7/23/11, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...>
> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Frippery
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, July 23, 2011, 12:02 AM
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> Dear God...
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzKrTMVdvRk
>

R

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

On 23/07/2011 21:17, Ms. Janet Strauss wrote:

Yep. She had a gift, and a look.

I have to confess that I didn't 'get' it about her at all. She could sing on key without a doubt, but her voice was so mannered and affected that I couldn't make out a single word she was singing, and that was even when she was relatively clean.

It's sad someone that young dies, but really it was all her own doing. My sympathies are somewhat restrained.

Mike

----- Original Message -----

From: Ms. Janet Strauss

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 8:34 PM

Subject: RE: [newmellotrongroup] So - The train wreck finally wrecked

Well Frank. She can sing.

“Edge of Glory” and “Hair” on Howard Stern……. is pretty darn good.

I still thought “Monster Ball’ was crap….bread and circus for the masses.

But her and paino and her voice…pretty good.

-----Original Message-----
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lsf5275@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 7:18 PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] So - The train wreck finally wrecked

Jim,

Watch the video on you tube of Gaga on Howard Stern. I used to feel the same way. I may not "get" her but man can she sing and she is actually pretty down to earth.

In a message dated 7/23/2011 6:48:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jandjstrz@verizon.net writes:

She wasn’t one of the greatest, and that genre doesn’t fly with some….I don’t get Billie Holiday.

Or lady Gaga….but I’ll listen to Amy Wino before I suffer Lady Gaga.

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Jacques
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 11:23 AM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] So - The train wreck finally wrecked

I agree... all these people are saying that she was one if "the greatest"... Sorry... She was good... but great?

She always sounded high to me... slurring her words.. etc... Style? maybe so... But considering what has happened...

Unfortunately, most will remember her for this performance:

http://hiphopwired.com/2011/06/19/amy-winehouse-falls-over-forget-words-and-mumbles-her-first-performance-out-of-rehab-video-30097/

Shame....

On Jul 24, 2011, at 12:55 AM, Mike Dickson wrote:

On 23/07/2011 21:17, Ms. Janet Strauss wrote:

Yep. She had a gift, and a look.

I have to confess that I didn't 'get' it about her at all. She could sing on key without a doubt, but her voice was so mannered and affected that I couldn't make out a single word she was singing, and that was even when she was relatively clean.

It's sad someone that young dies, but really it was all her own doing. My sympathies are somewhat restrained.

Mike

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 11:33 AM, <djacques@csulb.edu> wrote:

Its so tragic. If you look at and compare pictures of her six years ago, and recently... Frightening.

You did not see Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, or Jimi Hendrix deteriorate as dramatically as Amy (except for Jim gaining weight). Maybe that quick physical and musical deterioration, and subsequent death, will deter people from this kind of self abuse.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

From: "Ms. Janet Strauss" <jandjstrz@verizon.net>

Sender: <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:17:41 -0400

To: <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>

ReplyTo: <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>

Subject: RE: [newmellotrongroup] So - The train wreck finally wrecked

Everything was better the first time around…

-----Original Message-----
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of fdoddy@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2011 1:00 PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] So - The train wreck finally wrecked

I'm with Mike on this one. In general, I'm not feeling the whole neo-soul thing. I liked it better the first time around.


fritz

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Jul 23, 2011 5:55 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] So - The train wreck finally wrecked

On 23/07/2011 21:17, Ms. Janet Strauss wrote:

Yep. She had a gift, and a look.

I have to confess that I didn't 'get' it about her at all. She could sing on key without a doubt, but her voice was so mannered and affected that I couldn't make out a single word she was singing, and that was even when she was relatively clean.

It's sad someone that young dies, but really it was all her own doing. My sympathies are somewhat restrained.

Mike

On 25/07/2011 12:44, Chris Dale wrote:

I never got into her music. Her drug / alcohol abuse ruins her credibility for me. (Hendix had a strong record of enormous talent before he became a junkie).

I find this incredible. I can guarantee that most of the music you know and love was made by people who were out of their flaming boxes when they dreamed it up. Absolutely off their kites. Stoned out of their gourds. baked. Roasted. Six kinds of Wednesday. Smashed. Toked. Why apply one set of rules to the people whose music you happen to like and not to others? Frankly I don't care one iota if someone is a junkie or not if I like their music. All three members of Cream were blasted out of their little red wagons when they wrote and made their music. Is it any good? Of course it is. If you don't like it then it's a matter of taste, but to say it's bad because they used drugs is little short of idiotic.

Notice - you said that 'her drug / alcohol abuse ruins her credibility for me'. I mean...where to start? None of (say) Amy Winehouse's music sounds like she was tottering about the studio in a state of intoxication; barely any marketable label (like...oh I dunno...Island) would tolerate that fiscal waste these days. So what you are actually saying is that because she used drugs her music is no good. If you meanrt something else then maybe you could articulate it a bit better, but that is what your words say.

I don't much care for drugs. I didn't much care for Amy Winehouse's music either. But this kind of

I'll stick with music made by musicians who indisputably make, write and perform their own music and don't need gaudy and tacky stage shows, secret songwriting teams, and alarmist political tactics and causes to draw attention to themselves.

I think you will find without any doubt that Winehouse, Madonna and Lady Gaga write/wrote and performed their own material. Certainly the latter two are two women very much in command of what they do.

Secret songwriting teams? Really? Like who? I think you'll find that most songwriters (or secret teams) are probably quite motivated not to be secret because being secret means less money. The days of Tin Pan Alley writers churning out song after song on the odd chance that one will hit paydirt are long behind us.

I don't know who you are referring to about 'alarmist political tactics', but it sounds weird. Bear in mind that one Elvis Presley was possibly the most alarming thing that the sheltered bits of the USA had ever seen at one point. Mostly because he reminded people how babies are made. That was something terrifying. And it sold records. And it was still terrifying enough to ban bits of him from the screens of the nation's TV sets. Deeply alarming. Well, maybe not. Perhaps that was a mantle better reserved for Little Richard. He must have seemed like a thermonuclear device.

And....gaudy and tacky stage shows? This from someone who like prog rock? This one hit me like a brick in the face! Can you possibly be serious???

EXHIBIT 1: http://cdn.crooksandliars.com/files/uploads/2010/04/genesis_petergabriel_live_2954b.jpg
EXHIBIT 2: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Millennium/General/1999/02/25/codpiece.jpg
EXHIBIT 3: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/94/240935102_c05b4e74ac.jpg
EXHIBIT 4: http://www.keyboardmag.com/uploadedimages/keyboardmag/articles/emerson_opener_web.jpg
EXHIBIT 5: http://yesmuseum.org/images/RickOnIce.JPG

I can stop any time you like.

That's why I like prog - not a Labatts or McDonalds ad or association in sight.

Given the above I'm not surprised. It wouldn't pay.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

I don't much care for drugs. I didn't much care for Amy Winehouse's music either. But this kind of

Edit gremlins :-)

On 25/07/2011 12:44, Chris Dale wrote:

I never got into her music. Her drug / alcohol abuse ruins her credibility for me. (Hendix had a strong record of enormous talent before he became a junkie).

I find this incredible. I can guarantee that most of the music you know and love was made by people who were out of their flaming boxes when they dreamed it up. Absolutely off their kites. Stoned out of their gourds. baked. Roasted. Six kinds of Wednesday. Smashed. Toked. Why apply one set of rules to the people whose music you happen to like and not to others? Frankly I don't care one iota if someone is a junkie or not if I like their music. All three members of Cream were blasted out of their little red wagons when they wrote and made their music. Is it any good? Of course it is. If you don't like it then it's a matter of taste, but to say it's bad because they used drugs is little short of idiotic.

Notice - you said that 'her drug / alcohol abuse ruins her credibility for me'. I mean...where to start? None of (say) Amy Winehouse's music sounds like she was tottering about the studio in a state of intoxication; barely any marketable label (like...oh I dunno...Island) would tolerate that fiscal waste these days. So what you are actually saying is that because she used drugs her music is no good. If you meanrt something else then maybe you could articulate it a bit better, but that is what your words say.

I don't much care for drugs. I didn't much care for Amy Winehouse's music either. But this kind of

I'll stick with music made by musicians who indisputably make, write and perform their own music and don't need gaudy and tacky stage shows, secret songwriting teams, and alarmist political tactics and causes to draw attention to themselves.

I think you will find without any doubt that Winehouse, Madonna and Lady Gaga write/wrote and performed their own material. Certainly the latter two are two women very much in command of what they do.

Secret songwriting teams? Really? Like who? I think you'll find that most songwriters (or secret teams) are probably quite motivated not to be secret because being secret means less money. The days of Tin Pan Alley writers churning out song after song on the odd chance that one will hit paydirt are long behind us.

I don't know who you are referring to about 'alarmist political tactics', but it sounds weird. Bear in mind that one Elvis Presley was possibly the most alarming thing that the sheltered bits of the USA had ever seen at one point. Mostly because he reminded people how babies are made. That was something terrifying. And it sold records. And it was still terrifying enough to ban bits of him from the screens of the nation's TV sets. Deeply alarming. Well, maybe not. Perhaps that was a mantle better reserved for Little Richard. He must have seemed like a thermonuclear device.

And....gaudy and tacky stage shows? This from someone who like prog rock? This one hit me like a brick in the face! Can you possibly be serious???

EXHIBIT 1: http://cdn.crooksandliars.com/files/uploads/2010/04/genesis_petergabriel_live_2954b.jpg
EXHIBIT 2: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Millennium/General/1999/02/25/codpiece.jpg
EXHIBIT 3: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/94/240935102_c05b4e74ac.jpg
EXHIBIT 4: http://www.keyboardmag.com/uploadedimages/keyboardmag/articles/emerson_opener_web.jpg
EXHIBIT 5: http://yesmuseum.org/images/RickOnIce.JPG

I can stop any time you like.

That's why I like prog - not a Labatts or McDonalds ad or association in sight.

Given the above I'm not surprised. It wouldn't pay.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 26/07/2011 00:26, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

When did he die?

In a message dated 7/25/2011 7:19:37 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tronbros@aol.com writes:

Whatever your opinion is of Ms. Whitehouse, she wrote Love is a Loser's Game and that is a beautiful composition. It may even be her Yesterday. There are some well rounded compositions from Amy's pen in a very short career. She could well have become a songwriter's songwriter. Regarding drugs, even dear sweet Justin Haystack was stoned through most of the Moodies recording sessions....apparently.

----- Original Message -----
From: "ClayE" <ecclesreinson@rogers.com>
To: <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 11:58 PM
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: So - The train wreck finally wrecked


> Exhibit #6 - You must find a photo from Journey To The Center of The Earth
> tour. Make it exhibit #1 for gaudy and tacky.
>
>

Or Emerson's flying piano. This should do:

Exhibit #7:
http://mitkadem.homestead.com/files/elp/ELP_emerson_flyingpiano74.jpg

Andy T.

> Bear in mind that one Elvis Presley was possibly the most alarming thing that the sheltered bits of the USA had ever seen at one point. Mostly because he reminded people how babies are made.

>
> EXHIBIT 1: http://cdn.crooksandliars.com/files/uploads/2010/04/genesis_petergabriel_live_2954b.jpg
> EXHIBIT 2: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Millennium/General/1999/02/25/codpiece.jpg
> EXHIBIT 3: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/94/240935102_c05b4e74ac.jpg
> EXHIBIT 4: http://www.keyboardmag.com/uploadedimages/keyboardmag/articles/emerson_opener_web.jpg
> EXHIBIT 5: http://yesmuseum.org/images/RickOnIce.JPG
> EXHIBIT 6: http://cdn.babble.com/famecrawler/files/2011/02/groundhog_day.jpg
>
> I can stop any time you like.

On 26/07/2011 07:00, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

By that measurement, most pop stars become irrelevant; some more quickly than others.

That is entirely my point.

Mike

On 26/07/2011 21:17, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

No, your point was about Justin Hayward. He was just part of his generation.

Actually my point wasn't specifically about him at all. Someone else brought him up.

Much of his music is/was timeless and will be relevant long after we are gone. People will rediscover Tuesday Afternoon,and Nights in White Satin over and over again. His relevance might be to a narrower audience, but no musician is relevant unless someone thinks they are... ever. All it takes is one. More is better, though.

That's just simply not true. The difficult thing is that I think you know it. If something is an entity that 'people will rediscover' then it is an apparent truth that it has to be undiscovered first,and that process is well underway. They may well be your personal favourites, but ask your average 20 or 25 or 30 year old what they know about The Moody Blues (to name your specific) and the overwhelming likely answer will be a blank stare back at you. No one know. No one remembers. Far fewer ever care. Music is an evanescent thing, so get used to it and enjoy what you have. At best they might name NiWS. But that's all, and that is by an Herculean effort.

His audience is narrower is because his audience is dying slowly. That is how stuff works. And I have no issue with that at all.

Mike

On 26/07/2011 19:37, Norman Fay wrote:

> Bear in mind that one Elvis Presley was possibly the most alarming thing that the sheltered bits of the USA had ever seen at one point. Mostly because he reminded people how babies are made.

This reads like the kind of baby-boomer hyperbole that I used to read
in "mojo" back when I bought it

Is it not true?

On 26/07/2011 19:37, Norman Fay wrote:

One might reply that it is better to be OTT and stupid-looking, even
if you do wind up looking like an idiot, than to get up onstage in
plaid and scuffed trainers or the like, like just about everybody else
does.

Why?

I mean, personally, Todd Rundgren posturing in his pink hair
with ankh-spaped electric guitar is more likely to keep my attention
that Liam Gallagher in a hoody, squatting onstage like he's about to
take a dump.

Does that really keep your attention? For how long? Why?

It's more interesting to look at. this is a false
dichtomony, black & white, yadda-yadda. If ELP's mighty stainless
steel drumkit and persian rug, or Yes' fibreglass mushrooms is OH NO
BURN IT W/FIRE WAGE KULTURKAMPF UPON IT then what is actually OK for a
band to adopt as a look I wonder.

Oh don't misunderstand me. I think most rock bands look idiotic on stage, largely because they think they have to, and that might be dictated by the audience.

On 26/07/2011 21:17, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

No, your point was about Justin Hayward. He was just part of his generation.

Actually my point wasn't specifically about him at all. Someone else brought him up.

Much of his music is/was timeless and will be relevant long after we are gone. People will rediscover Tuesday Afternoon,and Nights in White Satin over and over again. His relevance might be to a narrower audience, but no musician is relevant unless someone thinks they are... ever. All it takes is one. More is better, though.

That's just simply not true. The difficult thing is that I think you know it. If something is an entity that 'people will rediscover' then it is an apparent truth that it has to be undiscovered first,and that process is well underway. They may well be your personal favourites, but ask your average 20 or 25 or 30 year old what they know about The Moody Blues (to name your specific) and the overwhelming likely answer will be a blank stare back at you. No one know. No one remembers. Far fewer ever care. Music is an evanescent thing, so get used to it and enjoy what you have. At best they might name NiWS. But that's all, and that is by an Herculean effort.

His audience is narrower is because his audience is dying slowly. That is how stuff works. And I have no issue with that at all.

Mike

From: Thomas C. Doncourt <tomdcour@amnh.org>
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Chamberlin M1 on ebay again
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Cc: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 10:30 AM

Yesterday i saw an M1 on ebay for $14,999! It had a pitch control
modification directly under the center of the keyboard. Today it is no
longer available! hmmm

>   It seems to be back now, with a MUCH lower starting bid. In the
> end, a M4000 (or M5000) loaded with Chamberlin sounds will probably still
> be a better deal.
> Â
> Â Â -Bruce D.
> Â
> Â
>
> --- On Tue, 7/26/11, Thomas C. Doncourt <tomdcour@amnh.org> wrote:
>
>
> From: Thomas C. Doncourt <tomdcour@amnh.org>
> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Chamberlin M1 on ebay again
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 10:30 AM
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
>
>
> Yesterday i saw an M1 on ebay for $14,999! It had a pitch control
> modification directly under the center of the keyboard. Today it is no
> longer available! hmmm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

On 26/07/2011 23:37, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

The very last of your sentences has us in total agreement. I may have improperly used the word "rediscovered" whereas I meant, "discovered" New listeners discover his music, thereby making him a rediscovered talent.

Hmmm. I don't see the evidence for that, really. The MB are going the way of an awful lot of bands of their generation and locale, and that is the same way that most rock music will go in time. Some just go faster than others.

I still maintain that you take particular glee in dumping on anything, "Moody Blues."

I don't have any particular axe to grind with them. I don't like much of what they did (or even anything they did, come to think of it) but they don';t mean so much to me that I "dump on anything Moody Blues". I admit I cannot understand why they are that revered round here.

That's fine with me. I once loved their music though now it's subject matter is less relevant to me. I'm no longer, "...watching and waiting, for a friend to play with."

It's fair to point out that, yes, their lyrics were abominable. Almost as bad as Sinfield's.

On 26/07/2011 23:38, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

Bay City Rollers anyone?

On 26/07/2011 23:34, tronbros wrote:

The main difference in all this is that within rock and pop you have a definitive recording, be it Strawberry Fields or Nights. Nobody really wants to hear a copy, there is no score, it was captured once in a particular way.

I dunno. It depends on the band and their modus operandi. Some of the more adventurous might record the song in the studio but then radically rework it live, or in a radio session, or whatever. Depressingly, rather a lot tried to relive their studio effort by playing a thinner version live but just beefing it up with a couple of thousand watts behind them. That's where live albums tend to fall over big time.

Classical music is realised through the interpretation of scores, modified endlessly by the vision of conductors and the sonority of individual orchestras.

...and of the concert hall acoustics, of course. The differences between one performance and the other tend to be pretty subtle though, maybe because there is a lot more 'information' in a symphony than in a song.

Therefore the audience for pop will diminish as you move away from the time of it's original creation. Okay, the Beatles defy this theory a little.

They defy it a lot. What will help is the sheer amount of the product about, physically. Michael Jackson will last without a doubt because there is just so much of his music everywhere. I suspect it will have a lot less to do with actual quality and have more to do with quantity.

On 27/07/2011 21:32, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

They don't approach Sinfield's

In a message dated 7/27/2011 4:25:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mike.dickson@gmail.com writes:

It's fair to point out that, yes, their lyrics were abominable. Almost as bad as Sinfield's.

----- Original Message -----

From: Gary Brumm

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 4:51 PM

Subject: RE: [newmellotrongroup] So - The train wreck finally wrecked

Prog rock is full of comic book, grade school, rubbish lyrically. I love a lot of the music from this genre but wince

when many of them begin to sing. Sinfield is defiantly the standard for bad lyrics……….

From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Dickson
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 1:41 PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] So - The train wreck finally wrecked

Sinfield is a special case. I use him as a yardstick for bad lyrics. An SI measurement of lyrical horror.

On 27/07/2011 21:32, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

They don't approach Sinfield's

In a message dated 7/27/2011 4:25:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mike.dickson@gmail.com writes:

It's fair to point out that, yes, their lyrics were abominable. Almost as bad as Sinfield's.

On 26 July 2011 22:09, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:

On 26/07/2011 19:37, Norman Fay wrote:

> Bear in mind that one Elvis Presley was possibly the most alarming thing that the sheltered bits of the USA had ever seen at one point. Mostly because he reminded people how babies are made.

This reads like the kind of baby-boomer hyperbole that I used to read
in "mojo" back when I bought it

Is it not true?

No, Mike, it is not true.

On 26 July 2011 22:15, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:

On 26/07/2011 19:37, Norman Fay wrote:

One might reply that it is better to be OTT and stupid-looking, even
if you do wind up looking like an idiot, than to get up onstage in
plaid and scuffed trainers or the like, like just about everybody else
does.

Why?

Because it suggests that the artist has put some...thought? effort? something like that...into their performance.

I mean, personally, Todd Rundgren posturing in his pink hair
with ankh-spaped electric guitar is more likely to keep my attention
that Liam Gallagher in a hoody, squatting onstage like he's about to
take a dump.

Does that really keep your attention? For how long? Why?

Well as long as I'm interested in the music I suppose. It is more interesting to watch while you're listening to the music.

It's more interesting to look at. this is a false
dichtomony, black & white, yadda-yadda. If ELP's mighty stainless
steel drumkit and persian rug, or Yes' fibreglass mushrooms is OH NO
BURN IT W/FIRE WAGE KULTURKAMPF UPON IT then what is actually OK for a
band to adopt as a look I wonder.

Oh don't misunderstand me. I think most rock bands look idiotic on stage, largely because they think they have to, and that might be dictated by the audience.

On 27/07/2011 22:26, Norman Fay wrote:

if you do wind up looking like an idiot, than to get up onstage in
plaid and scuffed trainers or the like, like just about everybody else
does.

Why?

Because it suggests that the artist has put some...thought? effort? something like that...into their performance.

Odd. Most orchestras have everyone dressed the same, every time. Is their performance 'thoughtless'?

I really cannot think of anything less relevant to a live performance than the way anyone is dressed. (Unless it's central to the show, I suppose)

I mean, personally, Todd Rundgren posturing in his pink hair
with ankh-spaped electric guitar is more likely to keep my attention
that Liam Gallagher in a hoody, squatting onstage like he's about to
take a dump.

Does that really keep your attention? For how long? Why?

Well as long as I'm interested in the music I suppose. It is more interesting to watch while you're listening to the music.

Well...good for you. I can't see either one or the other holding my attention for any longer than the other.

I really cannot think of anything less relevant to a live performance than the way anyone is dressed. (Unless it's central to the show, I suppose)

On 29/07/2011 01:04, Fritz Doddy wrote:

>> I really cannot think of anything lessrelevant to a live performance than the way anyone is dressed. (Unless it's central to the show, I suppose)

Then you must never have worked with an orchestra or played a live gig in a band or ensemble.

I did an orchestral session some years ago and requested the players dress formal. Normal attire in the studio is business casual, but it was an evening session and I had clients present. I thought it would be fun. Afterwards, my concert master complimented me on the strategy saying how well the orchestra performed and how attentive and engaged the players were for the recording. Dress is irrelevant?

I was referring to the way the show engages me (which is what the discussion was about).

> Well, I can vouch for the blank stares thing. Rather disheartening. Been a
> major obstacle in trying to work with other musicians.
>
> Everything around me here in California's south valley is either very
> indie-chic or angst-drenched metal. I wonder what ever happened to finesse
> in music. Or maybe, I'm just that out of touch with frankly everything.
>
> I get very particular about what I listen to and wish to play. The
> understandings in those songs are my companion through ... things... for
> lack of a better term. I just can't come to "get" indie-chic's fetish of
> everything gritty and "authentic," whatever that means to them cuz it
> certainly don't mean the same to me. I have nothing in common with the
> screaming and posturing of the metal crowd. But that's all there is.
>
> I'd rather be immersed in the world of Workingman's Dead, or American
> Beauty, or of Led I, or Days of Future Passed because the musical vibe is
> so right, even if the lyrics are stupid. Mellotrons and pedal steels get
> me going. Clear intelligible drum parts with a bounce get me going.
> Electric guitars that sound like electric guitars not like fire alarms get
> me going. My friends look at me bug eyed, as if something were generally
> wrong with me.
>
> Long way of saying all the 20 somethings around me are miles away from
> anything any of us here hold dear. So I sit at home with my transistor
> organ and my mellotron samples and learn licks that I'll probably not
> share with anyone around where I live. Kind of pathetic really.
>
> -Sean
>
>