Chalkhills Digest Volume 5, Issue 66
Date: Friday, 22 January 1999
Chalkhills Digest, Volume 5, Number 66
Friday, 22 January 1999
Today's Topics:
What's New on Chalkhills
Re: XTC in 2000?
REM Vs XTC
A self explanitory posting.
Re: Missile Sent From Hell
This World Over
Buying on the day of release
"Surprisngly well written"?
Let's Help Promote Apple Venus
blame the feather
People can be so touchy!
re: CD reproduction - think again
TB is soooo worth it!
uh oh
Radio Pressure
Re: The Turd Polished
My Top 10 for '98
Administrivia:
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the Chalkhills mailing list, send a message to
<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org> with the following command:
unsubscribe
For all other administrative issues, send a message to:
<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org>
Please remember to send your Chalkhills postings to:
<chalkhills@chalkhills.org>
World Wide Web: <http://chalkhills.org/>
or: <http://come.to/chalkhills/>
The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.
Chalkhills is compiled using Digest 3.6b (by John Relph <relph@sgi.com>).
Everybody walkie talkie / Everybody learning how.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 11:21:15 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199901221921.LAA13665@mando.engr.sgi.com> From: John Relph <relph@engr.sgi.com> Subject: What's New on Chalkhills What's New on Chalkhills this week: * Updated charts for "Jason and the Argonauts" * The "Sound & Vision" magazine review of "Apple Venus Vol. 1" * Royce Bardon's review of "Skylarking" * Matt Kaden's reviews of "Black Sea", "White Music", "Go 2", "Drums & Wires", "English Settlement", "The Big Express", "Mummer", and "25 O'Clock". * "Salon" magazine review of "Transistor Blast" * CMJ Reviews of "Skylarking", "Nonsuch", and "Mummer" * The first part of the "Raygun" article on XTC, by Joe Silva * and more! Surf now: http://reality.sgi.com/chalkhills/ I remain, your humble moderator and site-munger, -- John
------------------------------ Message-ID: <36A5B2A2.F125525B@SoftHome.net> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:40:35 +1100 From: MS <mseery@SoftHome.net> Subject: Re: XTC in 2000? I have been waiting patiently for Song Stories and Transistor Blast to be released here in Australia. Do any Australian Chalkies have any idea what the expected Australian release dates are for Song Stories, TB & AV1? The book stores I have been to so far have offered to order it in for me but I have been reluctant to do this as they have said it would take around 6 weeks (of course if I had done this in the first place I would have it by now). I have seen a copy of Transistor Blast at a Sydney rip off import store but decided not to get it. Actually, $80.00 is quite reasonable for 4 CD's in Australia but it seems to good to be true that no one could do better than them. If someone can tell me whether or not there is going to be further delay in the release of the above mentioned it would be a great help. If I found out that I am more likely to see the Sydney 2000 Olympic Torch being carried down my street before SS, TB & AV1 are released in Australia then I will bite the bullet and order them online. Thanks in advance. MS
------------------------------
Message-Id: <s6a5ca75.089@parliament.uk>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 12:21:23 +0000
From: Dominic Lawson <LAWSOND@parliament.uk>
Subject: REM Vs XTC
OK, it's a slightly weird thing to be discussing but since you ask....
Yes, it's perfectly obvious to all but the most witless of individuals that
XTC urinate with some force onto the pointy craniums of REM (and, indeed,
the vast majority of "pop" orientated bands - whatever that means...). Only
a towering dunce would think otherwise....and yet! I must confess to being
quite a fan of Stipe & his balding cohorts. Like many of us I (generally)
prefer "the early stuff" - oh how cool we all are! - with special
hallelujahs reserved for "Document" and "Life's Rich Pageant", but I fail to
see how anyone who enjoyed those early albums could remain totally unmoved
by either of their last two long-playing whatsits. "Up", in particular, is
an outstanding album, and arguably the band's best for many years. Granted,
when "Apple Venus" comes out I won't be spending a great deal of time
listening to REM (or anyone else for that matter - at least for a couple of
weeks) but there are numerous tunes on the latest REM platter which have
tugged long and hard on the Dom tune-o-meter, with warm but sticky
results. For the, ahem, record...."Hope", "At My Most Beautiful",
"Diminished" and the Spiritualized-like "Airportman" are the ones that
spring most readily to mind. Sure, there are innumerable more interesting
things happening in music at the moment, and yes, REM are hardly breaking
new ground or interfering too heavily with their own formulas, but it's
still a great record. So there.
>>>Suggesting that we kill the singer from Ally McBeal.....does nothing to
lend creedence to your opinion
No, but it's a bloody good idea. What a racket that woman makes! Oh, and is
that creedence as in Clearwater Revival or are you just crap at spelling?
Petty? Oh, alright then.
>>>other than an occasional mention of Lauryn Hill....
A fantastic record, let's face it. Even those of you who insist on regarding
HipHop as some vast conspiracy to annoy people with "taste" should invest in
this glorious 90s soul album IMMEDIATELY!!! Trust me, it's a beauty!
>>>...there's this underlying sense of fear of claiming to like anything
that has sold more than a few dozen copies...
Possibly, but in the words of Elton John, then again, no. In fact, I'd be
surprised if there was anyone on the list who doesn't own several
big-selling albums from the last few years. Sure, there will be those who
won't admit to it for fear of appearing uncool (and what a complex, tangled
and ultimately stupid concept that can be...) but generally speaking I would
have thought that XTC fans would be far from anti-mainstream (and that
includes me - if you only knew.....). We won't be buying any Boyzone records
(even Cat Stevens covers....gulp) - well, I hope not anyway - but the love
of a good tune would seem to point us towards "pop" and therefore often
commercial artists a lot of the time. Obviously, I say this with my Heavy
Metal licence cunningly concealed amidst my designed-for-rockin' cranial
mane, but you know what I mean. Also, it would seem a bit stupid to let
everyone know how good, for instance, the new Alanis Morisette album is
because (a) you can hardly escape mainstream pop music even if you exist in
a twilight world of de-tuned riffs and Satanic grunting (like wot I do) (b)
we'll get to hear most of it in time, whether we like it or not, and (c)
it's utter shit. I know what you're saying though. To the casual observer
it might seem like we're all saying "1998 was a great year for music,
especially albums by Urgent Fork, Bearded Clam, Keith & The Occasional
Rapists, Spigg 920 Ostenstad and Snorkelling In Diarrhoea....oh, and
Transistor Blast was cool too!" but I don't think it has much to do with
snobbery. My list was packed full of Heavy Metal (or related) records and
although I doubt if anyone paid any attention ("Aw, bless him, he hasn't
grown out of it yet...") I was pleased that no one wrote in to tell me what
a clueless spanner I am. You never know, someone might just check out that
Bruce Dickinson album (er, yes...) or the wonderful Ganger as a result. As I
have no doubt said before, we all come to XTC from different angles and it
would be duller than a Ken Herbst post if we only discussed mainstream stuff
all the time. But then that wasn't what you were saying. Bugger.
Oh, and saying things like "anything that has sold more than a few dozen
copies" is rather tempting fate if you ask me......
Chiz,
Dom.
------------------------------ Message-ID: <000019AD@print-server.mutech.co.uk.mutech.co.uk> Date: 20 Jan 1999 13:27:00 0000 From: "Robert Wood" <Robert.Wood@mutech.co.uk> Organization: Mutech Subject: A self explanitory posting. Those *wonderful* cooking vinyl people said in 5-63 >> the good news is that AV1 is a big release and we will do it on vinyl! - UK release date Feb 23rd - more info from mailorder@cookingvinyl.demon.co.uk << Thank you. Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you.Thank you. Er. That's great, really. <VBS>
------------------------------ Message-Id: <199901201341.IAA12340@hammurabi.nh.ultra.net> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 08:38:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Missile Sent From Hell From: "Duncan Watt" <kanuba@nh.ultranet.com> >From: "Bill Davups" <schtorposk@hotmail.com> > >"Papersnow" demo in MP3 form: > >http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Pavilion/9209 > >Any questions about MP3 files can be answered at http://www.mp3.com > >Enjoy! Let the firestorm begin... We're living in a new world, hm? Your pal Duncan Watt
------------------------------ Message-ID: <19990120134257.16175.qmail@hotmail.com> From: "Amanda Owens" <daveizgod@hotmail.com> Subject: This World Over Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 05:42:56 PST And a dreary morning to all from cloudy New Orleans. (What a way to prepare for Mardi Gras, with not an inch of blue in the sky!) Anyhoo, onto the usual..... Quick note to Chris Clee: Sorry medear, I take Dave's word as well as my own ears on Transistor Blast's version of This World Over. I am a nitpicker when it comes to my music and I can hear the subtlest of nuances in different versions of music. I hear no such thing when comparing TBE and TB versions. Besides which, if I'm not mistaken, Mitch said that Andy doesn't hear any difference either. It's the same version, with the exception of Andy's a capella singing at the beginning. Tis all for now, Amanda C. Owens "People will always be tempted to wipe their feet on anything with welcome written on it."-Andy Partridge XTC song of the day-Jump non XTC song-Loved By the Sun-Jon Anderson
------------------------------ From: Huw Davies <DaviesHPT@cardiff.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:15:59 GMT0BST Subject: Buying on the day of release Message-ID: <5523EDD1076@PARKLA1S.CF.AC.UK> A lot of people on this list have said that they will be ordering Apple Venus 1 on-line or have already got preview copies, but does anyone like me prefer the thrill of actually going down to the record store on the official day of release and buying it then, knowing that after the years of waiting it is finally here. It seems like much more of an event that way. All I know is is that I will be down at my local record store at 9am, when it opens, on Feb. 23rd (assuming that this is the definite UK release date) to buy AV1. It's much more fun than waiting for it to come through the post. I don't think I have ever anticipated an album this much in my life. Let's hope it lives up to expectations. Huw Davies
------------------------------ Message-ID: <19990120054916.21534.qmail@hotmail.com> From: "Duncan Kimball" <dunks58@hotmail.com> Subject: "Surprisngly well written"? Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 21:49:14 PST Hi Chalklings! Here I go again ... 1. BULLY FOR JULES: >I am interested in acquiring copies of Bull with the Golden guts and >Jules Verne's Sketchbook. Me too! I'd love to get a copy of these gems. BUT - can one of our enterprising teknokats burn a decent copy onto CD for me? I don't mind paying the appropriate price for it, because frankly I don't own a cassette recorder, and my only cassette player just went west (many thanks to my niece for totalling our car last week) - so how the hell else can I hear it? >Also, does anybody else agree that the Homo Safari series should be >released by Cooking Vinyl as a complete set? Yes. 2. LONESOME COWBOY MIKE Alexandre <alexandre.ferraz@lead.bsnet.com.br> wrote enticingly of Mike Keneally and XTC: >>Not that I think there's any specific danger of my being asked to >>join XTC (and if I were I would have some soul-searching to do, >>seeing as how Dave is a dear friend), but if I were asked, and if I >>decided to do it, I don't think anyone would have to worry about BFD >>falling by the wayside, considering that XTC makes albums once every >>five years and tours once every never. >> >>MK I was only guessing when I mentioned that idea. How delightful to see that Mr K. is indeed up for this (not exactly onerous) task. Given that he gets on well with Andy and Colin (so I hear), *and* has a life outside XTC, it would seem like a marriage made in heaven! Cos he sure can play ... and I'm dying to see how XTC will make use his great Johnny Cash impression, as immortalised on Zappa's "The Best Band You Never Heard in Your Life" - which, by the way should go on the shopping list right now for any Chalkies who don't yet own it. (By Ozzy, what a tour that must have been!) >Most of the Keneally fans thought that by joining XTC, Mike would >end his solo career. Umm...why? As he said, they rarely record, and never tour. Is Andy proposing to lock Mike in the shed between albums? >I personally think that Mike would fit perfectly in the band. Does anybody have different opinions on this subject ? You betcha! He'd be the most nifty, tough and bitchen replacement for Dave that I can think of. Let's hope it comes about! 3. YOUR DICTIONARY Robert wrote: >I've come across this something "blows" thing a few times recently, >not least on Friends. From context I guess it means that something >sucks? Where did this bizarre turnaround come from? Dunno know Robert - I'd also like to know the origins of both terms. I think it's related in meaning to the term "bites" (as in the phrase "Mariah Carey BITES"). >I live in Manchester and there's a big black community that lives in >an area called Mosside.. [snip].. They used to use the word "bad" to >mean something was really good. "Bad" would go way back I think - at least to the forties or fifties I think - perhaps one of those old jazz slang-words. >And yes, they used to buy these huge, nob off bass drivers to stick >in their wardrobes to get some outrageous bass sounds! What a cool idea! Never heard of that before! 4. REM (Really Extremely Mundane) Why do I suspect this is becoming the new "Phil Collins" thread? Hell, it makes me laugh ... First I'd like to address James' rhetorical question, wondering: >why XTC are better than REM: Well, a few reasons spring to mind 1. XTC have a sense of humour 2. You can understand what Andy and Colin are singing, AND you can usually get at least some idea of what the songs are about 3. Andy and Colin both write real, direct and personal songs about genuine feelings, experiences and issues - not waffly, unintelligible wilfully obscure meanderings of such yawn-inducing ordinariness that they wouldn't pass muster as an XTC demo (IMHO of course) 3. Michael Stipe couldn't write a lyric half as beautiful as "No Language In Our Lungs " even if his life depended on it 4. REM get paid millions to be rather boring and are accordded totally undeserved mega-star status, while XTC are paid a pittance to be totally brilliant and are ignored by almost the entire world 5. Andy would NEVER wear such awful eye makeup, and looks much better with a bit of lippy on >What REM lack that XTC have is the ability to surprise and go off at >an unexpected tangent in a song, a musical kind of lateral thinking. Precisely!! And not just within songs, but between songs too. I vivdly remember the first time I heard "Runaways", in a Sydney record store I was known to frequent, and being first deeply intruiged by the amazing sounds, and then totally knocked out to discover it was XTC. I just can't imagine REM being able to pull off that kind of effect - they nothing if not predictable - they have developed their corporate style, it always sounds like them, and, unlike XTC, you are *never* likely to hear an REM song and not realise it's them. >To wit: quirkiness. Oh James, it was all going so well ... and then you had to go and spoil it all by using the "Q" word ... *sigh* >The masterstroke however is that wonderful horn melody (which always >reminds me of the theme tune to "Are You Being Served" for >those reading in Blighty) which comes in in the second verse and >which totally transforms the song. Phew - you redeemed yourself. What a bloody brilliant observation, James! I wonder if Andy actually had that in mind? That's what I love about this list - people pick up on things you would NEVER think of yourself. It's like having extra lobes in your brain! Then, coincidentally, Bryce weighed in with the following propostitions: >I should probably know to leave well enough alone (especially as this >is my first posting) but here's my thimble of gasoline: Thimble? Egads, more like a supertanker, mate! You don't believe in starting off gradually, do you? hehe >Is "Shiny Happy People" REALLY any dumber than "Sgt. Rock (Is Going >To Help Me)"? Is "Stand" any more bubblegum than "Generals & Majors"? Dumbness is a very underrated and misunderstood quality, Bryce. Let's not forget that Spector was always asking his collaborators if a song was "dumb enough" and that the working title of "Smile" was "Dumb Angel". It's a common mistake to confuse simplicity with stupidity. And anyway, no REM song has anything like the brilliance of instrumental parts - especially Colin's bass lines - in any of the songs on "Black Sea". I'm not trying to be bitchy - I just honestly think that Mike Mills - and especially Peter Buck - are pretty ordinary musicians when placed up against Andy and Colin. >There's a fickle 'cooler-than-thou' atmosphere which permeates this >list. Take the recent 1998 Top 10 lists--other than an occasional >mention of Lauryn Hill, no-one seemed to include anything that basked >on a Billboard Sales Chart for any significant amount of time. >Don't get me wrong--I found the lists informative, and the >recommendations of fellow XTC fans is more substantial to me than a >random music magazine reviewer who listens to god-knows-what on his >free time. And it's an opportunity to hear about artists who AREN'T >sucking up all the press. But there's this underlying sense of fear >of claiming to like anything that has sold more than a few dozen >copies, or may have been--gasp, choke--purchased by a >fourteen-year-old somewhere in the world. Well perhaps you're right in some ways, but I think that A) the postings reflect the genuinely broad and divergent musical tastes of Chalkhills readers - not an attempt to be snobby. I've been really surprised and impressed by the amazing range of stuff Chalkhillers are into, and alhtough I think I know a fair bit about music, there are always a few surprises here. B) Chalkhillers listen to all that Top 40 stuff to - it's just not usually of any lasting value. That's the nature of most pop music - disposable. A major difference, IMHO, is that in the "good old days", pop used to be played by people like Spector's "Wrecking Crew" who were all veteran jazzers and stunningly accomplished players. Nowadays any cracked-out homey with a Casio sampler can have a stab (so to speak). Sorry, but as I see it, no amount of ambition can substitute for ability, discipline and experience. What I expected was confirmed here - people who like XTC are generally interested in many more kinds of different music, sometimes some VERY obscure stuff - and not really interested in generic Top 40 chart fodder. Speaking for myself, it reflects my complete non-interest in the current dance crazes, which I find derivative, repetetive and basically very dull listening. I'm not against it per se - it's what Elvis Costello termed -"Specific Purpose Music" and really belongs on the dance floor, not the radio. And I really loathe the nauseating proliferation of manufactured boy or girl vocal groups, (do you really think anyone is going to remember Backstreet Boys in five years?), not to mention the endless succesion of carbon-copy power ballads and scale-exercises from Misses Dion, Carey, Houston, and co. >The fact is that R.E.M., whether you love or hate their music, are >not sell-outs. I don't begrudge them their success, Bryce - just don't try to tell me it's "art", or that they deserve it, when XTC have to practically beg to get a contract with anyone. >They didn't tour at the height of their popularity. Poor darlings - how they must have suffered! >They have complete creative control over their work. Sure - so does XTC. But they don't have an $80 million dollar contract with Warners do they? >They haven't had an obvious single since "Everybody Hurts". Thank Ozzy for small mercies, I say. You go on to allude (very) briefly to the fact that every record since "Automatic" has sold progressively less. Why? Because even the silly old public are starting to realise that emperor has no clothes. >A few have cited or implied that from the "Green" album >forward--read: the Warner Brothers era--is when the band really took >its tumble. Being hugely successful wasn't the problem - I and many others who liked the band's earlier work lost interest then because (I contend) that signing with Warners signalled a conscious move by the band to "dumb down", write short, catchy, radio-friendly songs and start appearing in their own videos like real pop stars do so, that Warner could sell them on MTV - and that at the root, their new material was really pretty ordinary by comparison. I am well aware of the phenomenon where fans decide that a band has become too successful, and is therefore no longer cool. I saw it in the friend who introduced me to U2, and then dropped them after the "Red Rocks" thing because they weren't "underground" enough for him anymore. I hope I don't think like that; I dearly, dearly wish that XTC had the commercial success they deserve. But it ain't gonna happen. The fact is that signings like REM are far less about talent and musical worth, than they are about the accountants' projections of future sales. Look at Zappa's career. While he was with the majors he was censored, misrepresented, ignored and screwed six ways to Sunday. Once he got total control of his catalogue, he never looked back, although it cost him millions and took years to do it. He sold record-breaking numbers of copies of his "Guitar" albums by mail-order, when the record companies wouldn't touch it and laughed at the idea. He had to fight Warners tooth-and-nail, for ovmore than a decade, over their totally unjustified refusal to issue the "Lather" albums, and even blocked him from releasing through another label, even though they wouldn't release it themselves. Now they all turn pious and say what a genius he was. Hypocrites. >Does the introduction of major label dollars have a lot to do with >the ability to promote a band? Of course. Is it much of a coincedence >that this is when R.E.M. jumped into the stratosphere? Of course not. >Is it a coincedence that the cooler-than-thou crowd dismisses R.E.M. >at this same juncture? I really don't think so. The fact is that >Warner Bros. (as did countless labels; it was a massive bidding war) >saw the talent of the band, gave them almost unprecedented freedom >and a whopping pile of cash. Anyone--ANYONE--who was offered millions >of dollars to do anything they felt like doing would take it. And if >they felt any pressure to deliver multi-platinum albums, it sure >didn't come through on "Monster". I didn't like that album much >either, but it clearly demonstrates that they are artists following >their muse wherever it takes them. (Personally, I think they were >uncomfortable with the size of their fanbase, and "Monster" was a >conscious attempt to shrink it.) You're being very selective here Bryce - can you imagine REM ever trying something as extreme as, let's say, Lou Reed's notorious "Metal Machine Music" episode? Let alone the idea of Warners actually relasing it! There is a hell of a gulf between comparing "Automatic" to "Monster", and comparing "Sally Can't Dance" to "Metal Machine Music". And you can also claim that "Monster" was the work of a band running out of ideas, as many critics did at the time. And why do you think these bands get signed, anyway? Because they have real talent? Because of their poetic soulfulness. Nope. Because, in general, they are marketable and because A&R people think they are cool, or observe that they are linked to some kind of sub-culture with "street-cred" and that they will sell a shitload and will make money for the company. That's why. >I believe an interested observer can always tell the difference >between people who make music out of passion and those who do it to >become pop/rock stars. That some in the former group actually manage >to achieve superstar status is no reason to summarily dismiss their >work. To do so is (hand trembling as he completes the sentence) >snobbery. Well Bryce I don't think anyone would question Andy's artistry but I'm sure he'd be the first to admit that he was, way back then, just as interested in being a successful rock star as anyone else. >And if Warner Brothers isn't happy with the band's sales drops in >recent years, they ain't >telling--they recently resigned the band to >another multi-album deal. Well, egg on face is never a very nice look. And excuse me, but when did Warners merge with the Royal Benevolent Society? If it's *not* about sales, could you perhaps explain why Warners dropped Van Morrison, and Joni Mitchell, and Neil Young, and Randy Newman, and Ry Cooder? If it's not about what sells and abobut promoting it by means of what is perceived as 'cool' or 'hip' or 'trendy' - then what is it about? >It's obvious that XTC fans aren't followers of the latest flavor, >since XTC has never really BEEN the latest flavor. Wrong. They were the latest flavour once, for a very little while, and could very easily have been big after "English Settlement" - if Andy had kept touring, if they were on a label who knew how to handle them, and hadn't had a crook for a manager. >Most of the postings I've read have been written with intelligence >and wit and articulation. I bet you say that to all the boys ... >The intrinsic flaw in many intelligent, witty people (myself >sometimes included) is that it can turn dismissive, snobbish and >bullying in a heartbeat. And this is a problem because ... ? Christ, isn't this a DISCUSSION forum? If I want to read tepid uncritical drivel, I'll buy the daily paper. >And when you wield your opinion as a weapon to beat back the folks >you perceive as idiots, you force them to use their own opinions as a >sort of sheild. Oh no! We'll have to ...gasp ... think?! And even .... *cringe* ... *flinch* ...construct a logical argument???!! and ... *tremble*...engage in intelligent debate. ...Oh my god! My brain hurts ... please ...make it stop .. >That's when the berating starts. There was a line from an episode of >the TV show Frasier that has stuck in my head (the Niles character >said it, and claimed he wasn't quoting anybody, so I don't if the >writers actually coined this gem on their own): "Popularity is the >hallmark of mediocrity." There's a lot of truth in that, but I'd like >to propose that there is a flip side, too: "Popularity is the >touchstone of snobbery." Bollocks - popularity - in the charts - is and always was the hallmark of how many programme managers got grafted/laid/drugged to put a particular record onto the playlist, and/or who has the most huge-breasted babes in their video. >Having read Song Stories, Andy admits to having written some songs in >an attempt to score a hit single. Is that any less of a sell-out, >just because he wasn't very successful with it? I recall a >"Nonsuch"-era quote from him, where he said (paraphrasing): "I don't >listen to anyone else. Only the work of one other modern songwriter >interests me, and luckily for me, he's in my band." An unbelievably >snobbish quote, to be sure. Are you dissing Colin? Look out pal! And what's the alternative? Coolio shamelessly plundering Stevie Wonder to create some sort of sham-hit for people too young or too dumb to have heard the original? Erk. >But wait--here comes Song Stories, and he comes clean on a laundry >list of influences, including a horde of stuff that no-one with any >degree of cool would ever admit listening to. Or, worse, LIKING. Ooooooh! NOW look who's being a snob? >Okay, so I didn't join this mailing list to audition for the roles of >Solomon, Confucius, or Mom. But I do believe a debate can take place >on this list with a little more respect to opposing viewpoints. awww ... where's the fun in that? Suggesting that we should kill the singer from Ally McBeal, or that we're better off now that Sinatra is dead, or that R.E.M. should stop recording because YOU don't care for them--even in jest--does nothing to lend creedence to your opinion, it just shows a lack of ability to support your opinion. No no - it just shows that: A) I'm an opinionated prick, and B) I have incredibly good taste C) thos are all keen ideas! >And it makes you come off (to me, at least--I won't presume to speak >for anyone else) like a petty snob. Remember, just because you have >the RIGHT to say pretty much anything you want doesn't necessarily >mean you SHOULD indulge yourself. I suppose I shouldn't vote either? Babe, I'm gonna have to be PLENTY quiet when I'm dead, Until then, I'll keep talking. But all quibbles aside - welcome to the list. Penultimately, Peter Fitzpatrick <peterfit@MICROSOFT.com> complained that: >it's been difficult to get Andy on the 'phone for a while now and my Yeah - and Madonna won't return my calls either. Finally, Sebastien Maury <MAURY.SEBASTIEN@a2.abc.net.au> wondered: >how we can get AV to be feature album for a week on JJJ? First I though ...nah, it'd never happen. Then I thought - hey! wait! "Your Dictionary" has a four letter word - it'll be a shoe-in for JJJ. They'll play anything with the word F*** in it. Then I remembered ... the word F*** is spelled out, which means it's about three letters too long for Michael Tunn to understand. Damn! Yours endlessly Dunks
------------------------------ Message-ID: <B9B4268C8F87D11195DC0000F840FABE08387347@DUB-MSG-02> From: Peter Fitzpatrick <peterfit@MICROSOFT.com> Subject: Let's Help Promote Apple Venus Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 12:00:17 -0000 Take 5 minutes of your time and help promote the band and the album : Ok, the time has come : the advance promos are out there so . . . . Here are the locations for contacting RADIO in the UK (of course it can do absolutely no harm for anyone , anywhere in the world to email requests.....one can always pretend to be from Liverpool, Manchester, London, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Swindon....) Local Independent Radio Stations: go to http://www.thebiz.co.uk/marbroind.htm this has all UK Independent radio stations. BBC Radio http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/mailroom/mailroom.html Here you can choose a DJ and email them. This also has the phone & fax details. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/talk/talk.shtml Again all the email addresses for the BBC Radio 2 DJs. Virgin Radio,(Hey ! Why not ?) Studio Fax: 0645 30 1197 National Studio: 0500 30 1215 London Studio: 0500 30 1058=20 New Listener Hotline: 0845 600 1215 Studio E-mail: studio@virginradio.com I have no idea if Cooking Vinyl are promoting a particular track for radio - maybe they can let us know if there's a 'radio' track we should request. Be nice in your mails, be polite, don't be over the top, don't lie too much - just enough to get APPLE VENUS played. Peter Fitzpatrick Multimedia Production Manager Microsoft European Product Development Centre, Dublin.
------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 11:21:36 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <v03007805b2cb69b4ff73@[209.86.131.205]> From: Mitch Friedman <mitchf@mindspring.com> Subject: blame the feather Hi All, Just to add to what Peter Fitzpatrick contributed in the last issue, I spoke with Andy today and he and Colin will be out and about, doing their promo tour for almost 3 months! I've been informed that the packaging for Volume 1 will be nothing spectacular. It's supposedly a really close up color photograph of the detail in a particularly impressive peacock feather. In the spare nanoseconds that Andy is not on the phone being interviewed, he has been running out to the Shed and digitally copying all his and Colin's 4 track portastudio demo master tapes, cleaning them up a bit in the process. This is in preparation for the impending box set of many, many demos called "Fuzzy Warbles" which is definitely happening. Nothing Virgin ever had their hands on will be included unfortunatly (for instance "Let's Make a Den", "Find the Fox", etc.) but Andy did say that one of the few master tapes Colin did find was his original demo using the same music to "Find the Fox" but with lyrics that initially made the song about Halley's Comet! This will be one of the warbles your fuzzy ears will hear. Structural work is nearly complete on Idea Studios and musical work on the next album will started/continued in April. Mitch be
------------------------------ Message-ID: <19990120154008.26675.rocketmail@web4.rocketmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 07:40:08 -0800 (PST) From: nross <phoenixyellowrose@rocketmail.com> Subject: People can be so touchy! Chalkhills people! People can be so damned touchy! Why is everyone suddenly on a peace train, just when I'm starting to be mean and angry? ITS NOT FAIR! This sudden change in attitudes is perplexing. Since I've subscribed to this list, I've noticed a slight angst in the attitudes of posters. Why work to change it? I kind of enjoy a testy mood now and then, or a jab here or there... It can be directed towards me... give me your best damned shot! I miss the spice in discussions. I miss the off-hand remarks... I DON'T ENTIRELY WANT PEACE IF IT MEANS THAT PERSONALITIES ARE THROWN AWAY. I like balance. I'll take the good with the bad as long as it is all very interesting. Tone the rudeness down, but not your heart or fire! ON DAVID-OH: Okay, so maybe some think his postings are annoying, some think they are precious, some think they are clever. I am so serious here... I really don't mean to be rude: His postings hurt my brain! They physically hurt to read. I don't know why... perhaps its too unfamilar or too much stimuli... but I can't read them. I find it sad that I physically cannot read David-Oh's postings. I have a feeling they are rather interesting and fun. I'm sure he's got a lot to say. I'm very sure I'd enjoy reading the postings if I could. Alas! I must scroll down when I see his messages. I end up missing things I don't think I really want to miss. I just thought I'd offer up my dilema. I'll gratefully accept interpretations of his postings! ON SPOUSES NOT LIKING XTC: My husband hates them. My husband calls them crap. My husband won't let me play the damned CD's in the car. I know I cannot change his opinion... he likes the Backstreet Boys. Well! good day and happy hunting!
------------------------------ Message-ID: <818E6AFC174AD111991300805F1950B5B7607B@mail.novainfo.com> From: "Roberts, Peter" <Peter.Roberts@novainfo.com> Subject: re: CD reproduction - think again Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:19:18 -0500 ...from #5-64: This is only true using little rectangles to reproduce the sound, which is impossible with analogue electronics. It is theoretically possible to reproduce analogue signals ABSOLUTELY VERBATIM. (I think that absolutely is redundant there, but hey.) Sine waves are used to reproduce the sound instead, they are very smooth and nice and analogue. Next theory please. Wrong! Ever heard of square waves? Many analog instruments are perfectly capable of doing so, just ask Jimi Hendrix...or Neil Young (think 'Hey, Hey, My, My')...or maybe even Lester Bowie (to get a non-guitarist in there) Phil explained it correctly, according to all the stuff I remember from my EE classes in school (which is not as much as it used to be). As close as the sampled sound may be, it will not be a completely true representation unless the sampling interval is zero, which is impossible. Lots of people swear they can tell the difference. pete
------------------------------ Message-Id: <s6a5e49a.060@dineout.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 13:06:07 -0500 From: "Jason Hauser" <JHAUSER@dineout.org> Subject: TB is soooo worth it! Oy Chalkhitites- Don't know about you but I think the digest has been terrific recently. Contentious, informative, quaint, belligerant, bizarre. Keep it up! I finally got Transistor Blast for my birthday. "Hi, Mom? I'm 28, and I want a boxed set and a soccer ball. Time for my nap!" Oh man, it is so cool! Both live CD's are worth the (free) price, as I've never heard them live. Just awesome. As for the radio recorded material, great stuff, some I hadn't heard before. Doesn't "The Rhythm" just wrap The Cars career up in a nutshell? "Meccanic Dancing"? Are you kidding? This song is killer! "One of the Millions", beautiful song. "Real by Reel", awesome, you Canadians will know, The Odds come to mind. Whew! I just can't get enough of that sweet stuff, Andy and Colin left behind. doo doo doo doo doo ooh doo doo...
------------------------------
From: Matt_Kaden/CAM/Lotus@lotus.com
Message-ID: <852566FF.006C0285.00@mta2.lotus.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:31:07 -0500
Subject: uh oh
"...........................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
..................................................great
2 c humour 4 a change!
the human still known as davidoh"
I'm so glad I'm me.
------------------------------ Message-ID: <71118473695DD211967A0060B06805D46588A2@MSGBOS629NTS.fmr.com> From: "Sawyer, Keith" <Keith.Sawyer@fmr.com> Subject: Radio Pressure Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:43:07 -0500 Neal Buck asked about the 'correct' way to let your local radio station know that they should be playing Apple Venus. The answer depends on what type of station you're calling ... college or commercial. Since I'm involved in college radio I can suggest a few ways to get AV played there. The album is being serviced by McGathy to college, so your local station will likely get it. Depending of the effectiveness of the music director it should be available for play around the release date. The best way to get a cut heard on the radio is to pick your dj carefully - phone the station while they're playing pop/rock music. Nothing irks a dj more than a Morrissey request during a punk show. Also, convey some enthusiasm for the release - IMO sincerity goes a long way towards getting your request spun. Try not to call the same dj more than twice ... multiple requests for the same thing (even from different people) may be tagged as an effort to manipulate, and the opposite result will likely occur. There's no need to push a certain song, college dj's usually have the freedom to choose whatever track they like. The goal is to get the dj to listen to the cd and (hopefully) enjoy it, which will result in more spins. Commercial radio is a completely different dirigible. I'm not sure TVT will even be servicing commercial stations beyond Gavin reporters, so your local station may not receive it. Dj's at commercial stations rarely have the ability to program their own show, so pleading will be useless. The person you need to convince is the music director, or the employee who decides which songs are available to be played. Since most of us don't have any personal influence over the MD of a commercial station, more callous methods will have to be substituted. These stations usually track phone calls and e-mail requests to create an audience response report, and you want XTC to appear on this report. Which means calling. Many times. Interspersed throughout the day, of course. If they have a request page on the web use that also. Hopefully the MD will notice XTC and comply with your demands by putting a song into rotation. This is where the fact that a single is not being released is a strike against the release ... music directors rarely display any creativity in picking the song to add. I hope TVT will be pushing a focus track to help mitigate this negative. Good luck everyone, keith @ wmbr
------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 11:51:08 -0800 (PST) From: relph (John Relph) Message-Id: <9901201151.ZM60638@mando.engr.sgi.com> Subject: Re: The Turd Polished "Robert Wood" <Robert.Wood@mutech.co.uk> wrote: > >So unless the "normal" CD has >lots of damage and the error correction circuitry of the CD is working >overtime, what the CD reads from the gold disk is going to be exactly the >same as the normal CD. i.e. lots of numbers that are turned into voltages. >Whether the CD is made of gold, platinum or Cadbury's Dairy Milk, the >numbers that are read will always be the same. Ah, here's the flaw in your argument. In the case of the Skylarking Geffen CD vs. the Skylarking MFSL Gold CD, the bits are DIFFERENT! Yes, MFSL went back to the original mix tape and remastered it using their own half-speed playback technique and noise reduction system. So the bits on the Gold CD are actually cleaner and sound better than the bits on the Geffen CD. However, if you stuck those bits from the Gold CD onto a regular aluminium CD then your argument would hold. >You are a victim of the marketing man. (Actually *anyone* who buys a CD is a >victim of the marketing man, but you're a double victim.) Ask for your money >back! I compared the original Virgin CD and the Gold MFSL CD and the MFSL CD sounds measurably better. The bass is cleaner and clearer, the separation is better. Unfortunately, the MFSL CD has "Dear God" instead of "Mermaid Smiled", so it will always be second best, but really, the sound is much improved on the Gold MFSL CD. Try comparing in headphones. -- John
------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990120152750.0099ca00@smtpgw.ametsoc.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 15:27:50 -0500 From: David Gershman <dgershmn@ametsoc.org> Subject: My Top 10 for '98 Hi Chalk-listics, I've been wanting to share my top 10 CDs of '98, but decided to wait for the end of the year in case I got any new CDs at the last minute that made it in under the wire. As it turned out, there was one that jumped in there. In some bizarre desire to undertake a hopeless task, I've even tried putting them in order, but it would probably change depending on the day, moon phase, and weather. In any case, here's my list, in descending order: 1. Liz Phair: "Whitechocolatespaceegg" -- Liz returns with more great songs, easily matching the vastly underrated "Whip-Smart." (Favorite song: "Uncle Alvarez") 2. P J Harvey: "Is This Desire?" -- Polly Jean is one of the most distinctive voices around (not to mention that she's riveting in concert), and this album is no let-down. (Favorite songs: "Angelene," "No Girl So Sweet") 3. Grant Lee Buffalo: "Jubilee" -- Possibly their best album yet, recharged and revitalized. (Favorite songs: "Change Your Tune," "Testimony") 4. Hole: "Celebrity Skin" -- I would have liked it a little less polished, closer in sound to the already classic "Live Through This," but play it loud: she's a brat and she's proud. (Favorite songs: "Use Once & Destroy," "Celebrity Skin," "Northern Star") 5. Elliot Smith: "XO": This album is even better than I'd hoped it would be -- he's the Simon & Garfunkel of the '90s (and that's meant as a compliment). (Favorite song: Hard to choose, but "Question Mark" is up there) 6. Beck: "Mutations": Not the album I expected, but I'd be surprised if anyone knows what to expect from Beck. It's great to hear him writing more original melodies, rather than relying on samples again (although I think "Mellow Gold" and "Odelay" are full of great music). Is there anyone currently on the music scene with a better sense of musical humor than Beck? (Favorite song: "Lazy Flies") 7. Sloan: "Navy Blues" -- Excellent follow-up to "One Chord to Another," leaning heavily on the '70s (Cheap Trick, Thin Lizzy, et al.). You can just hear that these guys are having fun. (Favorite song: "On the Horizon") 8. The Cardigans: "Gran Turismo" -- Another disc-full of tunefulness from the First Band on the Moon, this time with more of an edge. (Favorite song: Can't decide...they're all too damn catchy) 9. R.E.M.: "Up" -- Can't really understand all the bashing they've taken here recently, aside from the fact that Michael Stipe has been so willfully weird for years, but for those who actually take the time to give this album repeated listenings, this is a very rewarding disc. They're never afraid to try something new (or something old -- see "At My Most Beautiful," the best Beach Boys tribute song since XTC). (Favorite songs: "Lotus," "Sad Professor") 10. Rufus Wainwright: "Rufus Wainwright" -- An original new talent...what a concept! Tin Pan Alley, cabaret, piano pop, Rufus doesn't quite sound like anyone else. (Favorite song: "April Fools") Best box sets: "The John Lennon Anthology" and "Transistor Blast" (no big surprise there, huh?) Honorable mentions, in no particular order: Billy Bragg and Wilco: "Mermaid Ave."; Yazbek: "Tock"; Harvey Danger: "Where Have All the Merrymakers Gone?"; Juliana Hatfield: "Bed"; Bob Mould: "The Last Dog and Pony Show"; The Loud Family: "Days for Days" That's it . . . I'd certainly be glad to hear any comments you might have. In any case, here's to the imminent release of "Apple Venus"! I'm crossing my fingers for it to be released on Feb. 16, my birthday -- what better gift could I ask for? :) Dave Gershman
------------------------------ End of Chalkhills Digest #5-66 ******************************
Go back to Volume 5.
22 January 1999 / Feedback