jmsellens@watmath.UUCP (John M Sellens) (10/20/85)
In article <-- Details hidden to protect the unaware --> > Has anybody seen the new ABC album? What does its cover look like? Something has been starting to really worry me lately. First I heard that Wham! played in Toronto and Georgeous George had 2 (or 3) backup *dancers*. And then I was locked in a small room with my TV and forced to watch parts of Live Aid and saw Madonna cavorting with (yup - you guessed it) 2 backup dancers. (I also heard Power Station whose drummer has never heard of the concept of a steady beat or keeping in time.) So much emphasis these days seems to be on appearance and perceptions of style rather than on the music. (Yes - there are many counter examples) Is this what videos have been doing to our music? I hate to admit it, but videos have had some good effects, mostly in introducing a few more interesting, but lesser known artists to the vast expanses of middle America. But in so many things, it seems that people are forgetting that the purpose of music is the music, not some fabricated video featuring pale, sickly-looking, ugly guys telling georgeous girls to take a hike. Well, this article went nowhere. Too bad. But tell you what - why don't you head out tonight and support some local band in some local bar?? Food for thought: From review of the Cruzados new album, Toronto Globe & Mail, Oct 17 by Liam Lacey: "It's a minor quibble, but this band's claim to be Los Lobos with cojones is defintely undermined by the hair and make-up credits on the album sleeve." See what I mean?? John John's rule of bands #1: Never trust a band whose bass player uses a headless bass.
rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (10/23/85)
> > Something has been starting to really worry me lately. First I heard that > Wham! played in Toronto and Georgeous George had 2 (or 3) backup *dancers*. > And then I was locked in a small room with my TV and forced to watch parts > of Live Aid and saw Madonna cavorting with (yup - you guessed it) 2 backup > dancers. (I also heard Power Station whose drummer has never heard of the > concept of a steady beat or keeping in time.) > > So much emphasis these days seems to be on appearance and perceptions of > style rather than on the music. (Yes - there are many counter examples) > Is this what videos have been doing to our music? > > John Here, John! Don't make a fuss! I'll watch your MTV :-) Seriously, it really is just rock coming full circle again. Go-go dancers were part of performences by bands on "Shindig", "Hullabaloo", "Let Me Take You Where the Action Is", etc. during the 60s. And as for style, theatrics have been around since before the birth of rock (e.g. Johnny Ray doing "Cry"). The videos only give the added ability of editing to the performance. Besides, with the exception of a very few musically competent people, what is rock but "appearance and perceptions"? BTW, I LIKE the Power Station's drummer's style!
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (10/23/85)
>> Has anybody seen the new ABC album? What does its cover look like? > Something has been starting to really worry me lately. First I heard that > Wham! played in Toronto and Georgeous George had 2 (or 3) backup *dancers*. > And then I was locked in a small room with my TV and forced to watch parts > of Live Aid and saw Madonna cavorting with (yup - you guessed it) 2 backup > dancers. (I also heard Power Station whose drummer has never heard of the > concept of a steady beat or keeping in time.) > So much emphasis these days seems to be on appearance and perceptions of > style rather than on the music. (Yes - there are many counter examples) > Is this what videos have been doing to our music? [JOHN SELLENS] I don't think having backup dancers *alone* qualifies them for the banality heap. (Such a categorization would make ballet and modern dance troupes worthless: "My God, dancing on the stage while the MUSIC is playing???? DIS-gusting!!!") Though clearly both Madonna and Wham! fit cleanly into that heap. But that's what the real "pop" side of pop music is and always has been all about: flash, showbiz, glam schlock, etc. For the purpose of sating the "entertainment" "needs" of the "masses" who have come to expect it. Today it's just so fine tuned you can't tell the difference between Sheena Easton and Madonna and Dolly Parton. (well... ) All this at the expense of the "serious" side of the house, those who really are making some real music worth listening to on its own merits and not based on the prettiness of the face that sang it. And guess what the rest of the world (the "jazz" and "classical" buffs, e.g.) see when the words "popular music" appear: the schlock side of the house. > John's rule of bands #1: Never trust a band whose bass player uses a > headless bass. I thought you said the important thing was the music itself, not what type of flashy stuff and/or equipment goes with it... -- "Mrs. Peel, we're needed..." Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr
jmsellens@watmath.UUCP (John M Sellens) (10/25/85)
In article <1948@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes: >> John's rule of bands #1: Never trust a band whose bass player uses a >> headless bass. [Sellens] > >I thought you said the important thing was the music itself, not what >type of flashy stuff and/or equipment goes with it... [Rick Rosen] What I meant to suggest with that was that a headless bass often seems to be an indicator that the band is more concerned with appearances than certain other things ... John
todd@scirtp.UUCP (Todd Jones) (10/29/85)
> In article <1948@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes: > >> John's rule of bands #1: Never trust a band whose bass player uses a > >> headless bass. [Sellens] > > > >I thought you said the important thing was the music itself, not what > >type of flashy stuff and/or equipment goes with it... [Rick Rosen] > > What I meant to suggest with that was that a headless bass often seems to > be an indicator that the band is more concerned with appearances than > certain other things ... > > John Dear John, For your own edification, the "Steinberger" bass you refer to is a significantly different bass compared to the Fenders and Rickenbackers you're probably familiar with. Some people like the sound, some people hate it. But those willing to spend near $2000 often do so because the instrument is so sensitive and the output is so "hot" that it requires very little force to produce adequate output. A lot of the bass players I have talked to have purchased one in spite of their hideous appearance, in order to get a certain tone or feel. ||||||| || || [(.) (.)] Todd Jones \ ^ / {decvax,akgua}!mcnc!rti-sel!scirtp!todd | = | |___| SCI Systems Inc. doesn't necessarily agree with Todd.
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (10/30/85)
>>> John's rule of bands #1: Never trust a band whose bass player uses a >>> headless bass. [Sellens] >>I thought you said the important thing was the music itself, not what >>type of flashy stuff and/or equipment goes with it... [Rick Rosen] > What I meant to suggest with that was that a headless bass often seems to > be an indicator that the band is more concerned with appearances than > certain other things ... [Sellens] But that cuts both ways. If you judge the music NEGATIVELY by the fact that they use certain types of equipment (e.g., drum machines, ahem ahem :-) without regard to the actual musical content, you are no better than someone automatically judging positively. Like David Levadie automatically hating any piece of music he hears on a radio station (or some such value judgment). -- Popular consensus says that reality is based on popular consensus. Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr