smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Michael Bennett" <mrhonorama@hotmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: Pop songs/Another poppy poll |
| Date | Mon, 10 Feb 2003 08:01:29 -0600 |
[Part 1 text/plain (1.7 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
For me, your comment is a vivid illustration of the strangely incompatible
gap between logic and your thought process. There is nothing incompatible
about a group of genre fanatics liking more 'obscure' titles and a
cross-section of fans that aren't of such a defined interest picking a list,
that, with the exception of a few titles, are the albums that dominated the
'serious' rock press in the U.S., such as it is. While less than a third of
the Eggbert poll made the Audities poll top 50, all of those records
received a fair number of votes.
Now the big question -- what exactly is your point? It seems many of your
posts are targeted towards some sort of pernicious Audities group think --
we don't think outside the box enough. Yet this poll, while a representive
selection of some quality music, is (to put it in Beefheartian terms) as
'safe as milk'. Is your bone of contention that we don't think in lockstep
with other slightly outside of the mainstream rock fans?
Mike Bennett
Record reviews and more at http://fufkin.com
>From: Eb <ElBroome@earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: audities@smoe.org
>To: audities@smoe.org
>Subject: Pop songs/Another poppy poll
>Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 23:31:17 -0800
>
>http://www.eggbert.com/reviews/COF_2002_top10.pdf
>
>For me, the above poll is a vivid illustration of the strangely
>incompatible gap between guitar-pop fans and guitar-pop cultists. This and
>the Audities top 50 have just 15 items in common, by my count? Despite the
>generally similar aesthetic of the contributors?
>
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.