smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | rob@splitsville.com |
| Subject | =?US-ASCII?B?UkU6IEx5cmljcw==?= |
| Date | Fri, 20 May 2005 14:07:34 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain US-ASCII (4.1 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
>Now, Rob, I think that John Bonham is a MUCH better
>drummer than Keith Moon.
>Rebuttal?
And I work with this flippin' guy?
Seriously, Moon came first and was a huge influence on Bonham. So I think that gives him the edge. Bonham was great, but how many drummers help TRULY define the sound of a band the way Moon did for the Who? I can't think of any that had as much affect as Moon.
(Townshend himself once said that even though Moon was "...only a quarter of the band, he was half of the sound and spirit.")
I think Moon can be used as a 'BC/AD' reference point. What did rock drummers sound like before Moon? And what did they sound like after?
Moving on to lyrics- someone had mentioned the connection between powerpop lyrics and love. I think the issue with Power pop (and, like Matt, I use the term loosely) is that the lyrics focus ONLY on love (yes, I'm generalizing a bit). So much that is tied to love- betrayal, envy, lust, disaster, etc.- can be pretty amazing topics. And when an Elvis Costello (of his first four or so albums, anyway), gets a hold of these topics, the results are stunning.
Be Bop A Lu-La,
Rob
>----- ------- Original Message ------- -----
>From: :audities@smoe.org
>To: audities@smoe.org
>Sent: Fri, 20 May 2005 11:57:20
>
>Rob says: Not to mention "Atmosphere", which
>should slay any human who has
>ever been in contact with another. That ain't no
>Jellyfish.
>
>While I agree with you regarding 'Atmosphere', I
>think the choice of
>Jellyfish might be off base. What struck me the
>first time that I heard
>Jellyfish's 'Bellybutton' is that - for the most
>part - they avoided cliche'
>in their lyrics. Sure, the topics were standard
>power pop, but I thought
>they navigated less traveled waters lyrically.
>Doesn't excuse 'Baby's Coming
>Back'.
>
>Greg brought up a great topic (at least I think it
>was Greg... regardless,
>he made good points) but Stewart put it best: I
>don't expect "great" lyrics,
>I just prefer that they not be boring cliches.
>
>A lot of the music mentioned on this list is
>unlistenable to me for that
>very reason... not to mention that so many bands in
>the 'power pop' (and I
>use that term loosely) genre revisit the same
>mid-60's jangly guitar sound
>over and over again. Exhibit A would be the
>otherwise beautiful 'Don't Worry
>Baby' by the Beach Boys. The lyrics are godawful. I
>don't mind simplistic
>(see: Marshall Crenshaw's 'MaryAnn' from his first
>album - love that song)
>but pedantic I can't stomach. Still, I can mostly
>forgive bad lyrics written
>prior to the 80's. I don't know why that's my
>cutoff, but it is. However, I
>can't forgive bad lyrics written now. Exhibit B:
>Weezer's new album. Love
>the band, and some of the songs on 'Make Believe'
>are as hooky as Rivers'
>best stuff. But the lyricist from the Blue Album
>has been replaced with
>someone I play the 'guess the next line of the
>song' game with. Not fun.
>
>Mea Culpa time... I certainly have been known to
>throw some pretty
>simplistic lyrics together. But I'm passionate
>about growing lyrically, and
>I wish others in this community would challenge
>themselves to do so as well.
>IMHO Neil Finn is the master of pop songwriting
>with almost universally
>great lyrics. And I'd much rather hear Thom Yorke
>sing a hauntingly
>beautiful melody with brutally nasty lyrics than
>hear the equivalent of 'I
>Want to Hold Your Hand' rewritten. Try not to go
>for the obvious rhyme, and
>challenge yourself to eliminate certain words yet
>convey the same meaning.
>
>Now, Rob, I think that John Bonham is a MUCH better
>drummer than Keith Moon.
>Rebuttal?
>
>
>
>
>"The sender believes that this E-mail and any
>attachments were free of any
>harmful and malicious code or defects when sent.
>This message and its
>attachments could have been infected during
>transmission. By reading the
>message and opening any attachments, the recipient
>accepts full
>responsibility for taking protective and remedial
>action regarding the code
>or such defects. The sender is not liable for any
>loss or damage arising in
>any way from this message or its attachments."
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.