Jump to content
Mudcrutch Farm Will Be Shutting Down - Read More...

Shelter

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    3,131

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    187

Posts posted by Shelter

  2. Posted · Report reply

    Yeah well, I'm sure he can't find a priest with a dowsing rod... He does have problems there, no doubt. I think he's spot on, though, when it comes to the sometimes cunning ways of so called "inanimate" objects. But then again, I might need holy water too, or perhaps preferably "unholy" water.. Can't decide who to trust.. Tom Waits or Jim Beam..

  3. Posted · Report reply

    4 hours ago, nobodyinparticular said:

    I got into an altercation with a doorframe. My face hurts now. The doorframe doesn't care, because it is an inanimate object.

    I wouldn't be so sure...

    Or, to quote Tom Waits...

    The piano has been drinking, my necktie is asleep
    And the combo went back to new york, the jukebox has to take a leak
    And the carpet needs a haircut, and the spotlight looks like a prison break
    And the telephone's out of cigarettes, and the balcony is on the make
    And the piano has been drinking
     
    And the menus are all freezing, and the light man's blind in one eye
    And he can't see out of the other
    And the piano-tuner's got a hearing aid, and he showed up with his mother
    And the piano has been drinking
     
    As the bouncer is a sumo wrestler cream-puff Casper milktoast
    And the owner is a mental midget with the i.q. of a fence post
    Cause the piano has been drinking
     
    And you can't find your waitress with a Geiger counter
    And she hates you and your friends and you just can't get served without her
    And the box-office is drooling, and the bar stools are on fire
    And the newspapers were fooling, and the ash-trays have retired
    Cause the piano has been drinking.
    The piano has been drinking - not me.

  5. Posted · Report reply

    16 hours ago, MaryJanes2ndLastDance said:

    From what I could recall, (and I'm sure he'll appear if I misrepresent him) Shelter thought a better approach would be for the band to vary the set list from tour to tour and within the show itself, vary up how some songs are played, extended jams one night, straight rendition the next.

    Did I say all that? Could be. Knowing me, I probably went on endlessly, rambling on about the distinction between the Music and the Branding. That is, the difference between traveling ankle deep in and with your music passion, being original (riding the river, wherever it goes), and traveling with a tightly scripted ritual, designed to reinforce your brand, trying to live up to it, chasing your shadow, as it were, if ever so evocatively (I won't back down!).

    The smart thing to do, obviously, is - like Pearl Jam, you say - to make dynamic your brand, to make that type of ride the expectation that people will have. Or put the other way around, to not letting you being a highly successful and profitable professional, stop you from also keeping it real, not only real within the limits of one basic design, but real for real, so to speak. That way you won't have to worry about the herds of less imaginative people telling you that if you don't do the exact same core show over and over, people will stop coming.  

    Alas. No use repeating all these details of a thousand past discussions. Especially since it is what it is now, and it can never be changed. So what, if some of us dreamed of them using their magic skills for more stuff - inside and outside the cataloge? So what if some of us saw certain logical flaws to all the "reasons" why they shouldn't ("Tom is the best!" being my favorite)? I guess the basic truth and value in all of it is something we all can agree on. That is, when it comes to h-o-w they actuallly did their thing, TPATH performances were over and beyond all other bands. And brands. To me the latter era sameness (from tour to tour, most notably, but also over the cause of a single tour - the latter would not be so much of an issue, if it wasn't for the former) may seem like some sort of waste of talent, in the big scheme of things. Some sort of misguided "perfectionism" or "integrity" on Tom's behalf, if you will. Misguided, since really it's a technical perfectionism only, that, moreover, they could've upheld in other ways than through this certain type of over repetition that they got themself stuck in over time. Someone else, of course, may like to come to a show well prepared, and I resepect that. To them the genius of Tom may have been exactly that, that he did stick to the formula, refined his specific act. There is no denying how great it was seeing these guys play these songs. Their performances, to all of us who saw them, just like all of their music will, indeed shine forever.. much like a diamond, as it were.

    Seems like I took the bate, damn you. I appeared... just to show that I had one more post on this subject in me. Go figure.

     

    MaryJanes2ndLastDance reacted to this

  11. Posted · Report reply

    44 minutes ago, MaryJane0612 said:

    Support by the band or family probably doesnt come into it. Signed artists' outpourings, unfortunately, are a commodity to be objectified like any other product for sale. To ask the family or band whether they mind, or consent, is not a legal requirement and it rather is like asking a cow whether it minds if their milk is sold to a supermarket. 

    True that. It will depend, though. There are cows that do own their own milk, as it were.

    chimera and Big Blue Sky reacted to this

  14. Posted · Report reply

    6 hours ago, High Grass Dog said:

    I don't understand

    As for me, I'm not as worked up as it may seem.. haha.. Just can't help but noticing a slight stench. It's easy not to care about the release itself, you are right. But it's as easy, for me, to think the how and when (and combined) of it smells.

    You do have a point though: It's good that they get this out of the way as quickly as possible. At least if it actually is such a well meant and one-off thing as you seem to think. (I do have a feeling though, that part of the stench is the implication that there is more of the kind to come, many more..The business argument that some people rightfully put forward stipulates as much.)

    6 hours ago, High Grass Dog said:

    This kind of project isn't targeted to us.

    What I like to know though, is - with those extra rare tracks - who is it target to? If it's a final fact since many discussions, here and elsewhere, that only the real "music geeks" are buying records any more, and that only them have any intense interest in unreleased, rare tracks (or indeed, as you rightfully point out, in the chronology..). So where does that leave the logic of this release? Still no smell?

     

  16. Posted · Report reply

    1 hour ago, nurktwin said:

    !!!! And ????????

    There you go. At least we can always count on you to stop and think before any final judgements are passed.

    Of course you are more than free to your perspective, and I'm glad you keep on the sunny side and are able to see ups rather than downs in today's business ethics. In fact I envy that part. I really appreciate the aspects you bring up as well, and I agree... people don't think about these things enough. 

    If they did think about them some more, they'd soon realize how sick and depraved things are, the things we think as normal cause we are told they are normal, but are they really? Ah.. the business side of show business. Nothing new under the sun. 

    That said, "survival" is not a concept that comes to mind here, especially not given the circumstances surrounding this release. Even if I realize that people need to make money, I don't think it at all uncalled for to ask oneself these questions, at least now and then: what people? how much money? at what time? on what? in what way? under what circumstances? to what cost (yeah, ironic, that one)?

    As you can tell, I don't stop and think much. (And maybe that is why I find it disorienting when people accept things they are able to explain, no matter how crooked the morale, or how backwards the explanation. It may also be why our politics look the way it does? That we just accept the void, and even cheer for it?)

    Now, I am sure a lot of people will do some surviving on the back of this release. As mentioned, I'm also happy for all the record buying none fans and new fans, for whom TBOE will be a treasure and/or starting point for great discoveries (and expenses) to come. But I hope you excuse me for still thinking the hows and whens of it all, to be less than charming. It's almost like someone didn't stop and think before they clicked the "go" button on the details of this, wouldn't you say?

    Humbly.

    chimera and MaryJanes2ndLastDance reacted to this

  17. Posted · Report reply

    9 hours ago, High Grass Dog said:

    I don't think it's a greed thing or anything bad.

    Oh, you just don't see the greed for the thick smoke of rapacity in the air. ;) 

    As for overlap, I find way more than half of it to overlap with earlier collections. But as a collection for christmas shopping none fans, it's still a good fun ride, of course. It's just really hard to ignore what they try to do with the inclusion of two rare tracks here... (There's a special circle in Hell for those kinda things! Some say it's the inner circle, what Hell is made of, but personally I think that may be just a slight exaggeration.)

    And what they try to do with the timing does not help them, whoever they are, to look like decent folks either. This is certainly a I-don't-care release for me as well. Still, I can't help but vent how utterly sucky it's handled.

    The good, heartfelt vibe of AAT, the hope  and the slowly coming to terms with the fact that Tom is gone, that I been starting to feel lately, now all have taken a real bad beating, first from FM's shameful drama queen display of Free Fallin, now this cynical blow. Nah, it's really time to suit up in rhino again, I suppose, not letting the bastards grind us down. For real? For Real!

    Like it's said, it' not 1993 anymore. Good point! Like modern people, with free hearts and free internet, I hope we are all gonna pirate their soggy Warner asses, by sharing the two songs aimed at fans on this collection, freely and generously among ourselves. 

     

     

    Big Blue Sky and chimera reacted to this

  18. Posted · Report reply

    Aaw.. From a fan perspective, that's just numbingly stupid and utterly unnecessary. Also quite annoying. For everyone else, it's probably a lot of fun. I wouldn't know.

    (Now when AAT is out of the way, I suppose we better get dressed for some harsh cold bs to come. Silly of me, I know, but I have to admit I wasn't quite prepared.. From now on, we better get used to having to buy a long list of new, variously sequenced greatest hits repackaging collections, one new set of oldies for each new prev unreleased song they plan on sharing with us. This type of thing just ruins my appetite. For everything.)

    Big Blue Sky reacted to this

  19. Posted · Report reply

    11 minutes ago, nobodyinparticular said:

    The two aren't mutually exclusive, though.

    Yeah, and that's kinda exactly what I meant. It's not only possible, it's to be recommended to combine the perspectives. That you might need to see the two levels simultaneously, no matter your personal preference. It's just that dismissing or appreciating things has a tendency to be rather exclusive with people. You love this. And you hate that. I know for a fact that Dylan's voice - for example - stop people from realizing that he changed the world. That's why I said what I said. My point is exactly that everything goes, but that there is a distinction to be upheld between subjectively and ovjectively. Now this may go without saying, and I already kinda regret sayin it. But now I'm gonna defend it furiously.. 😎

    chimera reacted to this

  20. Posted · Report reply

    ^^ Not liking certain things, though, is one thing. Not understanding its importance and impact, its place in our cultural cosmos is another.

    I suppose you will be able to breath, without being familiar with the existence of oxygen. But once you claim to understand even just the basics of air, wether you like it or not, you'll have to admit the key role of oxygene. Or.. just never mind this weird analogy..  or this post.. Just saying.

  21. Posted · Report reply

    13 hours ago, MaryJanes2ndLastDance said:

    The more I think about it the more it seems like a bad idea all together. Much too soon.

    That first part is about right. No time frame would excuse the fact that, done like this, it was bad taste, bad performance and all together horrible. I hope they stop doing it right now.

    How come no one is talking about this??

     

    Big Blue Sky reacted to this

  22. Posted · Report reply

    Fun thread to revisit. I guess most clever things been said already. At least when it comes to me. 

    Perphaps just an addition that, yes, I too feel Casa Dega is a great fit. Had it not been released on that single in 1979, had they saved it for a rainy day, so to speak, it would have been a great song to revisit during SA sessions, to find its place unto the album.

    Other than that, my initial belief that there are quite a lot more in the vaults to be heard, before any final judgement is to made, seems to have been further strengthened. That said, a new draft, for me - going only by what we know today, and being more than suitable for further resequencing and additions, should/when more original quality material show up from the sessions - could perhaps look like this:

    A: Rebels (raw) / Trailer / Dogs On The Run / Stories We Could Tell / Southern Accents

    B: Walkin' from The Fire / Keeping Me Alive (unused at the time) / Spike / Crackin' Up / The Best of Everything

     

    And.. just, before you come after me about those covers, please read the whole thread...

     

    chimera reacted to this

  25. Posted · Report reply

    Good questions. I do suppose the "screen full of images" doesn't quite help my perspective, does it...

    As for your items, I'd say that given the right arrangement and enough work, FM could make anything sound good. Please note that I am not one to tell them what to play. That would do as much harm to the idea of them making something fully their own, as does picking Free Fallin' as a steady tour set piece (if that's what they've done). Now, I am sure that they c-o-u-l-d play an ok Free Fallin', even if they didn't this time. What I'm questioning is well beyond that. I don't care what they play. It's why and how they do it, it's about their approach. If they really thought long and hard enough on what may be the the best fit, the most tasteful choice and the best way to go with the fact that Mike is now in the band and that his and Stevie's dear Tom is now gone. Are they sure they didn't just go for the quickest, simplest and most spectacluar drama fix - the standard format of our times, designed to satisfy the apathetic, with screens and all, subtleties not being an issue - that they could think of. I don't know the answer, mind you. It just really rubs me the wrong way and makes me feel very unconfortable seeing and hearing this. And I am really sorry, should someone take offense from me saying so. Seeing Stevie's face there, at the end of the song, facing what I believe is Mike, is what's offensive to me. I always loved her so much, and I know her devotion to Tom (and Mike) is genuine and all... but this was just too much.

    Sorry to not answer your question with a song list. That's not where I'm at right now... Can't Stop The Sun?

×
×
  • Create New...