MarcO

simple: egg salad w/ lettuce.

haha, they left out my parting comment before I slammed down the phone: "F*CK 'EM!!!"

I keep hearing tracks from their album that I dig. Now WMVY has added "Bright Lights Big City" to their playlist and I dig it. But every time I listen to one of their shows I reach my limit within an hour of putting it on. I may be the jamband fans worst nightmare: digging the "singles", not so keen on the live jamming. haha. I'll give them this: they rise above the pack.

that review made me hungry! rock on pt!

The headliners are excellent but whenever I look at these kinds of line-ups I haven't the foggiest clue who half of these artists are!

I find this one tough!

yeah, this is just awesome!

Stating an opinion on improvised music is one thing. Saying is provocative and begs a response. See?

I don't think he was targeted. I think he made a provacative post and there was some fall-out. Big deal.

I could kiss you. That is my personal favorite. Pre-drumz is insanity. Oh man' date=' I am going to have to bust this cd out tonight. Awesome reminder![/quote'] I just re-downloaded that this week but have to burn it. It's a doozy, indeed. I dig Disco Dead.

He's got big plump balls, that boy.

At this time, I'd like to mount a defence of "musical snobbery", as it was one of the first arrows out of Diesel Doug's sling and has been brought up in other contexts. I don't mean snobbery in the sense that hamilton claimed, where one APPROACH to music is considered to be the ideal to the held above others. He was right about that but that's not what I mean. What I mean is pride in personal aesthetic. the pursuit of quality music..... It's a process that compounds upon itself: the more you listen, the more you learn.... you keep searching, you pass on what doesn't move you and embrace that which does, the less questions asked the better. The idea that something *has* to contain improvisation to be of worth does a couple of negative things: it precludes a whole range of music from being of worth to you and it has the potential to lower the bar for what you consider to be GOOD vs BAD improv. It's a criticism I've long held in regards to this scene: suddenly taking a stage and "jamming" becomes the end game, judgments be damned. It's seen as an altruistic endeavour ("the bands, they give us so much") when in the end it's an artistic endeavour ("the bands give themselves so much and I may bear witness to this"). There's a big difference and I fall on the latter side, not the former. And so the danger is that then Grateful Dead = Phish = Disco Biscuits = nero = BNB = Diesel Dog = whoever. That's not musical appreciation, it's appreciation of the lifestyle that is SEEN to be connected with "improvisational" music. Which is ok, I guess, but it also tends to alienate those of us who do enjoy these bands and improvisational music but have cultivated a real distaste for some aspects of the supposedly attending lifestyle. So, no wonder people who actually do take music seriously (which ironically doesn't always seem to be the musicians themselves in some cases) get their backs up when they get called out for being "negative". I can't think of anything more negative than just dishing out "positive vibes" at the expense of the art that is supposed to bring people - of all stripes - together. It doesn't do ANYONE any good. So, in that sense I'm happy to be a musical snob. I don't know why I like what I like, but I like A LOT of stuff and dislike a fair amount, not in equal measure but applied with equal measure: you don't get a free pass because I like you as a person and think it's cool you're jamming out for your friends. And for the record, I have had some fun nights with Diesel Dog and probably will again, they're a good time bar band as far as I'm concerned, and good luck to them. But you gotta be smart. You have to know that improv is not an end in itself and there are others approaches to music that are as equally valid, and potentially more rewarding. There's no territory to defend. There's no obligation to represent. Musics don't cancel each other out. Maybe a good number of people in Ottawa didn't really see the appeal in spending a Saturday night with a band that is by definition anachronistic in focusing on Dead covers. They chose other options because they recognize have them. It's really not a mystery. I mean, no wonder nero did well - they sounded different, fresh, new, exciting, unpredictable. As for the whole friends/enemies thing, it's kind of silly to let a musical disagreement spill over into a personal one. Message boards are for debating things, not rubbing each others' shoulders and saying "it's all good brah".

You can believe that but I'd love to hear the rationale behind it. As far as I know, the songwriting tandem of Lennon/McCartney attracted attention almost immediately. Music critics were quick to hear elements of sophistication and originality in even some their earliest pop hits. Sure, they seem familiar as pie to us all now, but in 1963 a song like "I Want To Hold Your Hand" jumped off the airwaves because it was just heads and shoulders above the polo-sweater crooning that pervaded the airwaves. Remember, in the early 1960's, rock music was considered past. Elvis had joined the army and Doris Day was the flavour of the, um, day. And apart from being a refreshing wind of change from the blandness of the times (which they were), it was also apparent to many that these guys were instinctively onto something truly great. Potential' date=' yes, unrealized potential, even more so.[/quote'] Apart from laser beams shooting from their eyes, I'm unclear what the Beatles' unrealized potential would be. Picking up where I left off in 1963, by the next year they were starting to get cerebral ("I Feel Fine", "Baby's In Black"), by 1965 they had released "Rubber Soul" - which a good argument could be made as being the ultimate pop music album, each and every song is a jewel. And stop for a second there - in their day, nobody wrote their own songs. Previously, it was Brill Building, Tin Pan Alley production line writing. The only fair comparison to what they were acheiving at that time was Bob Dylan, and that's quite some company to keep! Nevermind the acid tinged sensibility of 1966's "Revolver", blowing millions of minds and one step ahead of the counterculture that would spawn the likes of.... the Grateful Dead! Their artistic achievements in the midst of a music related mania the global world had never previously seen strikes me as potential completely fulfilled, and then some. I'm all for disagreement about that but that's my take and I'm sticking to it. There's no revisionism going on. People KNEW the Beatles were special in 1963 and they knew it 1966 and the knew it in 1969, music punters, fellow musicians and critics alike. I can't even imagine what it would be like to experience that music being introduced to the world in real time.

#223 Your favorite secret track on an album that is not mentioned in the credits 1. Nirvana - Gallons of Rubbing Alcohol Flow Down The Strip (UK release of In Utero) 2. The Clash - Train In Vain (the original issue of London Calling; I think the new CD reissue lists the track) 3. Hayden - How to Make an Excellent Sandwich (from the first issue of Everything I Long For) 4. Nine Inch Nails - Suck (from Broken) 5. James Taylor - Hangnail (from "Hourglass") 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

The lessons The Beatles teach me is that music is unlimited and songcraft is the key to immortality. The fact that they also demonstrate the potential to participate in an awesome shift in popular culture is just cherry on the melodic cake. My sense is that they really delivered a similar feeling to all of the artists we cherish today - not least the likes of the Grateful Dead - and that's a lot more than a cosmic jam can ever hope to do, as satisfying as it is. It's not right to apply the train-spotting culture of the improvisational scene(s) to something as rock solid as the music of The Beatles. Whichever your preference, they're completely different - but crucially, not incompatible.

People like Alan Young are able to represent no-fuss people like myself thoughtfully and with dignity. That's all I ask from these gatherings but too often it turns into transient peoples engaging in civil disobedience for the thrill of smoking pot in public places. There's no brains behind it. It's a circus I don't want to be a part of, even in my own discreet times of consumption becasue it's not the company I wish to keep. I took a work-related pass through downtown Hamilton after this years 4:20 march and witnessed some appalling behaviour from some obviously stoned ding-dongs. When someone's right to party starts alarming little old ladies is when I say enough is enough.

Allison is bang on, although it should be acknowledged that bokonon's heart in is exactly the right place. All we can do is make sure he knows he has a community to return to. Caseworkers, we are not.

I don't feel well-represented by the likes of Marc Emery. And honestly, I'm not really interested in fighting for my right to party. Discretion and modesty go a long way to keeping out of trouble.

awesome. Rock the fuck out of Iqaluit Jack, Meg.

words can't describe the Hamilton 4:20 march a few years back. I was so embarrassed to even be on the fringes of that community. You find yourself marching down the middle of King St on a weekday chanting "SMOKE POT!!"...... just go join the army or something and smarten up. Good Lord it was a parade of twits.

:: respect to Luke ::

I love the fact he's using Fairport Convention as a reference point. Damn, Tweedy really is the man.

Things change. Don't look back.

exactly WHAT is being represented?!?!?!