The Mellotron Group

haha.

fritz

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: lsf5275 <lsf5275@aol.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, May 29, 2012 2:43 am
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Peter Gabriel - So what?


  
    
                  

Fritz doesn't ever kid. The "F" in Fritz stands for something, and that "something" is seriousness. 
 
 

In a message dated 5/29/2012 2:14:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, gabru@comsec.net writes:
    
  
  
  
I have got to   agree with you here Dave…Fritz…you are kidding right….turntable lessons???   J
  
  
  
  
  
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com   [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of   Hammonddave
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 11:11 PM
To:   newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]   Re: Peter Gabriel - So what?

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
You must be kidding.....

Sent from my   iPad
  
  

On May 28, 2012, at 10:52 PM, fdoddy@aol.com   wrote:
  
    
    
  
    
    
Chris,

You are so off     base here, imho, that I can't even respond  coherently.  The     Beastie Boy's "Paul's Boutique" was the first album to be assembled entirely     using samples (Mix master Mike) and it is a work of art!!  It has     influenced everything that came after it. I will go to my grave trumpeting     DJs/turntablists as REAL musicians and composers, because they are. I have     taken a few lessons on the turntable and I know how extremely difficult it     is to play.  Wake up folks!!

fritz
    
    

    
    
      
      
We all know       of some great technical guitarists, but there are very few proficient or       innovative DJ's.
      
      
Most are       just playing back two records at a time, and re-mixing. That is       something that anyone can learn to do.     

    
    

    
    

    
    

    
    
-----Original     Message-----
From: Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com>
To:     newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent:     Mon, May 28, 2012 7:11 am
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Peter     Gabriel - So what?
    
    
      
    
    
    
    
    

I think a     musician is someone who 'intends to make sound and craft'     music.
    
    

    
    
As far as the     attention span goes - yes people seem to be getting 'dumber' these days and     failing education systems where music and reading have been cut back are     partly to blame. There's no question about that.
    
    

    
    
I agree that     a DJ 'can' be a musician and composer, but often times they     aren't.  I don't think DJ music as a genre has been explored fully     and because of that it lacks credibility alongside historic genres of     music.
    
    

    
    
We all know     of some great technical guitarists, but there are very few proficient or     innovative DJ's.
    
    
Most are just     playing back two records at a time, and re-mixing. That is     something that anyone can learn to do. 
    
    
The     difference is there is a world of musical technique involved in physically     playing an instrument, and so far there is a real lack of manufactured     dynamic turntables that respond the same way a guitar, piano, etc.     do .
    
    

    
    
So I     personally don't attach the same amount of musical credibility to DJ's     partly because we don't see too much physical innovation there. But I do     welcome it and can see it happening in the     future. 
    
    

    
    

    
    
As far as     sampling goes - the idea of sampling someone else's art without their     consent is unethical to me.
    
    

    
    
If I took a     piece of the Mona Lisa and put it into my own painting, I wouldn't think I     would be that great or inspiring. It would suggest I'm at worst a     thief, and at best, someone who needs to rely on the work of others because     I can't come up with something better or original. If I painted Leonardo     DaVinci painting the Mona Lisa - well that might be     interesting.
    
    

    
    
To me     Mellotrons and their ilk are different from contemporary sample     use because the performers knew and intended the recordings they made     would be used in the creation of other music.  Sampling someone     else's work or even re-mastering it or altering it after they've     died is an artistic rape because it's not in keeping with what the     original artists intended.
    
    

    
    
For example,     the Isley Brothers, Kraftwerk, etc.etc. didn't consent to having their music     sampled and just because it's a common practice, that doesn't make it     morally right. 
    
    

    
    

    
    

    
    
As far as     album credits go, they go from both outright lies to total     truth.
    
    
You will     never have me believe someone like Justin Timberlake (who can't     play an instrument) can compose and arrange a  movie soundtrack. I     don't care what the movie credits say. That's where politics and     back scratching are an influence.
    
    

    
    
The music     industry as a whole is completely different than what it was in the 1970's.     Marketing and selling is now a science.  
    
    

    
    
In the mid     70's smaller music labels were bought up and absorbed by bigger music     labels.
    
    
This happened     again on a big scale in the 80's when Warner took over Time / Life and     Seagrams Liquor bought up most of the major record labels. And it happened     again in the 90's and again in the  early     2000's.
    
    

    
    
Today music     is completely corporate, and the multinational companies that own the     music industry are not interested in selling music with ideas about     dragons and fairies, or brewing your own beer, saving your     money, meditation, or anything that takes you out of the 'Matrix"     so to speak.
    
    

    
    
The simple     reason why is that they can't make big money from it.
    
    

    
    

    
    
They are     interested in selling ideologies related to consumerism     of products like tobacco, alcohol, and fashion, and also a group-think     homogenized mentality where everyone should largely react or think the same     way in the world.
    
    
Politically,     you would do this by removing  or censoring diversity of     expression on multiple levels.
    
    

    
    
As record     company owners or controllers - they don't want to foster talent and     individualism. They would rather have a universe of talentless 'idols' where     there is a collective lemming mentality, easily to manipulate     contractually, and favouring style similarity over diversity. Why?      Because once you create something unique or diverse, you must be     willing to defend it and promote it on your own - requiring a much more     costly noble and valiant quest.
    
    

    
    
Record labels     don't want to have to fight with individualistic creative artists. The     idea of the tradional guitar hero or keyboard hero is not really     encouraged.
    
    

    
    
It's in their     best interest to sell and promote a 'mass mentality' where they can push     products on to a receptive audience, and make money for their businesses and     stockholders. So we really can't compare the time of the 70's and back with     now.
    
    

    
    

    
    
This is the     reason for the all the observations here. 
    
    

    
    

    
    
If you want     to control a country and it's people you must make them subservient to a     belief system.
    
    

    
    
You     homogenize values through TV, music and magazines so that eventually they     all think the same.
    
    
And then     you've replaced the individualism of invention, innovation, etc. with a     dumbed down - go along to get along     - collectivism.
    
    

    
    

    
    
Plato said it     himself - 
    
    

    
    
“Musical     innovation is full of danger to the State, for when modes of music change,     the laws of the State always change with them.”  
    
    
“Those     who tell the stories rule society.”
    
    
    
    
    

    
    

    
    

    
    

    
    

    
    
   
    
    
On Sat, May     26, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>     wrote:
    
    
      
    
    
    
    
    

    
    
    

    
    
1. Digital life made musicians     almost obsolete.
    
    

    
    
      
What's a 'musician'?         
Why       is someone who puts together music digitally less of a musician than       anyone else?       
If       '[a]ny moron can "play, record and post it in the web"' then       doesn't that fly in the face of the point entirely?  Far from       '[making] musicians almost obsolete' doesn't that increase the       number of musicians there are out there?       
Are       you confusing 'musicianship' with 'personal     taste'?

    
    
    
2. Ecstasy is not a good drug for     music. People get so stupid that they see a DJ as     musician!!!
    
    

    
    
      
Why       is it 'not a good drug for music'?  Says who?  What about the       myriad people who take it every weekend and get off on it and the music?        Are you perhaps (again) confusing what is 'good' with       'what you personally like'?       
Why       can a DJ not be a musician?         
In       fact, given the definition of the word, why is a DJ not viewed as a       composer?

    
    
    

    
    
3. People are so anxious and     neurotic that they can't  'listen'to anything without pressing the FWD     key to the next song.
    
    

    
    
      
Maybe.  I suspect attention spans are getting       shorter because music (among other things) is so easy to get your hands on       now that it's a disposable commodity.  But has it ever not       been?  Who says it has to be anything but?       
Maybe the music lends itself to the whole ideal.        Do you have to be 'anxious and neurotic' for that to be true?        Are you seeing a stereotype where none     exists?

    
    
    
4. "Total     lack of identification with the band. Digital made bands/record     covers/credits useless...nobody knows who's playing and nobody     cares.."
    
    

    
    
      
To       come out with an absurdly sweeping statement like 'digital made       bands/record covers/credits useless' requires some form of evidence.               
To       say 'nobody knows who's playing and nobody cares' is plainly       flat-out wrong.  If anything, the speed at which music       (digitally played and recorded or otherwise) can be put together and       uploaded to the web so a musician is in direct contact with his or her       audience is such that it cuts out the middle man entirely.  Who       needs a publication deal when you can publish it yourself?  Why is it       that a musician speaking directly to his audience (or market) is a bad       thing?  Do you think record labels and music publication deals are a       necessary thing?
    
    
You sign off     with 'All in all...nobody cares for music at all I'd say'.  How     do you know?

    
    

    
    
Mike
    
    
    
    
    
    
On 26 May     2012 15:06, Fritz Doddy <fdoddy@aol.com> wrote:
    
    
      
    
    
    
    
    
I agree with     point #3, but vehemently disagree with 1,2 and 4

Sorry for the     brevity as I am replying from a remote region of iPhonekstan.     
    
    

    
    
fritzdoddy

    
    
    
    

On May     26, 2012, at 8:38 AM, R l <bluesrock77@hotmail.com>     wrote:
    
      
      
        
      
      
      
Hi Chris,       
      
      

      
      
I totally       agree. So much so that I said I'd rather visit the Pompeii arena empty and       feel the vibes of a bygone concert by the Floyd than see the band nowadays       (last 30 years). 
      
      
As for why       this is happening, there are many possibilities of course, my       theory.
      
      

      
      
1. Digital       life made musicians almost obsolete. ANy moron can "play, record and post       it in the web". Just like picture taking.
      
      
2. Ecstasy       is not a good drug for music. People get so stupid that they see a DJ as       musician!!! Bloody hell...
      
      
3. People       are so anxious and neurotic that they can't  'listen'to anything       without pressing the FWD key to the next song...3000 songs in the Ipod and       most never listen till the end...
      
      
4. Total       lack of identification with the band. Digital made bands/record       covers/credits useless...nobody knows who's playing and nobody       cares...
      
      

      
      
All in       all...nobody cares for music at all I'd say...Saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad: but       true!
      
      

      
      
best,
      
      

      
      
Roberto
      
      
      
      
      
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
From:       unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com
Date:       Sat, 26 May 2012 02:53:12 -0400
Subject: Re:       [newmellotrongroup]hris,
      
      

      
      
 Re:       Peter Gabriel - So what?

  
      
      
      
      
      
      
I almost       never go see big name classic rock concerts       anymore.
      
      

      
      

      
      
Usually,       some of the original band members are missing, (Moody Blues, Beach       Boys, The Who, Pink Floyd) or the performers can't sing as well or       play as well anymore (The Police, Led       Zeppelin).
      
      

      
      
Or       - the band is naturally using some shitty vapid digital equipment in       place of the original instruments, and the sound is an updated,       sterilized, modern version that has all the life sucked out of       it.
      
      

      
      
I       saw The Band once and Garth Hudson (and some other unknown       keyboardist alongside him) were using the shittiest, most depressing 80's       reverbed Korg and Roland organ sounds to do Chest Fever. It       was unbelievably bad.
      
      
It sounded       like kids playing a casio keyboard in a Walmart toy       section aisle.
      
      
The same       with Jerry Corbetta of Sugarloaf. Green Eyed Lady was played with tinny       hip-hop organ sounds - just sonic garbage.
      
      

      
      
Some of       these bands also use augmenting hack musicians on stage and girl dancers       that have nothing to do with helping the original band or music       style. It's just insulting to the original spirit or identity of the       band. 
      
      

      
      
A different       example a  few years ago was when I went to see Paul McCartney       in Toronto. It was enjoyable up to the point when people started trying to       sing along. It was sufferable for a while.
      
      
But then       came 'Hey Jude' which was the absolute worst.  The song was       literally murdered by the sing-along of the absolute worst choir       of out of tune morons I've ever heard. And their collective breath       stank like a sewage pipe.
      
      

      
      
I remember       seeing a Beach Boys concert clip where one of them asked those who could       sing to sing along, and those who couldn't to 'please keep       quiet'.
      
      
I thought       it was very rude for them to say that at the time, but after       that Hey Jude performance, I now understand why.
      
      

      
      

      
      
Overall,       the expense, time and the trouble you go through to see a       concert just isn't worth it.
      
      

      
      
These bands       today mostly exist as shadows of their former selves - almost their own       tribute bands.
      
      

      
      
I now       prefer a good DVD of a classic quality performance from the by-gone days       to what's passing as a live show. 
      
      

      
      
Of course,       if it's a band I respect and never got the chance to see, (like Nektar)       then I'll make an exception, but generally a glorified tribute band       version, with tinny keyboards, vocal harmonizer effects, and       anonymous helpers and dancers doesn't make for a decent       concert.
      
      

      
      
And the       irony is with the technology today - we can have a great sounding concert       more times than not.
      
      
So why is       this happening?
      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      

      
      
On Fri, May       25, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Bruce Daily <pocotron@yahoo.com>       wrote:
      
      
        
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
(GROAN)
      
      
I'm sure he's READY for       it.
      
      

      
      
I was surprised to hear one       of his songs on a TV commercial recently.  It was "Big Time", and I       think it was on one of those god-forsaken Swiffer ads.  Money trumps       integrity once in a while.
      
      

      
      
  -Bruce       D.
      
      

      
      

      
      
      
      
From: trawnajim <jimab@rogers.com>
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com       
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 8:11 AM
Subject:       [newmellotrongroup] Re: Peter Gabriel - So what?
      
      
      
      
      
  
      
      
      


--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com,       Bruce Daily <pocotron@...> wrote:
>
> Hi       all-
>   It would be fun to see him at Red Rocks here in       Colorado, except for the unreasonable ticket prices and the       bullshit on-line ticket sale methods.  Those reasons       alone reduce the enjoyment of the event.  I haven't seen a major       concert in years.
>  
>   -Bruce D. 
>       (with a trace of sarcastic bitterness)

I suppose it's likely that       he will do Red Rain at Red Rocks. Perhaps they can get Red Rider as       openers.

Jim Bailey


      


      



      








    



    
    


    
-- 
Mike     Dickson, Edinburgh



    




  
=