Errors-To: owner-chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
Reply-To: chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
Sender: owner-chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk
From: owner-chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
To: chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
Subject: Chalkhills Digest #6-85


          Chalkhills Digest, Volume 6, Number 85

                 Saturday, 22 April 2000

Topics:

                Rating the WASP STAR songs
                      Radio Silence
                    A Toast to Flames
               XTC on Channel 103.1 Survey
                  Re: napster hypocracy
               Talk To The Artist In You...
                  The Nonsuch Debate etc
                      Unload My Head
                     overrated album
                  Re: bitch bitch bitch
                     updated comments
                      RE: "Stealing"
                       Unstung hero
                    Re: Sophisto Plot
                  Napster Implications?
                  popularity and nonsuch
                  Re: Overrated Oranges

Administrivia:

    To UNSUBSCRIBE from the Chalkhills mailing list, send a message to
    <chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org> with the following command:

	unsubscribe

    For all other administrative issues, send a message to:

	<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org>

    Please remember to send your Chalkhills postings to:

	<chalkhills@chalkhills.org>

    World Wide Web: <http://chalkhills.org/>

    The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.

    Chalkhills is compiled with Digest 3.7b (John Relph <relph@tmbg.org>).

All the kids are complaining.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 18:02:29 -0400
From: "Tim Kendrick" <tim63@earthlink.net>
Subject: Rating the WASP STAR songs
Message-ID: <000901bfab14$310e9c80$845a113f@tim63>

  ??SPOILERS??
  Not really.  All I do is list the songs
  in order from my favorite to my least
  favorite, giving each song my own personal rating.
  No details.  But if that's still more than
  you want to know, then PAGE DOWN NOW.

  *** Tim's rating of the WASP STAR songs ***

               SONG                          TIM'S RATING
(favorite)  1. Boarded Up                          A+
              2. Church of Women                 A+
              3. The Wheel and The Maypole  A+
              4. We're All Light                      A
              5. You and The Clouds...           A
              6. Standing In for Joe                A
              7. Playground                           A-
              8. The Man Who Murdered Love B+
              9. In Another Life                       B
            10. Stupidly Happy                      B
             11. My Brown Guitar                   B-
(least fav)12. Wounded Horse                   C-

  I'll post my detailed review of each song on May 23.

  Later!

     Tim

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 07:15:23 -0500
From: "Christopher R. Coolidge" <cauldron@together.net>
Subject: Radio Silence
Message-ID: <l03130302b524a48a4673@[208.13.202.115]>

>> Does anyone know when the "add date" for "The Man Who Murdered Love" is?  I
>>  want to play it on my radio show, but I don't want to be too early.  You
>>  know how it is...
>
>What the hell, add it now! Create some buzz for the album. Well, OK, you
>might get in trouble but probably not. I'm sure there would be a lot of
>gratitude from the fans.

  Don't know from the add date, but the local AAA station, WNCS, played it
while I was doing data entry at work day before yesterday, so either
they're jumping the gun or it already happened. Extremely catchy song, too,
if the rest of the album is like this by half, they got the catchy pop
album in them they've always had, without sacrificing the intelligence.

Christopher R. Coolidge

Homepage at
http://homepages.together.net/~cauldron/homepage.html

"A Great law protects me from the government. The Bill of rights has
10 GREAT laws.  A Good law protects me from you.  Laws against murder,
theft, assault and the like are good laws.  A Poor law attempts to
protect me from myself."  - Unknown

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 00:05:20 EDT
From: "Jane Spencer-Davis" <janesunfish@hotmail.com>
Subject: A Toast to Flames
Message-ID: <20000421040520.44323.qmail@hotmail.com>

Chello Chalkarama!

Just my two cents: Jason's post analyzing the AV conglomerate cover art was
a breath of fresh air following the wheezy, old geezer Napster thread (the
point is moot, here).

Not to sound like a screamingly naive person, but I read in The Big Takeover
interview  a suggestion that the lads might want to sell the Fuzzy Warble
thing over the net to us voracious aficionados and therefore bypass Virgin-
Would they run into legal troubles?

Oh, and Nonsuch is a mature, soaring example of musicians at their apex.
That's what *I* believe.*Hello!* Books Are Burning, That Wave, Then She
Appeared, The Dissapointed! cut it out- I hardly believe you guys feel this
way!

No Orchid Show tix yet- I'll let you know!

Favorite XTC album logo: Do you mean cover art? I really dig the XTC on the
cover of the original ES- looks medieval, prickly edged, convoluted, just
like the best of XTC.

OK. Now I feel the toast of flames as I've decided to wave my newbie rump
out in the wind...
                                     Happy easter theatre,
                                                  Jane

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: K D <hentoe_xtc@yahoo.com>
Subject: XTC on Channel 103.1 Survey
Message-ID: <20000421043410.24787.qmail@web2103.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi all--

Just wanted to let everyone know that I heard "The Man
Who Murdered Love" on Channel 103.1's (in L.A.) New
Music Survey tonight.

It, of course, rocks.

If you are so inclined, go straight to
www.channel1031.com (yes, that is correct) and cast
your vote for XTC! ("5" means you loved it!)

Tomorrow night (Friday, 4/21 at 6pm) they play the
week's faves--we want TMWML to be featured, yes? So,
go vote NOW!!!!

The Baltimore Kate (in L.A.)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 23:24:07 -0500
From: JH3 <jh3@winco.net>
Subject: Re: napster hypocracy
Message-ID: <004b01bfab49$723fa840$55de90cf@JH3.alternatech.net>

I apologize in advance about the length of this message...

Mor_Goth <mor_goth@usa.net> writes:

>Now this may piss some people off, but Ive got to say that
>I believe that anyone who has listened to the demos or even
>has condoned or tolorated it, yet condemns Napster is indulging
>in the height of hypocracy.

It doesn't piss me off (partially because I don't really condemn
Napster), but I believe what we're talking about here are finished,
about-to-be-released, highly expensive studio recordings, not
demos. (Hypocracy = Rule by Hype? Hmmm...)

>...I'm willing to bet that anyone with enoug intrest in XTC to
>download the songs now sure as hell is going to buy at least
>one copy of the album when it is released.

That's probably true, in which case, I'd say go ahead. It's the
*future* that the music industry is worried about; once everybody
is used to getting the stuff for free, over time it'll seem less and
less morally problematic, even if it's XTC material. At least that's
what *they* think.

>Get this straight "THERE IS NO THEFT INVOLVED".

Exactly! And that's the whole point - *you're* not stealing because
you're simply transferring some file that's freely available, can be
copied an infinite number of times, and has no intrinsic value to
you. To you, the high cost of producing what that file contains is
irrelevant; for all you know it might cost nothing to produce. And
the people who put that file on Napster or some other sort of
server somewhere aren't stealing, because all they did was put it
there; they didn't *take* it from anybody and they didn't force you
to download it. So if no one is stealing, why are artists losing sales?
Obviously because *fewer people are buying!*

Mind you, I don't think XTC has lost many sales - yet.

>And if someone
>does download the songs, and then decide they don't like the album
>and don't buy it, is that really any different from listening to a copy
>of a friend's purchased copy and then not buying it? Or going to the
>record story and listening to it at one of those headphone stations?

No, but that isn't the issue, is it? It's when you decide that you
*do* like the album and don't buy it that the sale is lost. (And in
neither of the cases you've mentioned is the material in your
personal possession, not really.) A better argument might be that
it isn't any different ethically from listening to someone else's copy,
deciding you *do* like it, and then actually buying it. But if that's
all it was, nobody would be complaining, would they?

To be fair about it, you almost have to look as *each individual
download* on a case-by-case basis to decide if it's stealing or
just "try before you buy." And obviously nobody has the resources
to do that. You couldn't prove it was one or the other anyway.

>And just how is listening to a so called "legitimate" advance
>copy any better than listening to the MP3?

Because *they* intended for you to have it? Besides, once again,
that isn't the issue. Haven't you ever read those "unauthorized
reproduction or resale" warnings on promo CD's? They don't say
anything about "unauthorized listening," do they? Listening is not
the problem. Not buying the CD when you otherwise would have -
that's the problem. (Again, from the industry's perspective.)

Here's another question for you all: Does anybody remember when
computer fonts used to cost $79 per typeface? When clip-art and
digitized photo collections used to cost $99 for one CD-ROM disc?
When scanners and photocopiers cost thousands of dollars, pounds,
or whatever? For that matter, when was the last time you actually
*bought* a software program yourself?

Y'see, back when I was a young tyke, electronic fonts were a
tightly-controlled market, run by hardware vendors like Linotype
and AGFA/Compugraphic, and they cost a small fortune. Before
that, fonts were made out of hot metal and they cost a *large*
fortune. The people who designed them and sold them were
professionals who made a comfortable living. Now? Thousands
of quality fonts that used to cost enormous amounts of money
are freely distributed all over the internet and as extras to get
you to buy graphics programs. People copied them, renamed
them (and in many cases, claimed authorial credit for themselves!),
and then flooded the market with them, to the point where that
market simply collapsed. There was no way to stop it; the vast
majority didn't want it stopped, because HEY! FREE FONTS! So,
these days, you can't make a DIME as a font designer. And
it's only marginally easier to create new fonts now than it was
back when they were still fetching big bucks.

And yet, despite the complete lack of financial incentive, new
fonts are still being designed. They're created by kids taking a
break from their jobs as tech-support operators and web-page
designers, and you can bet that they don't make a penny on them.
They do it because they like doing it; sometimes they even post
them on the web for you to download because they like people to
see that they have this rather quaint sort of talent. (Disclaimer:
I even do it myself.) And since money isn't an issue, they can be
as wildly creative and/or self-indulgent in their designs as they like.
The results can be quite interesting, but you almost never see
such fonts in important, widely distributed print layouts, because
most of them are practically unreadable.

This is similar to what I expect to happen with music. At some
point, the only people making music will be those who have the
spare time and feel compelled (mostly for art's sake) to write and
record it, and (mostly for the sake of their own egos) to put it out
there for others to hear, despite knowing that they'll never be paid
for it. Given the lack of any financial incentive to create music with
broad popular appeal, the music itself will be wildly creative and/or
self-indulgent; some of it will be quite interesting, but I expect that
none of it will be XTC-quality (unless XTC themselves decide to put
something out just for old time's sake). I don't know when this will
become a reality, but one day we'll all wake up and there we'll be.
Of course, that's just my opinion.

Now, you're probably thinking there's a big difference between
fonts and music, and you're right. With music, the experience is
obviously more personal/emotional, and you identify more with
the artist because he/she is (in most cases) a human voice, and
that tends to provoke a more compassionate response, which in
turn might entail buying that artist's work - thus giving them a
financial incentive to record more (and perhaps be a little less
self-indulgent). Maybe that'll be enough... but I doubt it.

I just hope that if you read this far, you appreciated how I
refrained from putting that last sentence in its own paragraph,
just to try to give it more "impact." (I hate it when people do
that!)

John H. Hedges
XTCware: http://www.alternatech.net/jh3/xtc
(Technically speaking, a source of unauthorized reproductions
of copyrighted material, but nothing you'd actually pay for
otherwise... at least I don't *think* you would, anyway.)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 23:19:57 -0500
From: Roger Carvey <carveys@earthlink.net>
Subject: Talk To The Artist In You...
Message-ID: <38FFD6EC.AFF97D80@earthlink.net>

Meanwhile, Mor_Goth stated last episode:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Subject: cover art, napster hypocrisy... etc...

(start quote)
I'm willing to bet that anyone with enoug intrest in XTC to download the
songs now sure as hell is going to buy at least one copy of the album
when it is released.  Get this straight "THERE IS NO THEFT INVOLVED".
(end quote)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Believe me, Mor_Goth, I am not gunning for you, but simply borrowing one
of your points to help illuminate ideas that surely are in the backs of
all of our minds.

What I find truly unsettling is that some Chalkers and non-Chalkers
alike are quick to defend free distribution (and the base of that
distribution) of a yet unreleased work.  The idea below has been
possibly mentioned several times during this great "NAPSTER" debate (as
well as mentioned several years ago during the Great Demo debate), and
is this:

The artists have created material out of desire, or love of the craft,
or need for cash, or whatever muse they crank up to in the morning, but
when outside  parties have taken their handiwork (or even handiwork in
rough format, or handiwork co-owned by a corporation), and made it
available in any format, at any price (even free), without permission
from the artists, from the corporation, from whatever entity holds
rights to the work, that's theft.

Do you all know why that's theft?
Is it because copyrights are being ignored?
Is it because of the potential for loss of profit (we really can't say
for sure that Wasp Star will experience additional loss OR gain as a
result from the upload to NAPSTER, but the copyright owners certainly
may have an entitled opinion)?
Is it because the artists (our beloved Andy and Colin, we would never
hurt them) were not consulted as to the free distribution, and
permission not granted.

Perhaps that Andy, Colin, and the various companies involved might view
this as theft, but as an artist, it is probably also bitterly
frustrating and creatively draining to hear about this type of
infringement.  Of course, if all gave proper permission, then this is
all moot, but I think not.

Trust me, I am the last person to stand in judgment of any one of you
dear readers; I looked in the mirror before writing this note.  What's
the saying, about hypocrisy?  When you point a finger at someone, there
are three more pointing back at you.  I have confessed to owning a boot
of the boys' radio tour, and there is a great wailing and gnashing of
teeth every time I love to listen to it (For Shame, Larry).

No, Mor_Goth is most assuredly correct with regards to the readers of
this list; anyone taking a peek under NAPSTER's skirt will most likely
buy AT LEAST one copy of Wasp Star (applause for you multi-consumers).
That does not change what NAPSTER represents to the artist; uncontrolled
and non-commissioned use of valuable blood, sweat and tears.

Now Go Back To Sleep,
I'm not a lawyer, I only play one on T.V.,

Roger Carvey

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 12:04:53 EDT
From: Powerpop10@aol.com
Subject: The Nonsuch Debate etc
Message-ID: <c8.3e4c2b5.2631d625@aol.com>

Would I be wrong in suggesting that Nonsuch is a lumpy cumbersome beast?
Would I also be wrong in suggesting that after seven years wait AV1 was not
the great meisterwork. I look forward to Wasp star but being a fan of xtc
since 1981 I have learned not to get too excited with anticipation re: new
albums.
I may risk lynching but for me only Settlement, Skylarking and perhaps
Oranges and Lemons stand the test as being great albums. Three in 21 years.
Not a great return.
I will now retire and listen to the Lilac Times Looking for the Day in the
Night. Now that is a good album.

powerpop boy

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:25:16 -0500
From: Programs Temp <programs_temp@pta.org>
Subject: Unload My Head
Message-ID: <FCC7EC9332B9D211B0100008C759359D0183D53D@NPTA1_MAIL>

Howdy and Hello from the Fabulous North American Midwest,

I've been following this e-mail group for a month or two now, and feel
compelled to throw in my two cents, or buck twenty-nine, or whatever.
I'm a little cheesed that I find this necessary - up until three months ago
I had all of one XTC album (Upsy-Daisy Assortmen,)so that I could
occasionally listen to Grass and Earn Enough For Us), and pretty much could
have given squat-one about any others. Now, as I approach 33, I have 6
(count 'em) XTC albums and find myself in the grips of a bizarre and
unsettling obsession.  The one thing I've managed to avoid throughout my
entire life of music geekdom, I've become.  I'm a fucking FAN.

That said, my head became full and I need to unload.

A School Guide To XTC is not out of print.  Consequently, any reasonably
large bookstore should be able to special order it.At least I did - I don't
know how it is in other countries...

Why download "The Man Who Murdered Love" from Napster (I hear it takes a
really long time) when you can get it pretty quickly from:
http://stage.q101.com/new/music/newreleases/downloads

For folks in the Chicago area, Reckless Records on Belmont has a copy of The
Best of The Equals in the soul section (Andy Partridge mentions them as
being the perfect party music - I just didn't feel like it at the time).

I've been following the whole spoiler/napster debate and I feel the need to
provide the perspective of a new (AACK) fan.

An inordinate amount of XTC music has been GIVEN AWAY to fans or the ether
or whatever.   I hear a lot in this forum about XTC songs that I simply
can't go into a record store and buy.  What's more, if I did decide to buy
them (through e-bay I guess, because a lot of XTC collectors refuse to sell
copies - only trade), XTC will make exactly squat-diddly.

I don't think anyone is going to say that XTC will go down in history for
their tremendous business acumen. I do have some sympathy for that, but I'm
certainly not wringing my hands about it.  Wasp Star (and please, mark my
words) will most definitely be the most profitable (but not necessarily
biggest-selling) album for XTC ever, regardless of anything or everything.
We all should be so lucky to have the kind of loyal following they have. If
anyone really feels like they're stealing cake out of Andy Partridge's mouth
by cupping their ear to a computer, he or she could always just mail him 20
bucks, or 10 pounds, or 15,000 lire or whatever.  I doubt he'd send it back,
and 20 bucks would be about twenty times what he's going to make off of one
Wasp Star disk.

I would LOVE to hear "Young Cleopatra", or other songs I can't remember the
names of right now, but it doesn't bother me to read other peoples opinions
of these songs, because I actually don't read them - it just doesn't
interest me. I tend to fall into the writing about music/dancing about
architecture camp. Plus, to be absolutely brutal, most people are wrong
anyway (I am the queen goddess of all things right and good, by the way).
Someone (in this very forum) did a song-by-song review of Rag and Bone
Buffet, and described "Countdown to Christmas Party Time" as XTC "getting
down with their funky selves". If I seriously listened to what ANYONE said
about any album, I probably wouldn't own half of what I got.

 It's actually more painful to read the post from the guy who hates
Nonesuch. *Whew*. Someone hurt you as child, and I'm so sorry.

My favorite XTC logo is the Apple Venus one.

I have a super-secret fantasy of...I will definitely not tell you the whole
thing because I still want to try to make it come true...I want to do "That
Wave" and make it a tremendous hit because I think it makes a great woman-y
song (Andy Partridge's got child-bearing hips). I would want to work the
lights on "I'm the Man Who Murdered Love"

George Clinton and the P-Funk All-Stars gave the best live performance I've
ever seen in my life.  I raised my hands in the air when they didn't even
tell me to.

I touched the sweat of James Brown once.

I'm looking for a cd copy of Surf's Up and I have good story about it too.

I'm done now.  Thank you.

Nina Stratton

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:58:23 EDT
From: Robeach11@aol.com
Subject: overrated album
Message-ID: <71.266dd65.2631fecf@aol.com>

Personally, I do not feel "Nonsuch" is overrated. It's one of my very
favorite XTC albums. It features one of Colin's two best songs, "Bungalow"
(the other being "Frivolous Tonight).

The one CD I feel gets a bit too much praise is "English Settlement". The
songs tend to sprawl a bit more than I'd like. That said, it IS still an
outstanding recording and I doubt any other band could have pulled it off.

Rob
Carson, Ca

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:21:07 -0600
From: William Loring <bloring@tirerack.com>
Subject: Re: bitch bitch bitch
Message-ID: <B5261453.243D%bloring@tirerack.com>

> Someone didn't like my dismissal of Nonsuch, stating:
>
> You should try investing in a pair of ears, they're
> quite useful when listening to music.
>
> very odd, considering that just a few sentences before
> he wrote the following:
>
> ...the plastic sounding tuneless
> dirge that is River of Orchids...
>
> Which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that it's not
> ME who needs to invest in a pair of ears...

Perhaps between the two of you, you might come up with a full, working set.

...nah.

bill

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 15:29:17 EDT
From: OMBEAN1@aol.com
Subject: updated comments
Message-ID: <97.45ecf5c.2632060d@aol.com>

Hola,
  As I said before , "Wounded Horse" sounds just like a Jason & The Scorchers
song. Which is a good thing. I think Andys having fun with it.
  "Maypole" is one of the greatest endings to any album. I wish it would go
on forever.
  As for Nonsuch,  I listened to that album NONSTOP for about a year. Its
such a great album. Sorry Wes, I think That Wave is the weak link. Not a bad
song, just not that good.
  Did I notice Steve Young from Northern California on this list? Could it
be? Can I have your autograph Mr. Young? I think youre the greatest!!
             I'm done.  Roger

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:52:13 -0500
From: "Wiencek, Dan" <dwiencek@crateandbarrel.com>
Subject: RE: "Stealing"
Message-ID: <CCCF24B992E6D311BE670050DA793DE03AD202@escorp1.crate.barrel.com>

On the subject of Napster, music piracy, and the like, Keith said:

> This issue is more complicated than "stealing." I'm sure performers
> said the same thing when radio was first introduced in the 30s. It'll
> be interesting to see where we'll be five years from now.

It is more complicated than that, but your analogy is off-base. Most if
not all of the music featured on early radio broadcasts was played
live. Radio did not become a means of promoting records until well into
the 40s, and even then I think the emphasis was still on promoting the
artists, rather than the song. Those artists made their bread and butter
on stage, not on record royalties, and were probably only too happy to
turn up, play some tunes (incidentally pocketing a nice fee) and, with
luck, sell a few more tickets to their next show than they would've
otherwise.

What this really reminds me of was back in the late 80s/early 90s, when
digital audio cassettes first began making waves and the industry went
into an absolute panic, convinced that their newest moneymaker, the
compact disk, was about to be hung out to dry by this new medium. After
all, the thinking went, not only is the sound just as good as a CD, but
you can *record* on it! People can copy CDs all they want with no loss of
quality! One journalist asked a record industry type something to the
effect of: If the industry survived the analog cassette tape, why fret
over the digital tape?  The industry drone replied that, had they been
able to predict how widespread cassette tapes would become, "we would've
blocked them too." I don't know exactly how it all worked out, though when
DAT machines finally went on the market nobody really cared except for
musicians into home-recording, and to this day I've never met anyone who
owns one. A partial victory for the industry? Maybe. And probably they
want to do the same thing with Napster. Even if the technology remains
legal to use, they can throw up so many roadblocks and barriers in the way
of anyone "casually" using it that, in the end, nobody will bother.

The only thing I think I can add to this is: copyright infringement is
copyright infringement, no matter where, how, or why you're doing
it. People get carried away by the "utopian" promise of the Internet and
think that, just because everything CAN be easily accesible to everyone,
it SHOULD be.  It ain't so. Posting copyrighted material on a website or
ftp server, whether it's the text of a book, a picture of the starship
Enterprise, or an unreleased XTC song, is illegal, whatever other
rationalizations we (and I include myself) indulge in. We should be slow
to denounce anyone; there are very, *very* few of us in a position to cast
that first stone.

DW

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 15:56:26 -0400
From: "Todd Bernhardt" <todd.bernhardt@enterworks.com>
Subject: Unstung hero
Message-ID: <3900B26A.3DE36CBA@enterworks.com>
Organization: Enterworks, Inc.

Hi:

Sean Robison responded to my anti-Sting screed, saying:
> Ouch. Sorry, but I agree with the masses that parts
> of "You and the Clouds..." has a Sting-esque jazzy feel to
> them. BUT! This is not a bad thing. Andy just took a Sting
> sound and improved on it.

If Andy and Sting draw from the same influences, does that mean Andy is
imitating Sting? I don't think so. Wolfie Mozart and Tony Salieri were
contemporaries and presumably drew on the same influences, and both were
popular in their day, but only one was a musical genius.

and
> I applaud XTC for continuing to grow and mature in their
> songs. Any band that continues to crank out the same
> sounding album over and over again gets very boring

With you on that one, my man. Innovation and risk vs. more of the
same-o.

And Tim Synder asked:
> I pay only skimworthy attention to this list, so this may be
> a Suject retread.  But I'll ask anyway: what's the situation
> with Apple Venus 2?  Last I heard, it was to be released
> "following" AV1, and it was a more electric set of tunes than
> AV1.

Proof that, though it may be true there are no stupid questions, there
are lazy ones.
-Todd

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 12:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: relph (John Relph)
Subject: Re: Sophisto Plot
Message-ID: <10004211258.ZM60221@mando.engr.sgi.com>

fagnello@ascap.com wrote:
>
>"Boarded Up" - Don't fret so much, Colin.  Your town's not that far from
>Oxford and London.  I have to go into the city, we're "two-by-four-ded up"
>in my 'burb, too...Though it made less sense, I liked the drunk woodworm of
>the demo better than the "sophistoplot" of the final...

Actually, it's "superstore plot".  Which makes much more sense.  The
usual Wal-Mart or Target massive lowbrow superstores driving the local
mom-and-pop stores out of business (what are the English equivalents?).

	-- John

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 17:50:29 -0400
From: fagnello@ascap.com
Subject: Napster Implications?
Message-ID: <852568C8.00787C5F.00@notessmtp2.ascap.com>

Keith Hanlon wrote on 4/21(about Napster):

"This issue is more complicated than "stealing." I'm sure performers
said the same thing when radio was first introduced in the 30s. It'll
be interesting to see where we'll be five years from now."

        -- A good friend of mine had dinner last week with a fairly
prominent record producer, who offered his opinion on the
implications of Napster.  He said that all record label music
will soon be free and available on their websites.  When one
downloads a song, he/she will receive it with a commercial
before and a commercial after, similar to network television.
The labels will make their money from the sponsors.  All
record stores other than specialty shops will disappear, as
will much of A&R and record company middle management.

          This makes a lot of sense, especially in light of theories that
big sellers such as Amazon have always seen books and records
as "loss leaders," something that gives them a base for their next
move into big hardware items, where they can really make money.

          The immediate implication of this that upsets me is that DIY
artists will no longer be able to charge very much for their product
if the record companies are offering similar stuff for free.  Since
downloads will determine a big piece of the royalty pie, it looks like
everyone is going to have to get hooked up with Soundscan or the
like, if and when this happens, to encode their sites (stock tip?).  An
irony, of course, of this scenario is that the more you download an
artist, the bigger a favor you'll be doing them.

Cheers,

F.A.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 14:19:09 +1000
From: "Tom Pitsis" <lentom@healey.com.au>
Subject: popularity and nonsuch
Message-ID: <000901bfac11$e92809c0$0c4519cb@tom>

I find it interesting that a lot of my fellow XTC fans bemoan the fact that
XTC are not as popular as they should be. Couldn't the same be true of
NONSUCH- (and other ugly ducklings) a brilliant masterpiece that's not as
popular as it should be?
I bought Nonsuch when it was first released and sold it almost immediately -
some years later, after having discovered and loved much more music, I
rebought the thing and found that I could now understand it and love it and
its great Dudgeon production values. Thank "Dear God" that there are a few
bands out there that make albums that don't chase formulas for success.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 21:04:43 -0500
From: "Christopher R. Coolidge" <cauldron@together.net>
Subject: Re: Overrated Oranges
Message-ID: <l03130303b526b6a416c3@[208.13.202.221]>

>In 6-81, Adrian Ransome said: "In my opinion Nonsuch is the most over-rated
>album here on Chalkhills. Flame away....."
>Well, I'm not going to flame, but I have to say that I find it odd that
>you're calling it overrated when by far the majority of posts in praise of
>this album (that I've seen, anyway) are ones defending it against people
>slagging it. Generally, this album gets more than its share of criticism
>around here from what I can see. In order to be overrated, something has to
>be consistently over-praised, with dissenters in the minority.
>
>Not, of course, that I'm in any way willing to fish through the digests
>gathering statistics...
>Ed K.

  I personally find Oranges And Lemons overrated. If it had been the first
XTC album I ever heard I wouldn't be as into them as I am now. However, the
first two songs and the last three are amazing, as are two or three others
throughout the album. It just doesn't flow as well as most of their other
albums, though it doesn't help that I have it on vinyl and I have to flip
each side over every fifteen minutes. I would have preferred it on CD in
this case, and I'm not normally a fan of the CD medium. Nonesuch, on the
other hand, I liked even better than Skylarking, and I probably play it
more than any other XTC album aside from Apple Venus, which I can't get
enough of. I guess it's a matter of what's more important to you; for me
there's certain chord changes that are like sexual hot spots for me, and
Nonesuch has a lot of those. "Humble Daisy," for example, is like a hot
bath, I never get tired of it. The production doesn't bother me, I can
appreciate a good song even if it sounds like it was recorded in someone's
bathtub. For some people, though, the sound is important, and that's OK-
different strokes for different folks.

Christopher R. Coolidge

Homepage at
http://homepages.together.net/~cauldron/homepage.html

------------------------------

End of Chalkhills Digest #6-85
******************************

Go back to the previous page.