Chalkhills Digest Volume 6, Issue 85
Date: Saturday, 22 April 2000
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 Volume 6.
22 April 2000 / Feedback