For the last few years I've been poking fun at the slow production rate of "former rock star" Peter Gabriel. He had a studio album in 1986, and then another one in 1992, and then... anyway, import copies of his new album OVO are now in stock at Tower Records in East Lansing for $25. Any news on a USA release? I don't feel motivated to pay the $8 premium to get the import a few weeks early. An ad I saw in a UK publication says there is a Special Limited "Millenium Dome" Edition with a complete bonus disk, but no news on what is on that second disk.104 responses total.
((( Agora 328 <---> Music 269 )))
(tpryan forgets the Music 269 link, favoring the Agora 328 link)
Ooh...I hope he does a tour... I *looove* Peter Gabriel...
I was mad when he played at Hill Auditorium ... and didn't do "Games Without Frontiers"
As long as I hear "Mercy Street", "Red Rain", and "Kiss That Frog", I'll be happy. He can just forget to play "Sledgehammer", "Big Time", "Steam", and the other Top 40 hits. Blecch.
The exceedingly annoying site design caused my browser to GPF, but have you checked www.petergabriel.com for a release date?
shock the monkey!! :)
Jacques the Monkey.
well, the music is all for that Millennium Dome in london, so I wonder if it will make it as a release here.
I'd like to hear him perform "Don't Give Up" with Kate Bush live. Of course, she's still a FORMER rock star. Hopefully, she'll record another album too.
re 6 - Mike, Tony doesn't look anything up on the internet that he can ask on Grex or M-Net.
Yes, but Ken entered the item..
Good point.. but it was *SOOO* chamberlesque...
You never know what silly question will spawn a discussion. I couldn't get any useful information out of www.petergabriel.com. I was hoping for a description of what's in the Limited Edition -- I can't even find a confirmation that what Amazon is selling for $29 is the version with a second disk which was advertisted in FOLK ROOTS.
re:10 Didn't Kate Bush die a couple of years ago? (that's what somebody told me...) I have heard that song with Paula Cole singing her part.
I'm reasonably confident that if Kate Bush had died I would have heard about it. She was listed about a year ago in a silly 'Q' magazine article about Britain's Wealthiest Rock Stars, that's the last I heard from her.
(drift, sorry) Does anyone remember the tv sow "Sledgehammer"? (drift off)
Willie Nelson and Sinead O'Connor recorded a great version of "Don't Give Up."
re: 17 -- Yeah, he looked like a used car salesman, and was always making innuendos about his gun.
from the net: Latest Official News HomeGround fanzine report in their Summer 2000 issue that "Kate is continuing to work steadily on a new album". However they say that "the most realistic forecasts for a release date at this point is the latter part of next year". As previously reported Kate began writing and demoing songs for a new album in early 1999. She has had her recording studio serviced and upgraded and recording was expected to have began before Christmas '99. Kate is reported to be "happy and full of energy". In the meantime EMI will release remastered and repackaged CDs of the remainder of Kate's album catalogue as with 1997's Hounds Of Love reissue, starting with The Sensual World in September 2000, The Red Shoes in the early new year, The Dreaming and Never For Ever in Spring 2001, and finally Lionheart and The Kick Inside in late Spring/Summer 2001.
Kate Bush must have sole a *lot* more records in Britain than the U.S.
to qualify as one of "Britain's Wealtiest Rock Stars."
--
I'm not even sure why, but Peter Gabriel is, for me, one of those artists
who has crossed over the line from "Oh! A new {insert artist name} album!
I must buy it immediately!" to "I'll have to hear it first." Doubly so
when the release in question concerns an expensive import of unknown
material..
Buy.com lists an import release called "Millennium Show" for $21.95 but
says its status is "On Order". The details page is blank, which is somewhat
typical for that site..
resp:17 i remember him showering with the gun in its holster. i think that was a shot used in the opening sequence.
As for Kate's status among the wealthy British rockers --
1) she wasn't *that* high on the list
2) she was reported to have no bad spending habits, in fact no noted
spending habits at all except her home studio.
So yeah, if you sell at Kate Bush's level over six albums and 20 years,
and hardly spend any of it, the money makes a tidy pile.
I think there were 100 British rock stars on the list. Paul McCartney
was on top with an estimated net worth of 500 million UK pounds; I think
Mick Jagger and Elton John were #2 and #3. I'll see if I can dig out
the issue of Q magazine.
Can we get back to Peter Gabriel? Kate Bush turns my stomach, and the fact that she sang on one of my favorite Gabriel tracks (no, NOT "Don't Give Up," which has Bush's typical whine to it) doesn't help my opinion of her.
I'm not a big Kate Bush fan, either..
Re #24: brighn, was it "Just Another Day"? I have a live recording of Gabriel and Bush singing that together.
Peter Gabriel's peak for me remains his third and fourth albums, titled "Peter Gabriel" and "Peter Gabriel" respectively. For years I had heard that the sound quality on the UK versions of those CDs was better than the domestic releases, so I was delighted to have Leslie bring me back copies of PG3 and PG4 from Austria in 1999. I've played them a fair bit in the intervening year, and those two albums have held up pretty well, 20 years on. Part of the unusual sound of PG3 is that Gabriel had the cymbals removed from the drum kit. Curiously, I have never had any interest in following Gabriel's career back into the band Genesis, and I really don't know why I picked up his first solo album in the late 1970s; probably there was a rave review in Rolling Stone, which I followed pretty closely in those days. And the second album was a massive disappointment: except for the song "DIY," I can't remember a thing about it. Wasn't going to get the third album at all, but I took a chance on a used copy when an acquaintance was liquidating his LP collection (because he had converted to a church which taught that rock was the Devil's work). I brought it home and immediately decided I had acquired a masterpiece. ----- Buried in a review on amazon.com I found a description of what's in the second disc of the "limited edition" of OVO. "Rappers Neneh Cherry and Rasco appear in the bonus disc, accompanying PG in telling the story of OVO." OK, I probably don't need the limited edition.
Actually, Bush does the female bits in the background of "Games Without Frontiers." It's minimal enough that I can ignore it. =} (I believe all she sings is "Jeux sans frontieres" several times)
Prsonally, my favorites PG album is PG3, the one with Games with Frontiers, Biko, etc.
<sudden flash of insight> Biko? _Peter Gabriel_ did that song? Interesting..... That really isn't anything like the Genesis I've heard....I guess that's the point.
re #27: OK, so he had the cymbals and Phil Collins removed from the
drum set. Anything else?
Peter Gabriel 3 is a great album. "Security" (aka PG4) is also very good.
Peter Gabriel = musical genius Phil Collins = annoying pop musician
It's more complicated than that, actually.. Collins really is a good drummer, and his pop music is pretty good for pop music if you like that kind of stuff (I generally don't, but it's not fair to dismiss him just because I don't happen to like the style of music he makes..) Collins has performed on a lot of music I *do* like, for example Eno's "Another Green World" album.
For my brother's calligraphy project awwwwway back in High School art class, he did "You can blow out a match / But you can't blow out a fire / Once the flame begins to catch / The wind will blow it higher" (PG, "Biko")
I believe that PG3, and the song "Biko" in particular, were significant steps in Peter Gabriel's path into becoming a leading supporter & marketer of "world music." Gabriel became involved with the WOMAD group (World of Music and Dance), who produced some very influential anthologies in the closing days of the LP, and then he went on to start up the Real World music label which specializes in folk and "roots-pop" music from less-well-covered areas of the world.
Peter was great til '79 I'm talking about Peter Frampton..you know, Van Halen just knocked Framton off the map after that..
We're still in the "closing days of theLP," technically.
Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins sound pretty much the same to me. I mean, I can tell them apart, but they're the same kind of music: a kind I really enjoy hearing in the car, but find oddly disappointing if I buy the CD and take it home. Neither sounds any more of a genius, or a vapid pop star, than the other to me. Kate Bush has that annoying Stevie Nicks/Baba Wawa voice, but apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln ...
Really? I'm going to go out on a limb and presume you're making this decision based almost exclusively on what you hear of each artist on the radio? If so, there's a substantial selection bias affecting your comparison -- you're hearing only the tracks from each artist that radio programmers have chosen to play, so if that's the case then perhaps it's not surprising that they sound similar to you..
No kidding. I hate Peter Gabriel's radio stuff ("Games Without Frontiers") is
the exception. 96.3 plays "Red Rain" once in a while, but I don't count
that as a radio release.
'family portrait' (i may have the title wrong) is my favorite peter gabriel tune
I dunno. I think Peter Gabriel's music is irritating and trite. A lot of Phil Collins's music is trite, too...but far less irritating. And, he's one hell of a drummer.
I think it's "Family Snapshot." I recall "Sanpschuss" being the German title.
"Shock the Monkey" is another radio track I'd have to say is typical of his
artistry. It was really only his titled CDs (inasmuch as PG4 wasn't
voluntarily titled "Security") that had obvious radio tracks meant for mass
and vapid consumption ("Steam", e.g. -- although I always thought of "Kiss
the Frog" as one of those mass consumption singles, and I thought Gypsi aid
she liked that one... oh yeah, and "Sledgehammer," which was almost as obvious
as radio song as REM's "Stand," which qualifies as possibly the most annoying
song ever written by an artistic, quality band).
From a purely poetic standpoint, I think "Family Snapshot" is one of the best
musical poems PG has written, from the emotional breadth of it (from anger,
to hatred, to desperation, to poignant forlornness).
Didn't he admit that "Kiss the Frog" was about fellatio, or is that
just another urban legend?
Mike: I hardly ever listen to pop radio. OK, I've heard a lot of Collins in muzak situations (and in the recent Tarzan movie), but my knowledge of Gabriel is almost exclusively from stuff played to me by Gabriel fans, often in traded/circulated tapes. I remember hearing about half of his album "So" on such a tape, and really liking it. Then I bought it, and didn't like it at all.
I can understand someone not liking PG... it's a free country. I can't understand someone thinking he sounds just like Phil Collins.
Ditto. I don't see any similarities, even in most of the radio releases. I can't picture either one of them writing the other one's songs.
The voices aren't alike, but the songs are very similar: long, rambling, highly tuneful without being irritatingly catchy and with no melodic "tricks"; and the arrangements are also very similar: vocally lyric and soaring over strongly rhythmic but complex (not thumpa-thumpa) instrumentals.
"Sussudio" (or whatever it is) isn't annoyingly catchy? "Two Hearts" isn't annoyingly catchy? Blecch.
i can't dance.
"Sledgehammer" isn't annoyingly catchy? I guess I disagree. Despite Collins' art-rock origins (a la Genesis), Collins is much more likely to write traditional stanza-chorus-stanza-chorus-chorus style songs (one major exception being "In the air tonight"), while Gabriel tries to vary the model (although the radio tracks still have it). But it makes sense that collins would have some Gabriel trademarks... *shrug* In general, they SHOULD be musically compatible, else Genesis (with Gabriel) wouldn't've gone anywhere at all.
"Sledgehammer" and the other stupid Top 40 ones are a bit catchy and don't sound like "Peter Gabriel" songs to me.
Oh.. I can't help it. I HATE that sledgehammer song. Not as bad as that Sugar Ray group, though. *vomit*
I've got an odd perspective on monsterously popular hit songs: I don't listen to the radio enough to get sick of them. So "Sledgehammer" is OK, although a bit tame compared to the other stuff Gabriel has done. And I still like Red Hot Chili Pepper's "Under the Bridge"... weird, huh?
Weird Al made Sledgehammer tolerable again. I wanna be your... SLEDGEhammer *tingtingting!*
You have to remember that 'Sledgehammer' most likely got popular by means of the video made for it, which was a pioneering music video for its time. Alone, yes, the song isn't all that great. With the video, it's gool ol' MTV mind candy.
"mind candy" is actually a pretty good literal description of parts of it..
I don't think I know those "irritatingly catchy" Phil Collins songs. Looking quickly at a list of his album contents, the songs I recognize and remember liking from titles are "One More Night" and "In Your Eyes", especially the latter I also liked most of the songs in "Tarzan". Possibly I've heard these irritating songs and didn't realize they were him, because they didn't sound like the Phil Collins I know.
Isn't "In Your Eyes" Peter Gabriel?
Collins was quite the celeb for a while, wasn't he? Beer commercials, guest shot on Miami Vice, etc.
re #59: Yes it is. He's just trying to reinforce his point that he can't keep them straight..
I will grant that "One More Night" and "In Your Eyes" sound fairly similar, but that's because they're both light pop songs, fairly formula. I could throw out a dozen other songs by entirely different artists that sound like that, too.
I asked someone who knows the jazz genre reasonably well his opinion on Kenny G and Methany. His feeling is they are one and the same, both playing soft easy-listening jazz-infused musak. Gawd, is that true? If so it paints an even cattier picture of Methany's comments.
check this out: http://www.allaboutjazz.com/threads/patmetheny.htm metheny was one of the many cats in the development of fusion jazz, which has its ups and downs like anything else. he was friends with one of my favorites, jaco pastorius, one of the most versatile, lyrical bassists in the history of the instrument, and played with him in a couple groups. i remember him playing with jean-luc ponty, fusion violinist (i can imagine a lot of people would categorize ponty in the reviled 'smooth' category, or attribute roots of 'smooth' to him), another favorite of mine. after the early 80s, which was a depressing time for any type of music (except rap), i know nothing of metheny. before this time, i know only a little, of which i'm not really a fan. but i'm pretty sure he knows his stuff about the craft and theory of muzique. but this doesn't look like the appropriate item.
Peter Gabriel, Pat Metheny, they both start with P :)
Re #56: I thought _Sledgehammer_ was a tribute to Marvin Gaye Jr., and was a hit in no small part because of that. (Never saw the video.) _So_ (short for "Sellout"?) had a lot of blatantly commercial stuff on it. Not too surprising that it was a raging success compared to Gabriel's typical work, and part of a trend (remember "90125"?). It's a pity that music often has to be watered-down and derivative before the masses find it accessible enough to give it a listen.
Since Metheny has jumped item: Mary, if you have a reasonably decentsoundcard, might I recommend judging for yourself? www.cdnow.com has MPEG soundbites of each. My own assessment: I listened to three samples of Metheny's latest, Trio, and found it fairly typical jazz fusion... somewhat poppy, hints of dixie, a twitch of muzak. Entertaining, didn't stand out. I listened to two samples of Kenny G.s, or tried to. I couldn't get through the 30-second clips of pure muzak New Age dreck.
Re #63: I disagree strongly with that appraisal, at least at the extremes. Kenny G. has, AFAIK, never done anything more lively than "Puttin' on the step", which is a lightly syncopated, slightly bluesy variation on his usual. I'll be happy to play you some Pat Metheny which you would *never* hear in an elevator. It's not representative of all Metheny, but that's not the issue. I'm afraid that the choices of some (most?) DJ's deny you the chance to hear this for yourself without going out and buying the CD (or visiting Napster). Even WDET is not blameless. The 12-3 show has featured several cuts from "Imaginary Day", but they've all been the more Muzak-y ones. Sometimes you'd hear two out of three cuts, missing the high-energy one in the middle. The artist isn't to blame for a DJ taking unrepresentative excerpts from a work that's much stronger as a whole. You could do the same butchering with Beethoven. Metheny does the equivalent of symphonies; in my experience, Kenny G. does not. You want stuff that's really hard to Muzak, try _Thonk_ by Manring. ;-)
Straight up, anyone who's cool with Jaco is inherently cool. Weather Report in tha house.
If "In Your Eyes" is actually Peter Gabriel, then somebody's playing a joke on me, because I found a song of that title on some web site listing the contents of Phil Collins albums. But whatever the story, it does indeed prove my point: they're pretty similar.
The website could be wrong. Either that, or Phil Collins also had a song by that name.
CD Now doesn't list any Phil Collins songs by that name. It could be out of print, though.
resp:64 Pardon me for the drift, but the early 80's was a depressing time for music? I would think au contraire.. rap actually appeared on the scene in the very late 70's, by the way.. the Sugar Hill Gang was just one of the first to cash in on it in 1979. Techno was also being developed in Detroit, which I think someone pointed out earlier. Of course, it's more vividly associated with European groups now, but then electronic music and technopop from the UK and Europe got a big boost when MTV hit the airwaves. I explained in the "Video Killed The Radio Star" item that music really drastically changed then because videos weren't being made very much domestically when MTV started out; the staff needed more videos than the existing 200 that they had in stock. Yes, it's true that not all of the music had as much aural substance as it did in video form-- many speak of the music that hit it big primarily because of their videos. But then MTV also called on performance artists (such as Devo) in its early years-- and these groups didn't really consider themselves musicians anyway. I mentioned "Sledgehammer" because it has been listed as both one of the best and as one of the most played videos on MTV. The literal mind candy comment was funny-- for those of you that might not have seen the video, it's a Claymation of a head and shoulders Gabriel singing with swirling images around him and such-- and one was his hair turning into cotton candy. Phil Collins isn't a staple of MTV anymore, but he does fit into the discussion somewhat-- like many other artists, his music is being used to sell movies. It's true-- how many movies have there been that were pretty lousy in and of themselves as far as the actual screenplay, but were noticed because we liked the soundtrack so much? Thankfully, Tarzan was an *excellent* movie-- I've had mixed feelings about Disney films as of late. (But I'm biased.. a relative of mine, Don Bluth, has worked in animation outside of Disney for about.. 20 years after being Disney's right hand man. But I still haven't seen Titan A.E. .. shame on me, I guess).
i agree; the early 80s was a fantastic time for rap and hip-hop, like i said. and i have to give credit to new wave, albeit not *too* much; in the meanwhile, punk was on the decline, and early 80s jazz (i think) typically sucks. other than thinking of it in terms of influences and directions building, i'd place the origins of detroit techno in the latter half of the 80s. i could be entirely wrong. in comparison to music from the 50s to the 70s, i don't think the early 80s has much merit to speak of.
I'm not sure it's fair to compare one era's music with another without providing the parameters... are we talking about lyrical quality, lyrical content, musical quality, musical content, influence on future styles, amalgamation of previous styles, entertainment value, political relevance, social relevance, aesthetic appeal, or what? I also don't think it's fair to characterize music primarily in terms of decades. The 70s went from CCR to Abba to Sex Pistols... which of those is the msot representative (out of the three) of "70s" music?
i'm not classifying music primarily by decades rather than using decade-sized chunks (or half-decade sized chunks, in terms of "early 80s") as a quick organization of the progression and development of music in its different styles and genres. by saying "70s music", i'm not trying to suggest a style or type of music that is recognizable by its "70s-ness", i'm generalizing the music and music movement that was made in the 1970s. in these terms, the only way a musician or group thereof or song or style (&c.) would 'represent' "70s" music would be if it was made and performed and diffused into the culture in that decade. we could produce reams and reams of text talking about individual songs and musicians and style movements and aesthetic musical revolutions and innovative musical theories in practice and and and . . . and how they led to their artistic successors and inspirations, or opponents. i think the music "diffused into the culture" during the first half of the 80s was subject to an increase of music-making and musical trends that were derivative of earlier styles and aesthetics while hitting an onrush of mass(ive)-media -- one of those periods in which everyone is trying very hard to find "the next big thing" because the last big thing(s) made fuckin truckloads of money and social change. i suppose it could sound like i'm suggesting that music that occurred in the early 80s wasn't good because of some aberrant aesthetic ripple warping the musical abilities of the world. so, i don't mean that. what i mean is that i find the musical culture of the early 80s to be the bland, downswung tail-end of a lot of cool musical trends that were being beaten to death by a million camera-lenses, which made space backstage for the more intriguing, innovative, building up-swings of some trends to come down the road to nab their beginnings.
Pop music in general seems to be pulled by three major forces (at least):
Entertainment value
Artistic value
Sociopolotical value
Certainly it could be said that top 10 music of the early 80s to the present
has had Entertainment Value as the most important of those three factors,
while pop music of the Free Love era held artistry highest and the Vietnam
ear (which overlapped a good deal with Free Love) held sociopolitics highest.
Going back to the late 50s/early 60s, entertainment is again tantamount --
the development of the Beatles from a pure-pop entertainment groups (B*Boys
and N'Sync have nothing on 1962 Beatles for pure, mindless GLITZ with no
substance) to a protest group ("Revolution") and an artistic group
("Revolution 9"). When the Beatles split, Lennon went along the protest line,
with some artistry, Harrison went along the artistic line, with some protest,
McCartney went along the entertainment line, with some artistry, and Starr
went along the "I'm not all that talented so let's milk my fame for all it's
worth" line... but that's another story.
i heard ringo became a train conductor for a while
This response has been erased.
77 speaks for the forces that pull music up, forward, or any word you can surmise that speaks for growth of music industry. what decelerates that movement 'forward', or accelerates it in the opposite (presumably 'backward', 'down') direction? to follow up that point, ringo starr's "i'm not all that talented so let's milk my fame for all it's worth" career direction isn't really another story at all, it's the main plot-line of music in, e.g., the early 80s.
Well, except that Ringo had only one single that came close to being a hit
(The No-No Song), and his most famous opus outside of The Beatles may very
well be a movie, not a song ("Caveman!").
There is talent behind B*Boys and N'Sync, just not artistic talent. I've said
it before, and the point's gone unnoted: They have entertainment talent. They
(being the entire force behind the groups, including management) know how to
put on a show. Maybe the music has negligible artistic merit, but does "Twist
and Shout" (covered by the early Beatles) really have all that much artistic
merit? the early Beatles didn't get famous, and didn't get their clothes torn
off, and didn't get girls swooning over them, because their music had artistic
merit -- I know this is heresy, but it DIDN'T. It's their later music that
has the artistry to it... the early stuff is pop crap with chords and beats
and structure that had been around for a decade before. It shared the radio
waves with Louie Louie and Wild Thing.
The difference between The Beatles ca. 1963 and The Backstreet Boys ca. 1999
is in who has the entertainment talent -- in the case of the Beatles, it's
the group themselves, and they're later able to take that entertainment talent
and mature it to artistic talent. In the case of the Backstreet Boys, it's
the management of the group, not the group itself, and so when the boys mature
and want to do more serious, artistic music, they won't have the skills to
do so, and their management will be on to the next boy group.
I'm using B*Boys as an exemplar; I'm not picking on them specifically. And
the trend of the paper-doll band starts with The Monkees (who did, in fact,
have a little bit of talent themselves, but not enough to overcome the
incredible machine and pressure against them, with the possible exception of
Mike Nesmith), but really picks up steam in the early 80s, with Banarama (who
not only didn't write any songs, they didn't play any instruments... three
chicks who sang and looked pretty) and Samantha Fox, among others, through
Kim Wilde and "I Think I'm Alone Now" (what WAS her name) to LeAnn Rimes and
then Hanson... ^We're ^
That' and the early 80s saw the popularization of the synthesizer, which had
been around for a few decades, but was both expensive and crappy sounding
(moog, anyone? The Monkees used a moog, or something similar, for "Star
Collector" and other tracks). I think one reason why early 80s music sounds
so fake was because synthesizers still sounded fake, and people were playing
with them. Many groups prided themselves on having little musical talent,
claiming that they were bringing the music to the youth, and inspiring the
youth that it doesn't matter how talented you are if you've got something to
say (that's something Human League, for instance, claimed; Missing Persons
made a similar comment).
But, in the aftermath, the synthesizer (and the mdigitized music revolution
in general) had a great impact on how the music industry worked. Nearly
everything sounds more commercial when it's cleaned up. This isn't just true
in the music world... with the Internet, everyone's a graphic designer now,
too.
"I Think We're Alone Now" was covered by Tiffany and also by Lene Lovich. the smart money is betting that the Tiffany cover is the one you had in mind.
where's tiffany now that we need her?
And where's Lene Lovich?
I think they're both alone now..
Maybe they're alone together... Yes, I was thinking of Tiffany. I don't recall Lene Lovich going through a top-of-the-pops phase.
side note, mostly to m-netters: i think alex just got himself a moog, so look out world. he's graduated into the next realm of space travel. i guess i've neglected your schematic, outlined below, but i sure don't disagree with it: -- entertainment value (appealing to the audience; tweaking their nipples) -- artistic value (focusing on the form, the craft; leaving your signature for future artistes to emulate) -- sociopolitical value (making an impact on the way people see the world and how they live in it; songs into ploughshares) in each of these categories there can be further comparisons made between skill levels and, say, intensity of the innovation of the particular artist. unless i'm wrong; i suggest that n'sync, as entertaining as they've become, is lacking in the innovation department, even in comparison to the early recorded beatles. first of all, they are still a part of an industry model that was changed and embedded by the beatles and the beatle-machinations themselves. your points about the democratization of music through easier recording tech, synthesizers and 'puters, thrown in the blender with the DIY/punk ethic that had promoted the use of whatever rock instruments one could get one's hands around, on both sides of the pond -- are well noted. if memory serves, this has a tendency to detract from the entertainment side (which was made up for by the new mtv style of life) of that music and add to the artistic (new wave) and sociopolitical (punk, rap) sides of the rubrick. or maybe that's too presumptious of me to make that generalization; that can be what happens when innovation is high. when imitation is higher, and more of everyone is on the same korgs and moogs and drum machines, then it can be more of the same buzz, until it's time for the next innovation peak. i won a blue pocket-rocker (anyone remember those?) when i was in 4th grade. with it i won a boston tape that i never listened to, and tiffany, with "i think we're alone now" on one side and "manic monday" on the other. i listened to it until it wore out.
(I'm a little lost here. I thought Moog was an NHL goaltender, played with the Stars, and the Capitals, I think)
has he ever played with dick hyman?
Moog was one of the first synthesizers as well, and provided a deliciously but annoyingly surreal sound that got old fast. Is "Incense and Peppermints" Mooged? I don't recall. lelande -- I thikn we mostly agree, so hey... =}
don't forget: Moog rhymes with rogue. RCA built one of the first modern synthesizsers in the early 50's. It took up a whole room. and could only play one note at a time. Programmed by punchcards no less, not a 'keyboard'
moog rhymes with rogue? hum. i like moog like goose better. maybe not. resp:90 synthesis/synthesizers, whichever ;)
I guess it all depends on how you pronounce "rogue"... Is it "roog" or "rohg"?
Moog is pronounced with a "long o".
righto. The "other" pronunciation makes him sound like a cow.
it's cute, tho!
lots of good music in the 80's, Blue Oyster Cult, J.Geils, Blondie, Huey Lewis, Hall and Oats, Robert Palmer...
Blondie's Parallel Lines (their major opus) was relesaed in 1978. And although J Geil's Freeze Frame was released in 1981, the overwhelming bulk of their work was during the 1970s... they broke up not long after Freeze Frame, if I remember (maybe 83?). BOC had four studio albums in the 1980s, at least that are still availabl via CDNow, but only two were important, and those were in 80 (Cultasaurs Erectus) and 81 (Fire of Unknown Origin). But since Fire has "Burnin' for You" and "Veteran of Psychich Wars," I'll grant you BOC. ;} Hall and Oates produced radio fodder crap in the 1970s, then went on to continue in the 1980s. Their LPs are nearly unbearable to listen to, being spaghetti dishes of throw-it-against-the-wall, let's see what sticks. Huey Lewis. NSync for the 80s. Better music than NSync, but pure entertainment. Robert Palmer. Don't get me started. I'm glad he's faded back into oblivion. But you're right, lots of good music in the 80s. Of the 6 you listed, you only mentioned 2 of them, but hey... ;} Maybe you're following Hall and Oates' formula for success.
Van Halen
Just cause you don't know good music when youy hear it. You would probably dump on my canary yellow western cut leisure suit as well. ( and don't forget the fried egg pea soup green nylon sirt that went with it.) Oh...wait.. my mistake, that was in the 70's
Heck, I was thinking 90's
Canary yellow leisure suit? Why didn't you say so? And here, I though you didn't have any taste!
NPR's "All Things Considered" ran a review of Peter Gabriel's album OVO yesterday. The clips they played mostly sounded like a Peter Gabriel pop album, so I'll probably get this. I nipped into Borders last night hoping to get the copy of OVO which was there on Sunday, but I guess somebody else heard the review. Still no sign that the album will get a US release. I may just order it from amazon.co.uk, since they sent me a three pound e-mail coupon. SKR Downtown has a copy in the window but they usually close before I manage to get there.
id just liek to say that i love old genesis..and even when phil took over i dug it. anything up until the invisable touch stuff. all solo peter gabriel is xcellent. i like a few old phil solo things... mike rutherford and tony banks solo stuff sucks...
You have several choices: