[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Pino on Bass

>From: "Scott Schrade"
>Subject: Re: Pino on Bass
>> A bassist, like Flea, would kick some shit into the show that Pete would
>> forced, and want to respond to.  It would be great.
>The thought of Flea playing with them sickens me.

Bahahah.  Yeah, me too.

>First off, I hate "The Chili

Awe, they're not that bad.  I actually dig early Peppers.  Mother's

>Second, that guy's an idiot.

Actually, I've heard him interviewed several times.  He's a friggin'

>He'd probably play shirtless.

We could only hope (alternative is only wearing a sock?).

>He'd be
>hopping around.....

It'd be flopping around...


and flopping....


> I don't want to see that.

Hell, if Pete almost tore Chuck M. a new one at A Day in The Garden, for
simply getting too close, imagine the fireworks we'd see with Flea on the
Pete would have a freak sesh!

>I'd rather have Pino. <snicker>

Yeah, me too.

>And also!  Kevin!  My good friend.  Just choosing a *busy* bass player
>necessarily solve the problem.  I'm afraid you've erred in your reasoning,
>good friend Kevin.

"Busy" ?
What is this......."busy"?
Did *Ieeeeeeyyyyy* mention this thing called "busy"?
I don't believe I *did*!

>(Is any of this making you nervous?)


>For you see!

Wait, where are my eye shades???

>Flea (ugh....I don't even like typing his name), while being a *busy*
>bass player, is still a clunky, non-fluid bass player.

He's clearly funk.  But, it's his energy I was thinking of.
It was the most extreme of the bassists Alan listed, and I just used Flea to
emphasize the point.
I want energy.
I want....what was it you called it???

Hmmmmm??  Help me out here, dude.
What *was* it you called it?  It was perfect.
Damn short term memory....


In this context....">I think that's what has a lot of people miffed.
no human spirit (!) coming from "Who bass" anymore.  It's all regimented
& structured.  Bare-boned & cold.  Plunk plunk plunk. <"


Now, not to spend too much time defending Flea (really don't have the
desire), but Flea would be 'human spirit' over on the left.
Ok, granted, a bit too much spirit.....for anyone's liking, particularly
Pete's....but.....the point is still made.

>  He's all patterns & pops.

He's got skills.  No mistake about that.

>The Who aren't a funk band, my good friend Kevil-Doody.

The Who aren't a funk band?

Well, FUNK you very much!

(If *anyone* ...*ever*...get's the chance to see Parliament Funk-i-delic
live......DO IT!)

>Now do you see
>the error of your ways?

Clearly, your perception is the way that has erred.

>Compared to Pino, Flea's playing would just mean *more* square blocks
trying to
>be squeezed into round holes.

Ethan's getting better and better with that.

>Good Who should be circular.  And malleable.

<lighting candles>
<lotus position>
OUUUUmmmmmmmmmmmm.     OUUUUmmmmmmmmmm.

>I'm telling you:  Mike Watt would be the ultimate choice as bassist.  For
>That guy rumbles, improvises, is hugely expressive yet still
>and is a Who fan to boot.  And he'd probably enjoy doing it.  But, I'd be
>willing to bet neither Pete nor Rog even know who the fuck Mike Watt is.

Who's Mike Watt?

>> That said, I can't imagine Pete sharing the stage with a youngster such
as Flea.
>Wait, Flea's gotta be around Zak's age.  He's not *that* young anymore!

Yeah, but Zak sure does act a whole bunch more mature....cool....on the low
Flea's a youngster by comparison.
Ya dig?

We're saying the same thing.
I'm just flowery-er.  (?)

Kevin in VT