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

Re: Stones vs Who vs Kinks

> That's the thing about the Stones, they are hard to
> classify.  I'm not sure 
> they know what they are.


Especially in the 60's!

> I love XTC's Fly On The Wall. I have all their
> albums. So it is so cool


English Settlement is probably their best album. I
think so, anyway.

> to see other like them too. You are right they don't
> get the recognition they should.

If only the others knew...I feel that way about The
Who, too. And the Beach Boys. And...and...and...

> Nice to hear from you.  I don't even know about this
> band!  


They don't play live, haven't for years. So unless the
preprossed radio played a song, or a friend turned you
on to them, how could you?

> record bin, so maybe the experts (Mark and Lew)
> could give us a hand in 
> choosing which way to approach exploring this
> important band.

I'd say it depends on where you want to go with it. I
think their best two albums are Arthur and Muswell
Hillbillies. For your average Who fan, however, I'd
suggest one of two. If you're more into Tommy-type
Who, Face To Face or Arthur. I'm listening to FTF as I
write this. If you're more into Quad Who then maybe
Schoolboys In Disgrace or Soap Opera. You really can't
go wrong with anything from FTF (1966) to Muswell
(1972), skip a few to Soap Opera (1975) to Word Of
Mouth (1984), but naturally the music is influenced by
the timeperiod.

> >I guess the Lord must be in New York
> >City.
> Eh?


Harry Nilsson.

> Why'd you do that???

The new logo is more representative of Pete than the
old one, which looked a little tame. I wanted Pete
from the Live At The Marquee poster, but my (now
former) partner said it looked like a blob over a
guitar, and having absolutely NO objectivity in regard
to that picture...

> I'd add BBE to that.

Add it to the list of songs heard too damned much.

> Who knows, I could be wrong.
> But I doubt it!


> Objective view on what?


On getting hit in the face "for fun."

> EVERYONE here except you views it this way

Oh? Does EVERYONE really? You've spoken with everyone
about it, have you? Or are you a mindreader? Funny,
the people who have discussed it with me think it's
utterly insane. I guess they're nobodys.

> that.  You continually use it to belittle me

How can it be "belittling" when you offered it to the
list freely? Somehow my restating it makes it an
insult in your mind. Odd, that.

> you, considering all I did is disagree with an 

Maybe it was the "Well, I hesitate to disagree with
Mark for fear of venomous retaliation" that makes it
more than just a plain disagreement. Ya think? Or do
you think you can throw something like that out there
with no reprecussions? The more fool you.

> So there's a new rule here that if one disagrees 

You did more than disagree, as can be seen above. Now
HERE is an insult, so you'll know the difference: Why
don't you just quit whining like a baby and leave me

"There's no cave deep enough for America, or dark
enough to hide."
     George "ain't no mountain high enough" Bush

Cheers         ML

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway