| Author | Message | ||
     kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 159 Registered: 05-2005 |
Well you know what I think(thats disappointment, if you missed the post), what about the rest of you? | ||
| gareth w Member Username: Gareth Post Number: 51 Registered: 05-2005 |
Masterpiece. Probably my favourite album of all time. | ||
| Wilson Davey Member Username: Wilson Post Number: 53 Registered: 05-2005 |
Some of their best moments for me. "I'm alright" a very underated song. "Devils Eye" simplistic beauty The production is a bit too polished for me. I would love to hear the whole LP played live in the same sequence. REM did that with Murmur once and blew the crowd away. The songs could then breathe again. I love the version of "clouds" on the DVD. I think this something that GM/RF will do again,revisit and twist some of the perhaps over familiar songs. So you hear them fresh. Maybe a piano version or added strings or something. I bet the demo version of "You can't say no" was awesome. It;s amazing how a different emphasis on a single line of lyric can put a song in a different light, or just RF raising an ironic eyebrow... | ||
| Jeff Whiteaker Member Username: Jeff_whiteaker Post Number: 203 Registered: 10-2004 |
masterpiece. not their best, not *the* masterpiece, but still an awesome record. i do have a few qualms with it: took me a long to come around to liking 'quiet heart.' the song sounds so derivative of U2's sound at that time, and that used to really put me off. to this day, i've never cared for 'dive for your memory.' everyone seems to love that song, but to me it's kind of trite. eliminate that song and replace it with 'rock 'n roll friend', and 16LL would end on an infinitely better note. my final qualm is that it's sad that half the songs have a drum machine replacing lindy. words can't describe how wrong that is. i know this occurred on spring hill fair, but at least it wasn't quite as obvious as on 16LL. anyhow, i do think 16LL holds together tremendously well, and has a cohesion similar to before hollywood. the guitars are lush, the songs are generally great, and amanda's contributions are beautifully woven into the overall sound. i think 'love goes on,' 'you can't say no forever,' 'streets of your town,' and 'love is a sign,' are some of their best ever songs. | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 161 Registered: 05-2005 |
jeff, just as well I like your own bands music which shows you have good taste BUT the 2 best songs on 16LL imo are quiet heart and dive for your memory. oh well, what do i know, i will be forever villified for calling this album a "dog turd"  | ||
| Bob Mail Member Username: Bob Post Number: 10 Registered: 03-2006 |
masterpiece -two sides of a coin with both songwriters compositions making a brilliant whole. Plus it seems to reflect the real relationships in the band (rather then the imagined of earlier songs) - Grants first big love affair and Robert free but on the cusp of a new phase later highlighted on his first solo album -comments re production I think it is fine and suits the songs I have never had a problem with it. The comments remind me of similar ones in relation to the Chills Softbomb..some say its too polished but I actually think it has showed its worth. I feel the same about 16LL it has actually stood the test of time and improved with age. A fine wine? | ||
| Geoff Holmes Member Username: Geoff Post Number: 72 Registered: 05-2005 |
A good thread - and one which is sure to divide our little community!! I think it was, and is, a complete letdown. The production is terrible and so is the cover for that matter. Some very good songs like Dive for your Memory, but Was there anything is lame as are a number of other songs.The over reliance on 80's bad sounding acoustics on the whole album really dates it. I was suprised that Mark Wallis produced(but not mastered) such a classic as Oceans Apart after the debacle of 16LL. When it came out, I had just moved to Sydney and was really dissappointed that such a lame album was put out by them. I think The Triffids put out the Black Swan at around the same time and I was similarly unimpressed. I'm a huge Church fan but I also think Starfish, apart from a couple of songs was disappointing too. Around that time I thought the best new albums were by far "Blue Bell Knoll" by the Cocteau Twins and "Lost" by Died Pretty. There..that's off my chest! Fire when ready!!! | ||
| Kurt Stephan Member Username: Slothbert Post Number: 167 Registered: 04-2005 |
I was going to stay out of this argument, but I feel fairly strongly about it. I say it's a masterpiece for what it is: a lush, slick pop album that emphasizes great songs and singing. Is it the best GoBs album? No. It's not really a band album so much as it is a Forster/McLennan studio project with prominent instrumental and vocal contributions from Amanda Brown and hired-gun guitar solos from John Wilsteed. Lindy has discounted her involvement in the record and, indeed, everything sounds like programmed drums to my ears--but with the exception of a couple of songs, the rhythm section is pushed way in the background anyway. So "16LL" was deliberately different in conception than the five previous albums, which were truly full band efforts. In a sense, "16LL" was their Steely Dan-style album--and I realize that's a horrifying thought to a lot of people. That said, I think it succeeds magnificently in being what it was meant to be (lush and accessible), it tracks better than any of the other albums, and it's the only album where Grant's and Robert's songs flow together seamlessly instead of bumping and crashing into one another in sometimes jarring ways (mind you, that's one of their greatest charms to us fans). Would it be my desert island GoBs album? No. But it's still a classic. I don't mean to fan the flames, but I find it astounding that a few people are criticizing the production and sound of "16LL" while touting "Oceans Apart." With "16LL," at least the dumb '80s production values were contemporary. What's the excuse in 2005 for the programmed drums and synth washes on "Statue" and "This Night's for You"? | ||
| Alex Bolton Member Username: Alexb Post Number: 23 Registered: 01-2006 |
Certainly this thread will arouse controversy (as is no doubt the intention). Common wisdom is that 16LL is the GB's best album and common wisdom is right. Why? Thematic Consistency; the songs look at the same subject from different corners. Pop Sensibility; The GB's have sunch innate character that a more commercial sound improves listenability without downside. Sympathetic Production; A lush acoustic sound suits the songs and in my view doesn't date all that much. Great Songs; There are more on this album than any other; Quiet Heart; Streets... You Can't Say No Forever, I'm Alright, Clouds, Devil's Eye. If the GB had made this album and the time of SHF their career might have ben different; as it was it came too late. The other point to make is that 16LL is now a very famous album, especially in the UK and America. I have 4 recent best album anthologies and it has a five star write up in ever one. | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 164 Registered: 05-2005 |
Thanks Kurt. You have eloquently stated (above) better than I ever could the many reasons why I detest 16LL. I was not aware of any of the facts you relate in the second paragraph, but it all makes sense to me now why this album is such a letdown for me. | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 165 Registered: 05-2005 |
Alex, 2 things. 1)This thread was not started to arouse controversy, it was genuine curiousity on my part. 2) Common wisdom about 16LL. Says who? This is just fanciful revisionism on your part. My perception is that Liberty Belle and B4H'wood are the best albums. It would be interesting to know how the band rate 16LL - anybody read any GO-Bs books or read any articles on this? | ||
| David Matheson Member Username: David_matheson Post Number: 60 Registered: 12-2004 |
To me 16LL is brilliant and remains my favourite Go-Betweens album. It's hard to be objective after reading the above, as well as all of the other stuff that has entered my consciousness from this board over time, not to mention reviews and stuff. I think the greatest strength of the Go-Betweens is the songwriting talent of Robert and Grant. On 16LL their songwriting is at its best. It seems a large part of the debate centres on the production. I'm still deciding which side of the fence to jump down on. The lush sound both enhances the beauty of the songs - and detracts in parts by being too overdone and artificial. But I guess the bottom line is the pleasure that it still gives me to listen to. So, if the only choices are masterpiece or disappointment, then I'm calling it a masterpiece. | ||
| Randy Adams Member Username: Randy_adams Post Number: 221 Registered: 03-2005 |
I think maybe this thread reflects the inevitable creative curve of an artist. For a fair length of time, you only half know what you are doing. You are constantly over-reaching because your ability is so limited and the results are fascinating for the listener. Sometimes you miss the mark and it just falls on the floor. Other times you miss the mark you were aiming for but hit one you never thought of and the result is a classic. But inevitably you learn how to play and how to write and how to record and you start hitting the mark you were aiming for more consistently. The result? Fewer surprises, less adventure. This happens to everyone unless they are willing to keep stretching beyond their present limits like, say, Scott Walker. But that means you have to be willing to release something that you are not even sure is good; you have to accept the hazard that you are falling on your face very publicly. Few people are willing to take that risk. There have been no risks taken since the reformation and it's probably fair to say that there are few risks on 16LL. | ||
| Kurt Stephan Member Username: Slothbert Post Number: 169 Registered: 04-2005 |
Well said, Randy. And Kevin, while we don't agree on 16LL, I'm with you all the way on BH and LBATBDE being the best "real" GoBs albums. You asked about the band's opinions of it--Robert, in David's book and other interviews I've read, praises the album, saying he's grown to like it more and more over time. But he admits it's not a band album--the members rarely played on the tracks together when it was being recorded and he actually played very little guitar on it. I don't think I've ever read anything complimentary toward the album from Lindy. I'm guessing Grant likes it, considering how much more formulaic and studio-driven he got on his solo albums. | ||
| Andrew Kerr Member Username: Andrew_k Post Number: 56 Registered: 04-2005 |
I think Lindy was basically replaced by technology for 16LL. I listened to the Live on Snap CD the other day for the first time in ages: while the band are not as 'tight' as the current line-up, there is an edge to the playing that is far more exciting and unpredictable. I took a friend to see the band in about '84 and after 'I Need Two Heads' she said that it sounded like they were about to disintegrate at any point. But it made for an exciting performance. | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 170 Registered: 05-2005 |
You know what - i am working night shift tonight (on my own) so I am going to take 16LL along and listen to it. I have not listened to it for ages, and the last time I listened to it I certainly did not scrutinise it as much as I will do tonight - should be fun!! | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 172 Registered: 05-2005 |
Just listened to 16LL intently - its still pish (Randy, pish is the Scottish equivalent of naff) | ||
| Pádraig Collins Member Username: Pádraig_collins Post Number: 223 Registered: 05-2005 |
Kevin, you said on another thread that people who love Lovers Lane probably got into the band through that album. Not so in my case at the very least. My intro was Metal And Shells, then 1978-90, then Lovers Lane. I agree with you on one point though; people who got into R.E.M. through Automatic... are satan's spawn who should be burned at the stake. (I know you did not say that exactly, but I'm sure it's what you meant.) | ||
| gareth w Member Username: Gareth Post Number: 53 Registered: 05-2005 |
It seems to me that we see the album from 2 distinct camps – those of us that love it see it as the peak of Grant/Robert’s songwriting with the production and playing to support this whereas the other camp sees it as the least representative go-betweens album in terms of personnel and production. I agree that it is not their most traditional album in terms of sound and approach but I don’t really care about that. What matters to me is the music on the disk. It’s the best album released under the go-betweens name – pure and simple. Perhaps i’ve never seen them as a band in the same way as others do (i.e. along the lines of The Beatles or The Smiths). To me the songwriting has always been at the core of the band rather than a line up or a specific musician. | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 49 Registered: 03-2006 |
Gratifying that I have so many "fellow travelers" (forgive my use of that word - I just watched "Good Night and Good Luck"...EXCELLENT movie, by the way), folks who admire 16 LL.... I'd be tempted to gloat, but that would be buying into the notion that it isn't just subjective taste we're talking about...and great art isn't a matter of majority opinion, otherwise Britney Spears would be a brilliant genius...And, as we all know, the GBs, sadly, have sold bupkes and that has no bearing whatsoever on their artistic worth... Things like "polished", "accessible" and "slick" are subjective value judgements also, matters of taste...no one viewpoint on the subject is morally superior...and if being weird, edgy, dark, or whatever, were all you needed to automatically guarantee great artistry, then GG Allin would be the greatest musical artist the world ever choked (crapped) up.... 16 LL is waaay bigger than this little debate by the way...I'm sure it'll still be loved 30, 50 years down the line... | ||
| Guy Ewald Member Username: Guy_ewald Post Number: 115 Registered: 02-2005 |
Masterpiece. I like all the Go-Betweens albums and rate the Mk.II work right up there with the 80's albums, but they've never made a better album than 16 Lovers Lane. | ||
| Jerry Clark Member Username: Jerry Post Number: 195 Registered: 08-2004 |
Despite liking all the songs on 16LL. It doesn't hang together well as an LP, for me. I'm quite a late-comer, the joys of Go-B' ville were introduced to me via Bellavista Terrace, for which I blame radio & TV programmers. | ||
| Michael Bachman Member Username: Michael_bachman Post Number: 46 Registered: 01-2005 |
Hmmm, I got into the G-B's thru 16LL in the Fall of 1988. It's my favorite songwriting album, but certainly the playing is stonger on Tallulah, LBATHDE, BH and SHF. Lindy missing in action is a huge drawback. Padraig, as far a REM is concerned, I got into them with the Chronic Town EP in 1983 and then Murmur a few weeks later. Those two are my favorite REM's and I thought they started go down hill slightly with Reckoning and bottomed out with Green in 1988. A slight uphill with next two and then I lost interest after Monster. | ||
| Peter Senning Member Username: Peter_senning Post Number: 14 Registered: 05-2005 |
16LL is a masterpiece! It's my favourite album and my favourite song "You Can't Say No Forever" is on it. But the whole album is a joy to listen to. I have other albums in my record collection that I 'rediscover' from time to time, but 16LL has remained on heavy rotation in my home since 1988. | ||
| Duncan Hurwood Member Username: Duncan_h Post Number: 35 Registered: 05-2005 |
One of the most lovely records I've ever heard, and far and away my favourite Go-Betweens recording, together or solo. | ||
| Donat Member Username: Donat Post Number: 132 Registered: 11-2004 |
The album (to me) would have sounded a lot better with real drums. Electronic drums and The Go-Betweens shouldn't mix. 16LL is certainly an album that's hard to fault. | ||
| clive gregory Member Username: Clive_gregory Post Number: 1 Registered: 12-2005 |
This thread has goaded me into my first post. How any G-B's fan cannot recognise 16LL as at least a great album (if not the work of genius that I and so many see it as)is completely beyond me. I'm right with Gareth W . The key criteria must be the songwriting. And in respect of the quality and consistency of the songs, the emotional depth to the vocal delivery and the wonderful counterpoint between Grant's buoyancy and Robert's lovelorn melancholy, I can't see another album which gets close, brilliant though many of them are. | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 161 Registered: 03-2006 |
Well said, Clive. To me, the crux of the matter really is the songwriting and the emotions, the heart and soul conveyed through the vocal delivery...everything else is superfluous...I just don't really care that much about drumming and drummers per se or have any loyalty to band members beyond GM or RF... and, that dialog, if you will, between RF's lovelorn songs and GM's lovestruck ones is part of what makes it so great. The liner notes to the deluxe edition attribute the contrast to the fact that Robert, who'd just broken up with Lindy, was sitting, wounded, on the sidelines watching GM in the full throes of his new relationship with Amanda. It is, as some have observed, similar to "Rumours", but without the coke, and with better songs. | ||
| Kurt Stephan Member Username: Slothbert Post Number: 215 Registered: 04-2005 |
Though actually "Rumours" is a really good album if you can get past the preconceptions of the Mac as lightweight commercial pop and disregard the coke-fueled money drain that was the making of the record! The GoBs could have recorded 10 albums for what "Rumours" cost, I bet. I have to admit I loathed "Rumours" when it came out because punk was booming, but now I appreciate it. I also have this crazy theory that anyone who likes either "Rubber Soul" or "Rumours" would like 16LL if they give it a chance. I know that's an appalling thought to some on this board, and all the more reason to hate 16LL! | ||
| Stephen Harris Member Username: Smh Post Number: 31 Registered: 05-2005 |
I got into them with i need two heads and all the lps are brilliant and each better than the last. 16LL is their masterpiece. Freakchild might have been even better. | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 164 Registered: 03-2006 |
Yeah, the California version of the Mac are easy to dismiss - lightweight but also bloated, way too rich, the coke stuff (supposedly Stevie Nicks can insert a tissue into one nostril and pull it out t'other) and the clothes, let's not even get started (Ms.Nicks being the worst offender again), but Rumours is a really good album. Tusk, for me, even had its moments, in between all the crazed experimentation. For some reason, I've always loved "Not That Funny" - what a lovely little art-damaged slice of pop noise that was. If it is an accurate depiction of Lindsey Buckingham's state of mind at the time, then I can only say "poor bastard". Freakchild - that really makes me smile, Stephen: it's so perfect, so evocative. What a great name for the great lost album that could've been. It makes me think of that quote on some of the promotional material: "The Go-Betweens are the perfect dream of a pop band". If they didn't exist, someone would've had to invent them. | ||
| Jeff Whiteaker Member Username: Jeff_whiteaker Post Number: 232 Registered: 10-2004 |
i actually like california fleetwood mac. gross? bloated? coke-fueled? obnoxious? you bet!!! but if you really listen to some of those songs, there's a brilliant, minimalist approach at work which was sometimes quite pretty. songs like "sarah," "that's all for everyone," and "dreams" are really lovely, dreamy songs if you can get past all the preconceptions, as kurt put it. i used to loathe them too because they were the antithesis of the whole punk ethos. i also like some of their pre-CA albums, like "Bare Tress" and "Mystery to Me," though I really don't care for the really early stuff as I'm just not interested in blues. | ||
| Kurt Stephan Member Username: Slothbert Post Number: 216 Registered: 04-2005 |
If I ever had impure thoughts about Stevie Nicks (and I'm not saying I did), you just killed them, Hardin, with that story about her nose. | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 165 Registered: 03-2006 |
Sorry man. To look at the bright side, if she ever goes for a septum piercing, she's more than half way there. All they really have to do is just slip it in - no piercing needed! Other buzz killers: she dated Don Henley and, I believe, Kenny Loggins...She's like Joni Mitchell in that respect: who DIDN'T she "date"? I think, too, according to the article I read about them in Mojo, they all pretty much slept with each other...they were, in essence, part pop band, part swinger's club. The original, bluesy Mac were pretty highly rated by the blues cognoscenti - not really my thing, blues, but I always loved their song from that era, "Oh Well". | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 243 Registered: 05-2005 |
Hardin, got to disagree with your comment about drummers. Lindy, while perhaps not being technically wonderful, was essential to the GO-Bs sound in my opinion. Taking it wider, imagine Joy Division/New Order with anybody else but Steven Morris, unthinkable. Ditto Topper Headon(The Clash), John Bonham (Led Zep), Jaki Liebezeit (Can), and thats just off the top of my head. | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 167 Registered: 03-2006 |
Ah, but here we have it, here's where our taste differences about the GBs come from...your GBs, the sound you're fondest of, is that tight, rockin' unit...perfectly valid, just not the GBs that have moved me the most...I wasn't trying to weigh in on the artistic merit of any particular drummer or drumming in general, just stating that it's not what I go to pop music for...it's just not that important to me in the overall scheme of things. Jonathan Lethem (author of "Fortress of Solitude" and others) is in your court, by the way. He has a great piece on the GBs, probably linked to on this site, that talks about how, without Lindy, it just isn't the GBs, for him. And all of those drummers mentioned are certainly integral to the more rhythmically focused bands you mentioned...I would even add Charlie Watts to the list...you may hate them now, but once upon a time the Stones were one badass ensemble...and who was the drummer on "Never Mind the Bollocks"? That was some tight shit. Interesting question: if all of the Beatles reunited while they were alive, but Ringo was left out, would the world have cared? | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 245 Registered: 05-2005 |
paul cook is the pistols drummer. the stones from 65-72 were untouchable | ||
| Jeff Whiteaker Member Username: Jeff_whiteaker Post Number: 233 Registered: 10-2004 |
Hardin, in response to your question "if all the Beatles reunited while they were alive, but Ringo was left out, would the world of cared?" I don't know, but *I* would've cared!!! He has a reputation for not being too technically proficient, but I quite like his drumming w/ the Beatles, not to mention his occasional vocals. Plus, he was a helluva lot better than Charlie Watts (a drummer who *really* has a reputation for not being very technically proficient behind the skins). | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 169 Registered: 03-2006 |
Hmmm, interesting...I really had no opinion either way on it, was just curious what people thought... So, you're saying Charlie Watts, in actuality, is not technically proficient? I don't know from drumming, just know what I like and what sounds good to me...but wait, I think I may know what you're saying - next to (put name of famous session drummer here), he sucks, couldn't play fusion jazz or whatever... Technical proficiency isn't what it's all about at the end of the day anyway, I guess...the LA Times had a link to a great article about how Neil Young (one of my ABSOLUTE faves), because what he did was so rudimentary, "democratized music for the untalented". I wouldn't quite put it like that, but I do take their meaning. | ||
| Kurt Stephan Member Username: Slothbert Post Number: 217 Registered: 04-2005 |
I agree with Jeff that the Beatles without Ringo would have been missing something and I definitely would have cared. It's amazing to me how much I still hear the "Ringo style" (which I can't really describe, but think of the kinds of fills and rolls he did on Sgt. Pepper for an idea) in current indie groups. And Charlie may not be "technically proficient" compared to that guy in Rush, but man he knows how to drive a band, keep a great backbeat, and get a cracklin' snare sound. In rock, what more do you need? | ||
| Jeff Whiteaker Member Username: Jeff_whiteaker Post Number: 235 Registered: 10-2004 |
You're right, technicaly proficiency isn't what it's about, necessarily. And I'm not talking about "fusion, jazz" whatever.... Maybe technical proficiency is the wrong term anyhow. As for Charlie Watts, I've read numerous articles from various producers and/or engineers who worked with the Stones in their prime, and they all said that it sometimes took a while to get Charlie "in the pocket" so to speak. Often times they'd have a percussionist play a scratch track to sort of guide Charlie so he could get the feel right. That said, his drumming on the Stones records always fits. I'm really not a Stones fan, but you probably know what I mean. Anyway, this is all heading down a really boring tanget, since the whole point of your post was about the Go-Betweens possibly not being right in its current state sans Lindy, and not whether certain drummers are good or not. I would agree that Lindy's drumming was an integral part of the Go-Betweens Mach 1 sound, and was sad (yet not surprised) to learn she wouldn't be involved with the new line-up. For the record, I was disappointed to learn that Rober Vickers wouldn't be part of the Mach 2 line-up either. I guess there's just too much personal stuff in the way to have made it work for everyone (like Vickers' living in NY, Lindy focusing on political stuff and her family, etc... not to mention Robert and Grant's possible unwillingness to deal with emotional baggage from the past with regard to Lindy). That said, I do quite like their rhythm section. Adele's backing vocals are great, she's a superb bassist, and I quite like the vibe she gives off live. Glen Thompson may have a more conventional approach than Lindy, but he's a wonderfully solid and spirited drummer. So, it's worked out anyway, but yeah, it would've been nice to see Lindy and Robert Vickers playing with them too. | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 246 Registered: 05-2005 |
on a slightly different drumming tangent - I have always found that american drummers are great to watch at a gig, conversely brit drummers just seem to be going through the motions. I remember seeing American Music Club approx 1990 and Tim Mooney was mesmerising to watch. Aint got a clue how "good" a drummer he is, but he sure seemed to be an artist on the drums to me. Saw Grant Hart when he was in Nova Mob, again a joy to watch. Saw Preston School of Industry backing up the Breeders, dont know who the drummer is but the guy was a real showman - great to watch. Again, dont know the guys name, but saw Pernice Brothers a few years back and the drummer was a lunatic, but clearly enjoyed himself. None of these guys will go down in the pantheon of great drummers, but they held their respective bands together in my view. Now lets get to the Brits - Coldplay, Radiohead, Oasis etc- its all very po faced in comparison. | ||
| Randy Adams Member Username: Randy_adams Post Number: 257 Registered: 03-2005 |
Like many of the British r & b drummers of the 1960s, Charlie Watts came out of the British jazz scene. If you go back to the vintage 64 - 65 stuff Watts' hold on the backbeat was unmatched by any other British pop drummer. The only serious competitors were Ginger Baker in his pre-Cream days and Danny Thompson. But Watts is the only U.K. drummer of that era I can think of who was able to create that rubber-legged rubato feel with his drumming that has typically been the exclusive preserve of the better african american players. Listen closely to something like "Down the Road Apiece" or "2120 South Michigan Avenue" or "Time is on my Side" and you'll see what I mean. He hangs just off the beat in a way that is no accident and VERY hard to do. It is not hard to make the case for Watts as the best musician in the Stones and I'd bet you money Jagger and Richards would concur. In two volumes of autobiography that mostly deal with his time with the Stones, Andrew Oldham never made any criticism of Charlie Watts' playing. | ||
| Kurt Stephan Member Username: Slothbert Post Number: 218 Registered: 04-2005 |
Hmm...it's probably the inflated sense of self-importance that American drummers have. I'm trying to think of great Brit drummers and which were great showmen. Moon was, obviously, and Ginger Baker too, I suppose. I don't know what Bonham was like on stage, having not seen Led Zep on stage (even on film), but I'm guessing he was flashy. But most of the rest--workmanlike on stage, yeah. | ||
| Andrew Kerr Member Username: Andrew_k Post Number: 63 Registered: 04-2005 |
Randy, Yep, 'Charlie's good tonight...', but I know that Danny Thompson played bass for almost everyone in the music biz, but drums? Has anyone ever suggested to him that he could write a most informative + entertaining autobiography? Not sure how much he remembers of the time with John Martyn due to the alcohol consumption! | ||
| Matthias Treml Member Username: Matthias Post Number: 69 Registered: 05-2005 |
Masterpiece. Pure and simple. I think that the inclusion of Amanda on Tallulah and 16 LL fleshed out the melodies and added a lushness not previously seen with her multi-instrumentation and backing vocals. I think what makes 16 LL slightly better than Tallulah is the songwriting; great imagery and directness of the lyrics. The listener can relate to the stories more intimately. That said I think 16 LL coupled with their weirder stuff (Hammer the Hammer, Dusty, 8 Pictures, Five Words) is essential in trying to understand and appreciate what is the whole picture of the Go-Betweens. The Go-Betweens V2 suffers a bit from not having a player like Amanda on it I think. Up until Ocean's Apart with Mark Wallis there hasn't been much additional instrumentation or production on their albums. On Ocean he added strings, horns, and even some additional vocal parts that add great depth and interest to their songs. And despite the mastering issues, it is clearly a superior record than the previous three. But I do think that the band V2 is much tighter live and are at top form. | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 170 Registered: 03-2006 |
Of course it's based slightly on work avoidance, but I find this board extremely entertaining, even when it goes off on tangents... Kev, I shoulda known you'd be an AMC fan...I used to be a huge fan, but then Mark Eitzel's heavily self-indulgent solo career completely lost me...talk about someone who needs an editor. And the reformed AMC, they only serve to underscore the magnitude of what the GBs have pulled off, because Mk II GBs are everything the reformed AMC is not: relevant, tuneful, in short, *good*...I saw them in LA this past October as the warmup for Spoon. While it was good to see them, they didn't play any of their best material, concentrated too much on the new record... Sometimes to attempt to make a point, mainly that drumming isn't particularly relevant to me in the context of 16LL, I overstate my case a little, methinks... I would in no way want to be perceived as dissing the Beatles (ok, maybe Sir Paul, a little bit) and I definitely cast my lot in with those who would miss Ringo, in my little hypothetical scenario... I also can pretty quickly conjure up many drummers I've really enjoyed and who's presence has been pretty crucial in their band's greatness...Pete Thomas of the Attractions, Mighty Max Weinberg, and Levon Helm are just a few... | ||
| Randy Adams Member Username: Randy_adams Post Number: 258 Registered: 03-2005 |
I have got to stop writing entries on here without checking reality against the faulty impulses coming from my brain! Sorry, Andrew. I meant Red Reece. I got my Duffy Power musicians crossed. Reece comes from the pre-Beatles era of British rock n roll but when turned loose on Power's r & b records, he was quite exceptional. Danny Thompson played bass on a lot of Power's mid-60s recordings. So did Terry Cox in fact. | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 172 Registered: 03-2006 |
Andrew, I read a great article in one of those excellent British music mags (Mojo, Uncut, etc.) about the drunken exploits of John Martyn and Danny Thompson back in the day. It was hilarious: they apparently stayed pissed (or as we say in the states, "shitfaced") most hours of the day and beat up each other, or anybody else they came into contact with! Sensitive folkies on the outside, drunken thugs on the inside, I guess....And Danny Thompson today seems so gentle and placid: what a wonderful bass player... | ||
| Geoff Holmes Member Username: Geoff Post Number: 82 Registered: 05-2005 |
Brooke and all you Tallulah fans. I saw Amanda Brown playing last Saturday night at the local Heritage hotel in Bulli! She was playing violin with someone else on Cello and Sophie Glasson from Bluebottle Kiss on piano. They were the band behind the Church's Marty Willson-Piper. She's as stunning as ever, but the night was soured by the ego of Marty unfortuneately. I'm a HUGE Church fan (I even have a copy of the "to be released" album...!)but he has hung out too long with self proclaimed genius Steve Kilbey for too long!!! Shooshing a small crowd(45) of followers, out for a good saturday night, and then following up with condescending remarks about Australian audiences does not endear one!! Absolute "person who indulges in sexual self stimulation starting with W"(Thankyou Admin!!)!!! Amanda and the rest of the "Mood Maidens", as they were billed, looked away in embarrassment a number of times. Lindy, if he needs a drummer, don't go anyway near him!!!!! | ||
| Randy Adams Member Username: Randy_adams Post Number: 264 Registered: 03-2005 |
What a shame, Geoff. I really like Willson-Piper's music and his devotion to the 12 string. The idea of him being backed by the people you've identified sounds terrific. But if he's become a "person who indulges in sexual self stimulation starting with W," that ruins it. Maybe he was just in a shitty mood; we all have that happen and then wish we could hit the rewind button on whatever we've done. | ||
| Geoff Holmes Member Username: Geoff Post Number: 92 Registered: 05-2005 |
I'd love to say that was the case, Randy, but it's the second time I've seen him like that. Last time he stopped a song just as he started to berate someone personally who had the hide to be talking through one of his songs. | ||
| spence Member Username: Spence Post Number: 290 Registered: 05-2005 |
A mate of mine is a huge Church fan. He's done me lots of comps over the years, what I noticed abouttheir stuff is although most of it is very good, its all pretty much sounds the same. Like the production is the same on all the albums, their is no dynamics in terms of production. They are the masters of gated reverb though. | ||
| Adrian P Member Username: Adp Post Number: 14 Registered: 05-2005 |
I've no idea if the crowds attracted by Australian bands playing in London are typical of what they get in Australia, but if they are then I'm firmly on the side of Willson-Piper. I left early from the last Paul Kelly gig I saw here - I could barely hear the gig, due to a crowd "out for a good saturday night". If you want to have some beers and shout at your mates then fine, but why not save the price of a few pints and not do it at a gig? And put me down in the "masterpiece" camp for 16LL - I got in to the band around the time of Spring Hill Fair and as far as I'm concerned each release improved on the last through the 80s. | ||
| Mark Sweeney Member Username: Domestique Post Number: 5 Registered: 04-2005 |
It took me about 4 years to decide it was a masterpiece! I'd agree with Adrian that each 80s album was better than the last, but with 16LL I took a long time to get over the fact that it sounded too polished. I guess I'm just a bit slow on the uptake! | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 183 Registered: 03-2006 |
More power to Wilson-Piper...why do people go to gigs if they're just going to talk to their pals, instead of, radical idea, actually listening to the artist? Why not just stay home and and avoid ruining it for everybody else? It's like people who talk on cell phones during movies...we should be allowed to carry small caliber weapons and give folks like that small flesh wounds, i.e. "wing" them, for such flagrant abuses... | ||
| Geoff Holmes Member Username: Geoff Post Number: 102 Registered: 05-2005 |
I like to hear bands/solo performers too, don't get me wrong. Australian crowds though are known to be a bit "chatty" and maybe that's why most of them can handle anything in the outside world after playing here! What was most striking about the 2 Marty gigs though was his ARROGANCE. In comparison, I was dragged along to a Bernard Fannning gig (Lead singer of very second rung Australian band Powderfinger)at the Enmore last month (The Panics were the support/"Bait") and I have NEVER seen ANYONE as COMFORTABLE as him on stage - it was like he was playing his own housewarming with a few old mates! I'm no fan, believe me, but his control of the nosiy crowd was awesome to behold. I guess that's what Australian audiences, on the whole, are after - someone who earns their respect. Unfortuneately, Marty only dug his grave deeper. | ||
| Hardin Smith Member Username: Manosludge Post Number: 237 Registered: 03-2006 |
There is a way to handle boisterous crowds gracefully - I'm thinking of Neil Finn in the 7 Worlds Collide video...he very adroitly handles his rowdy, but adoring audience...It's New Zealand, instead of Oz, but I'm gueesing the audiences are similarly chatty... | ||
| Pádraig Collins Member Username: Pádraig_collins Post Number: 263 Registered: 05-2005 |
I don't have any Powderfinger records either, but was impressed when I saw them live at Homebake 2002. I hate the way Aussie crowds sit on the floor in front of the stage and talk during the support acts. Stand up and show some respect you damn hippies! | ||
| M. Mark Burgess Member Username: Fortysomething Post Number: 77 Registered: 05-2005 |
What keeps me coming back to the Go-Betweens is the diversity of sound from album to album. R.E.M. have made a successful career out of this. Nothing bores me faster than an artist who hits on a popular sound (are you listening Mark Knopfler?) and beats it to death. I don't think you can truly compare the Go-Betweens albums because they are so different. Each one will appeal more to a certain mentality than others. I like all of them on their own merits. Do I have personal favorites? Sure but it's like asking me what my favorite colors are. 16LL is great for what it is. To me, it evokes a retro 60's vibe quite apart from their indie leanings. I daresay it would have been a hit had it been released in 66, although ironically the production would probably have been more to the liking of some of the people who dislike it for just that. | ||
| Geoff Holmes Member Username: Geoff Post Number: 107 Registered: 05-2005 |
Padraig, they don't only do it for the supports. I remember one night at the Paddington RSL where the Triffids came on really late (1 - 1.30?) with pajama tops on and the crowd were, at the start, gazing up at them from the floor! I actually don't mind it as it means you can usually get a good view of the stage from the back! | ||
| joe Member Username: Dogmansuede Post Number: 1 Registered: 07-2006 |
unlike anything else. the greatest australian album of all time. and california mac were great! tusk was light years ahead of its time. | ||
| spence Member Username: Spence Post Number: 499 Registered: 05-2005 |
I never thought this thread would outrun the fox hunting debate, maybe I'm wrong! | ||
| joe Member Username: Dogmansuede Post Number: 2 Registered: 07-2006 |
oooh...there's a foxhunting thread..... | ||
| Jerry Clark Member Username: Jerry Post Number: 331 Registered: 08-2004 |
There is now! I'm all for it, tally ho? | ||
| kevin Member Username: Kevin Post Number: 524 Registered: 05-2005 |
16LL and Fleetwood Mac comparison - I rest my case! The only proviso I would make is that the Mac demos would still be shite, unlike the demos for 16LL | ||
| Simon Withers Member Username: Sfwithers Post Number: 30 Registered: 08-2005 |
Geoff - was the Triffids gig at the Paddington RSL in 1988? I remember that being very late, not getting back to Manly until the early hours. I wasn't massively impressed with the Triffids gig, but enjoyed their version of Madonna's 'Into the Groove'. Oh, and I think 16LL is a fabulous album. | ||
| Eke Member Username: Ekewebb Post Number: 80 Registered: 05-2005 |
Me too Simon. Masterpiece - no question. | ||
| Randy Adams Member Username: Randy_adams Post Number: 459 Registered: 03-2005 |
I don't agree with Kevin's assessment of 16LL but I do agree with his view of Fleetwood Mac: bloated, undistinguished, forgettable. | ||
| Eke Member Username: Ekewebb Post Number: 81 Registered: 05-2005 |
I'm not a fan Randy but I think you're wrong with "undistinguished and forgettable", they had a very recognisable and memorable sound. And that was even after they went down the bloated route - let's not forget they were going for a long time before Rumours. | ||
| Randy Adams Member Username: Randy_adams Post Number: 461 Registered: 03-2005 |
Yes, Eke, but they were so many totally different bands during those earlier years. Getting to the famous lineup, I confess I just find very little in their chord changes, lyrics or instrumental fills to hang onto. For me, they were the epitome of 70s bland. But I do truly hate the 70s mainstream music. I always did; I spent the first two thirds of that decade exploring the more obscure reaches of the 60s and also discovering reggae. Not a moment too soon punk arrived . . . . | ||
| Michael Bachman Member Username: Michael_bachman Post Number: 130 Registered: 01-2005 |
The Peter Green era Fleetwood Mac, from 1968 to 1970, was a great blues band, and later a long jam band. Peter Green was one of the great blues guitarists of all time. He had a unique tone and was a great blues singer as well. The last year Green was with them they played long intricate songs like the Greatfull Dead and the Allman Brothers were doing at the time. I got to see them in March of 1971 after Green had come back briefly to fill in for Jeremy Spencer after Jeremy had been abducted by The Children of God cult group. | ||
| Matthias Treml Member Username: Matthias Post Number: 95 Registered: 05-2005 |
Michael, Your comment reminded me of a recent post from the Observer about the 50 Albums that Changed Music. Here's what they say about the Ramones pick: #35 The Ramones The Ramones (1976) 'Fun disappeared from music in 1974,' claimed singer Joey Ramone. To restore it took he and his three 'brothers' just one album and 16 tracks, all under three minutes. Brevity was the New York punk rockers' first lesson to the world, along with speed, a distorted guitar thrash and a knowing line in faux-dumb lyrics. In an era of 'progressive' rock pomposity and 12-minute tracks, the Ramones' back-to-basics approach was rousing and confrontational. Although I don't agree with all their picks, I nonetheless find it interesting to read their reasoning behind them. Check it out: 1821196%2C00.html,http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1821196,00.html |