So i had few friends over and i rambled a bit too much about jack white and his guitar playing. Specifically saying that i admire his ability to play sloppy guitar in a precise manner. Meaning that when he wants to he is sloppy for a certain sound. When he wants to he is precise and perfect and he can write the hell out of a pop song. But what happened was that i made a girl angry and her boyfriend came to her defense and an argument ensued. Basically it was said that i was being too harsh on his artistic choices and i could not for the life of me get the point across that i appreciate this about him and i love his musical stylings.
So as the conversation went on, i was called white trash and a scumbag and when i politely asked them to leave they wouldn't so the party moved to the deck where we enjoyed drinks and cigars. Anywho the reason why i am writing this is i need to know what is the correct term for saying i love the guitarist's ability to play a wide range of stylings. I think artistic styling works. But maybe it was the alcohol talking on both sides of this miscommunication. I don't know anyone have any thoughts?
And the moral of the story is they will not be invited over again.
Music and politics. My two favorite things are conversational poison at parties with my local friends. Turns out half my childhood pals went right-wing nut-job conservative and they all hate MMJ. I'm not so sure it's the words you used, but the nature of the audience.
All you had to say was Jack wears many hats and is extremely versatile. He's one of the few legitimate rock stars and guitar heroes of his genertion. Oh, and he's an emotional player rooted in punk and blues so if he's not perfect then it's intentional. Those idiots know nothing about guitar and the blues.
Once you realized you were incorrectly getting ridiculed and they werent getting the picture, you shouldve just played along with them and started saying how The White Stripes suck, you saw that music documentary with him and Edge blew the doors off Jack with his technical precision, etc to piss them off even more! :evil:
You can't be sloppy in a precise manner. Sloppy means lack of precision. Like saying > I admire the snow-filled, clear sky < that doesn't make sense.
Similar story, I almost got into a fight once during the Budweiser years b/c someone said Jimmy page was a sloppy guitar player. My retort was, "Unless you're Jeff Beck, you should just shut the fuck up!" It went downhill from there.
Sloppy about anything isn't a compliment, IMO.
I disagree Tracy. You can't be precise in a sloppy manner but you CAN be sloppy in a precise manner. If I wanted to put spaghetti sauce all over my kitchen but put it exactly where I wanted it (like maybe a painter would) then I would be sloppy in a precise manner.
Take sloppy out of rock and blues and what's left is pretty darn boring.
Quote from: BH on Feb 17, 2013, 08:21 PM
I disagree Tracy. You can't be precise in a sloppy manner but you CAN be sloppy in a precise manner. If I wanted to put spaghetti sauce all over my kitchen but put it exactly where I wanted it (like maybe a painter would) then I would be sloppy in a precise manner.
First of all, why do you want to put spaghetti sauce all over your kitchen? I feel inclined to stop right there until I get to the root of that silliness. But in the meantime, if you are putting something
exactly where you want it, then it isn't sloppy. What you have is a kitchen (or highway) that was precisely stained with spaghetti sauce.
(http://www.truckspills.com/tomato_paste_spill_3.jpg)
Quote from: Jaimoe on Feb 17, 2013, 08:29 PM
Take sloppy out of rock and blues and what's left is pretty darn boring.
Heartfelt?
Improvisational?
Random?
Interpretive?
Elementary?
Eclectic?
but not sloppy; that's not a compliment
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Feb 18, 2013, 12:05 AM
Quote from: BH on Feb 17, 2013, 08:21 PM
I disagree Tracy. You can't be precise in a sloppy manner but you CAN be sloppy in a precise manner. If I wanted to put spaghetti sauce all over my kitchen but put it exactly where I wanted it (like maybe a painter would) then I would be sloppy in a precise manner.
First of all, why do you want to put spaghetti sauce all over your kitchen? I feel inclined to stop right there until I get to the root of that silliness. But in the meantime, if you are putting something exactly where you want it, then it isn't sloppy. What you have is a kitchen (or highway) that was precisely stained with spaghetti sauce.
(http://www.truckspills.com/tomato_paste_spill_3.jpg)
Yes, precisely placed by artist, but percieved by the listener as sloppy.
Quote from: BH on Feb 18, 2013, 10:49 AM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Feb 18, 2013, 12:05 AM
Quote from: BH on Feb 17, 2013, 08:21 PM
I disagree Tracy. You can't be precise in a sloppy manner but you CAN be sloppy in a precise manner. If I wanted to put spaghetti sauce all over my kitchen but put it exactly where I wanted it (like maybe a painter would) then I would be sloppy in a precise manner.
First of all, why do you want to put spaghetti sauce all over your kitchen? I feel inclined to stop right there until I get to the root of that silliness. But in the meantime, if you are putting something exactly where you want it, then it isn't sloppy. What you have is a kitchen (or highway) that was precisely stained with spaghetti sauce.
(http://www.truckspills.com/tomato_paste_spill_3.jpg)
Yes, precisely placed by artist, but percieved by the listener as sloppy.
(http://i.imgur.com/A46JK.gif)
I generally agree with Tracy, to an extent. What I mean is, sometimes it gets sloppy, but that's ok. The Faces revelled in drunkeness, but they pulled it off on most nights. It gets really ugly with technical clean players (Rush at the massive 400,000 Stones-led SARS fundraiser festival in Toronto last decade kinda sucked, and they were the first to admit it), but I don't want the New York Dolls and Sex Pistols to sparkle. Hendrix unrehearsed ain't a good time. Check out his Isle of Wight 1970 for proof. Jimmy Page is messy sometimes (the solo on "Heartbreaker" is a good example), but with him it often came down to practice, and as we all known, he goes through loooong stretches of apathy towards his craft, case in point the entire 1980s.
I don't want to talk in circles, but I don't think Jack White is sloppy. His style is full of hammer-ons, bends and fast flourishes, so his solos might sound jumbled at times, but that's his intent.
I don't know if it's sloppily precise or precisely sloppy but the solo to Weep Themselves to Sleep is a Prego masterpiece.
Jesco White on Sloppy Eggs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc3SEBA-9nU#)
You know what's sloppy, this thread not being in Other Music. :wink:
Quote from: ManNamedTruth on Feb 18, 2013, 05:11 PM
You know what's sloppy, this thread not being in Other Music. :wink:
What a great idea!
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Feb 18, 2013, 11:19 AM
Quote from: BH on Feb 18, 2013, 10:49 AM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Feb 18, 2013, 12:05 AM
Quote from: BH on Feb 17, 2013, 08:21 PM
I disagree Tracy. You can't be precise in a sloppy manner but you CAN be sloppy in a precise manner. If I wanted to put spaghetti sauce all over my kitchen but put it exactly where I wanted it (like maybe a painter would) then I would be sloppy in a precise manner.
First of all, why do you want to put spaghetti sauce all over your kitchen? I feel inclined to stop right there until I get to the root of that silliness. But in the meantime, if you are putting something exactly where you want it, then it isn't sloppy. What you have is a kitchen (or highway) that was precisely stained with spaghetti sauce.
(http://www.truckspills.com/tomato_paste_spill_3.jpg)
Yes, precisely placed by artist, but percieved by the listener as sloppy.
(http://i.imgur.com/A46JK.gif)
hahaha
but seriously, I think BH nailed it. Artists can act in a certain way so that their art is "perceived" to be sloppy, though its not actually sloppy. Not as sloppy as people arguing over the definition of sloppy artistry.
the first example that comes to mind is Via Chicago
Quote from: johnnYYac on Feb 18, 2013, 05:14 PM
Quote from: ManNamedTruth on Feb 18, 2013, 05:11 PM
You know what's sloppy, this thread not being in Other Music. :wink:
What a great idea!
haha, well done Yac.
Good Sloppy Timing is right even if you miss the exact note.
The Who were even able to be sloppy and good the other way. Listen to Young Man Blues on Live at Leeds. They collectively miss some marks, and it kind of adds to the coolness of that version.
I love that this thread was moved to other music, i didn't want to ramble about a bad experience at a party where i couldn't convey my ideas about Jack White's guitar playing to become an off topic rambling and then have it seem like it didn't belong in the right section. Anywho, great discussion, I have to respond to the idea that you can not play guitar sloppy and precise at the same time. I believe that you can be sloppy for aesthetic purposes and with that intent in mind you have the ability to be precise in what you attempt to achieve. Big loud distorted guitars with hammer ons and pull offs is the way i play the guitar, not nearly as well as anyone we listen to but my god i love it. but as i listen to white blood cells i realize that 75% of the original problem was the individuals i was arguing with and 25% was the irish whiskey inhibiting my ability to explain that i appreciate and love everything Jack White does. Except Icky Thumb. Actually i rather liked Icky Thumb but the majority of people i speak to about the Stripes these days claim it was a sub par farewell album.
I have to give lots of love to the person who mentioned Via Chicago. Continually my two favorite bands are Wilco and My Morning Jacket. Let's keep this debate going with a question: What is your favorite example of sloppy guitar playing and your favorite of precise playing?
Quote from: ffghtrs on Feb 18, 2013, 09:59 PM
I love that this thread was moved to other music, i didn't want to ramble about a bad experience at a party where i couldn't convey my ideas about Jack White's guitar playing to become an off topic rambling and then have it seem like it didn't belong in the right section. Anywho, great discussion, I have to respond to the idea that you can not play guitar sloppy and precise at the same time. I believe that you can be sloppy for aesthetic purposes and with that intent in mind you have the ability to be precise in what you attempt to achieve. Big loud distorted guitars with hammer ons and pull offs is the way i play the guitar, not nearly as well as anyone we listen to but my god i love it. but as i listen to white blood cells i realize that 75% of the original problem was the individuals i was arguing with and 25% was the irish whiskey inhibiting my ability to explain that i appreciate and love everything Jack White does. Except Icky Thumb. Actually i rather liked Icky Thumb but the majority of people i speak to about the Stripes these days claim it was a sub par farewell album.
I have to give lots of love to the person who mentioned Via Chicago. Continually my two favorite bands are Wilco and My Morning Jacket. Let's keep this debate going with a question: What is your favorite example of sloppy guitar playing and your favorite of precise playing?
Something a eponymous as the guitar solo in Black Dog. The timing of the whole band sounds off kilter, but it all comes back on track.
Spoon is a band that comes to mind that produce very precise albums with several moments of random talking, laughing, etc. that are supposed to sound "off the cuff" but are really carefully placed to not make the songs seem overproduced. Precisely sloppy.
Iny Thump rules, just like every White Stripes album.
Jack White uses terms like expression, rawness, real, screaming poetry, when referring to a Son House song that he earlier called "off time". Sloppy is on the other side of the continuum which he speaks, IMO.
'It Might Get Loud': Jack White's favorite song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTlSka5iqPY#ws)
In this one, Jack White talks about Meg's drumming as being child-like and quotes Picasso saying "it took my whole life to learn how to paint like a child". He also calls her drumming primitive, primal, limited, boxed in, but he never says sloppy. Sloppy isn't a compliment.
The White Stripes - Charly Rose Interview pt. 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDVduMCo01o#)
Sloppy (intentional or not) simply isn't a compliment, it's a negative criticism. There are more appropriate words.
I am a huge JW fan but kind of hate most JW & TMR fans. It is very difficult to talk music with them. Most think Jack can do no wrong. Which IMO is far from the truth. But I am willing to except that opinions are different but most of his fans are not. They see Jack as a god of sorts and that everything he does is gold.
This is really gotten under my skin in recent years because I basically think that TMR puts out 80% crap. Jack choose to work with some god awful bands and I don't understand why.
But again it is all opinion.
PS I saw the White Stripes 27 times including the 10th anniversary show in Glace Bay.
Pretty much a perfect American food
(http://www.simplyrecipes.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/sloppy-joe.jpg?ea6e46)
Yes rob. Sloppy IS a compliment.
But why were on the subject of JW and people thinking he "craps gold"... I could never get into any JW other than The Raconteurs. I do think, however, that he is one if today's RnR geniuses, and has secured his spot in history as one of this generations best song writers, along with Thom Yorke. I don't know who else off the top of my head, but maybe Jim one day, and maybe Tweedy one day. Maybe Vedder, but that could be my bias.
Quote from: e_wind on Feb 19, 2013, 04:50 PM
Yes rob. Sloppy IS a compliment.
But why were on the subject of JW and people thinking he "craps gold"... I could never get into any JW other than The Raconteurs. I do think, however, that he is one if today's RnR geniuses, and has secured his spot in history as one of this generations best song writers, along with Thom Yorke. I don't know who else off the top of my head, but maybe Jim one day, and maybe Tweedy one day. Maybe Vedder, but that could be my bias.
What is funny is that I never found the Raconteurs "sloppy" enough. One of the great things about TWS was that live they could be super sloppy 1 second then the next be super tight. Also with TWS there was a surprise element that neither The Raconteurs, Dead Weather or Jack solo out put have been able to capture for me. I saw Jack 5 times last year and I think it was almost the same set list most nights. Only the 2nd night of the Roseland had a really exciting moment and that was during the encore. The solo bands sound great but it is just a little to rehearsed for me.
Quote from: midwesterner on Feb 19, 2013, 04:26 PM
I am a huge JW fan but kind of hate most JW & TMR fans.
This is really gotten under my skin in recent years because I basically think that TMR puts out is crap
What is TMR? It's killing me and I fear the answer is obvious.
Third Man Records! The masters of the gimmick.
Quote from: e_wind on Feb 19, 2013, 04:50 PM
Yes rob. Sloppy IS a compliment.
But why were on the subject of JW and people thinking he "craps gold"... I could never get into any JW other than The Raconteurs. I do think, however, that he is one if today's RnR geniuses, and has secured his spot in history as one of this generations best song writers, along with Thom Yorke. I don't know who else off the top of my head, but maybe Jim one day, and maybe Tweedy one day. Maybe Vedder, but that could be my bias.
I think Jim, Tweedy and Vedder already fit that bill along with Dave Grohl.
(http://memecrunch.com/meme/8P0B/i-dont-always-get-sloppy-seconds/image.png)
Quote from: oistheone on Feb 19, 2013, 05:25 PM
Third Man Records! The masters of the gimmick.
Their gimmicks are getting old IMO. Also I hate how they tend to claim they created all of these new formats when in fact they didn't.
But Jack knows how to sell records and seem to be doing a great job at it I just wish it had the sincerity TWS did instead of feeling like a cash grab. I call it a cash grab because how many fucking versions of the TWS albums do we need. There was no need to re-release the first 3 LPs and a bunch of the singles. If you didn't have the originals on vinyl tough shit you missed out.
The WS reissues actually make sense to me -- there is a huge market for them, and the original pressings on eBay go for ridiculous amounts. TMR has always said that they'll keep 'em print as long as they're in business, which is cool too. Nice to have the option to buy a copy of De Stijl pressed from the original analog masters for $20 instead of an original pressing (which doesn't even sound that good) for close to $100.
It's the glow-in-the-dark, water-filled, scratch-and-sniff records that I'm not a fan of. I mean, I love the idea that they can create these funny gimmick pressings to drum up publicity, but I just hate that people actually pay thousands for these things. You know what, maybe it's the TMR collectors I have a problem with actually...
Quote from: EverythingChanges on Feb 19, 2013, 05:37 PM
Quote from: e_wind on Feb 19, 2013, 04:50 PM
Yes rob. Sloppy IS a compliment.
But why were on the subject of JW and people thinking he "craps gold"... I could never get into any JW other than The Raconteurs. I do think, however, that he is one if today's RnR geniuses, and has secured his spot in history as one of this generations best song writers, along with Thom Yorke. I don't know who else off the top of my head, but maybe Jim one day, and maybe Tweedy one day. Maybe Vedder, but that could be my bias.
I think Jim, Tweedy and Vedder already fit that bill along with Dave Grohl.
The problem I have with putting Vedder in is that his band was uber-famous 22 years ago. Their fame has peaked. Radiohead was famous a long time ago, but they're still climbing.
I guess Grohl, though I honestly don't understand why.
Quote from: oistheone on Feb 19, 2013, 06:02 PM
The WS reissues actually make sense to me -- there is a huge market for them, and the original pressings on eBay go for ridiculous amounts. TMR has always said that they'll keep 'em print as long as they're in business, which is cool too. Nice to have the option to buy a copy of De Stijl pressed from the original analog masters for $20 instead of an original pressing (which doesn't even sound that good) for close to $100.
It's the glow-in-the-dark, water-filled, scratch-and-sniff records that I'm not a fan of. I mean, I love the idea that they can create these funny gimmick pressings to drum up publicity, but I just hate that people actually pay thousands for these things. You know what, maybe it's the TMR collectors I have a problem with actually...
I guess I mind because I did have the original pressings of all of the TWS(including GBMS which I paid a lot for) and it kind of pisses me off that Jack basically deflated the value of those records by repressing them. I guess it is cool that now everyone can own a copy but what about the diehard fans that were buying his albums from the start? I just feel like he doesn't take those people into consideration.
My issue with the Glow in the Dark or Bizarre versions is that TMR doesn't always release the pressing info so people are spending crazy a mounts even though there could be 100 to 1000s of them. I am fairly certain at this point that for the tri colors there are maybe 100 more printed than what they release.
This is my same issue with the vault I would like to know how many of each are pressed. However I have been very happy with the Vaults out put lately. The Gold Dollar show and jack live at TMR are great. Now it is time for some 2003 TWS release.
I know it sounds like I am complaining a lot and I really am a huge Jack fan and I think that is why I am so critical of him lately.
I hear exactly what you're talking about! Their creation of something for no other purpose than to make it collectible kinda takes the fun out of collecting. Especially when, like you say, they deliberately hide facts such as pressing numbers. They pretty much control the secondary market for everything they put out. Kinda shady, really.
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Feb 19, 2013, 05:51 PM
(http://memecrunch.com/meme/8P0B/i-dont-always-get-sloppy-seconds/image.png)
See Tracy you proved it yourself. Sloppy seconds are a great thing for all but the prude and the prideful.
And Midwesterner, while I hear where you are coming from, I am always grateful for repressings as a vinyl fan with limited disposable income. I own some jazz originals from the 50's and early 60's but I would not be angry if Columbia or Blue Note chose to repress again. The secondary market prices are ridiculous and it makes no sense to deprive fans who want them.
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Feb 19, 2013, 04:16 PM
In this one, Jack White talks about Meg's drumming as being child-like and quotes Picasso saying "it took my whole life to learn how to paint like a child". He also calls her drumming primitive, primal, limited, boxed in, but he never says sloppy. Sloppy isn't a compliment.
The White Stripes - Charly Rose Interview pt. 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDVduMCo01o#)
Sloppy (intentional or not) simply isn't a compliment, it's a negative criticism. There are more appropriate words.
Funny enough I got involved in a heated discussion with a "classically trained" drummer about TWS and specifically Meg's drumming. He was a real young guy who knew it all and just kept claiming anyone could do it. I tried to explain this very scene and why it was intentional and even acknowledged by the band that her drumming was simple. He wasn't having it. He also claimed they couldn't be a band because it was just two people. I argued with him for five minutes before realizing he wasn't grasping or even trying to understand the point so I just went back to drinking my beer.
Side note: Charlie Rose is the man.
Quote from: ffghtrs on Feb 16, 2013, 08:00 AM
So as the conversation went on, i was called white trash and a scumbag and when i politely asked them to leave they wouldn't so the party moved to the deck where we enjoyed drinks and cigars.
"i was called white trash and a scumbag and when i politely asked them to leave they wouldn't"
Actually, this is the part of your post that I am most concerned with. This is your home? And you just let them stay after they called you names and refused to leave? Are you a sloppy host? Or were you being precisely sloppy?
Quote from: midwesterner on Feb 19, 2013, 06:17 PM
Quote from: oistheone on Feb 19, 2013, 06:02 PM
The WS reissues actually make sense to me -- there is a huge market for them, and the original pressings on eBay go for ridiculous amounts. TMR has always said that they'll keep 'em print as long as they're in business, which is cool too. Nice to have the option to buy a copy of De Stijl pressed from the original analog masters for $20 instead of an original pressing (which doesn't even sound that good) for close to $100.
It's the glow-in-the-dark, water-filled, scratch-and-sniff records that I'm not a fan of. I mean, I love the idea that they can create these funny gimmick pressings to drum up publicity, but I just hate that people actually pay thousands for these things. You know what, maybe it's the TMR collectors I have a problem with actually...
I guess I mind because I did have the original pressings of all of the TWS(including GBMS which I paid a lot for) and it kind of pisses me off that Jack basically deflated the value of those records by repressing them. I guess it is cool that now everyone can own a copy but what about the diehard fans that were buying his albums from the start? I just feel like he doesn't take those people into consideration.
My issue with the Glow in the Dark or Bizarre versions is that TMR doesn't always release the pressing info so people are spending crazy a mounts even though there could be 100 to 1000s of them. I am fairly certain at this point that for the tri colors there are maybe 100 more printed than what they release.
This is my same issue with the vault I would like to know how many of each are pressed. However I have been very happy with the Vaults out put lately. The Gold Dollar show and jack live at TMR are great. Now it is time for some 2003 TWS release.
I know it sounds like I am complaining a lot and I really am a huge Jack fan and I think that is why I am so critical of him lately.
I'm a big music fan but only started getting vinyl a couple years ago. I'm thankful for any and all reissues that might come because not everyone can shell out a lot of money for original pressings. I buy records to listen to them, so i don't care if something's been devalued by a reissue. Actually i don't even think that's true because look at some of the original pressings of various band's albums, even though there's been a bunch of other reissues the original will still be worth more. You come off as a huge snob, like if you don't have the original albums when they came out then you don't deserve to have them.
Since I wasn't alive during The Beatles, I shouldn't deserve to have these reissues they came out with. It's not fair to the older fans who have been alive and with them since day one.
Quote from: ManNamedTruth on Feb 19, 2013, 09:23 PM
Quote from: midwesterner on Feb 19, 2013, 06:17 PM
Quote from: oistheone on Feb 19, 2013, 06:02 PM
The WS reissues actually make sense to me -- there is a huge market for them, and the original pressings on eBay go for ridiculous amounts. TMR has always said that they'll keep 'em print as long as they're in business, which is cool too. Nice to have the option to buy a copy of De Stijl pressed from the original analog masters for $20 instead of an original pressing (which doesn't even sound that good) for close to $100.
It's the glow-in-the-dark, water-filled, scratch-and-sniff records that I'm not a fan of. I mean, I love the idea that they can create these funny gimmick pressings to drum up publicity, but I just hate that people actually pay thousands for these things. You know what, maybe it's the TMR collectors I have a problem with actually...
I guess I mind because I did have the original pressings of all of the TWS(including GBMS which I paid a lot for) and it kind of pisses me off that Jack basically deflated the value of those records by repressing them. I guess it is cool that now everyone can own a copy but what about the diehard fans that were buying his albums from the start? I just feel like he doesn't take those people into consideration.
My issue with the Glow in the Dark or Bizarre versions is that TMR doesn't always release the pressing info so people are spending crazy a mounts even though there could be 100 to 1000s of them. I am fairly certain at this point that for the tri colors there are maybe 100 more printed than what they release.
This is my same issue with the vault I would like to know how many of each are pressed. However I have been very happy with the Vaults out put lately. The Gold Dollar show and jack live at TMR are great. Now it is time for some 2003 TWS release.
I know it sounds like I am complaining a lot and I really am a huge Jack fan and I think that is why I am so critical of him lately.
I'm a big music fan but only started getting vinyl a couple years ago. I'm thankful for any and all reissues that might come because not everyone can shell out a lot of money for original pressings. I buy records to listen to them, so i don't care if something's been devalued by a reissue. Actually i don't even think that's true because look at some of the original pressings of various band's albums, even though there's been a bunch of other reissues the original will still be worth more. You come off as a huge snob, like if you don't have the original albums when they came out then you don't deserve to have them.
I was going to say something to the same effect, but didn't want to sound like an ass. The idea that there should only be 1 pressing and that was for the fans who bought it and the rest are SOL b/c their purchase will lose it's value isn't very rock n' roll, to me. I have heard Jack White say that every album ever pressed should always be available. I agree.
Tracy, great words, i still give 75% of the fault to the other people in the original conversation but my vocabulary was definitely not the word/words to be using.
And Midwesterner great point on TMR, the whole ICP thing is still weird in my mind.
I assume that everyone saw the Conan/Jack White conversation that was 75 minutes long, it was awesome but point is that guy has some serious creativity flowing in him. I meant no harm in using the word sloppy, i'm the kind of person that like dirty, dive bars and dirty martini's but sloppy was not the best choice in words to describe jack white's playing. Ball and Biscuit is still one of my favorite tunes, has been for years.
Also strange as this is admitting this on the MMJ forum i was the last on the bandwagon for the White Stripes and MMJ. Never listened to Elephant with out hearing the annoyance of 7 nation army and the radio play it received until Get Behind Me Satan came out. That album is so flipping good. And MMJ I think I heard it at work for the first time so i was only half listening. That's not an excuse but maybe my excuse is that the music of MMJ is so sophisticated and mind blowingly awesome that i could not grasp it until i heard Dondante off of Z. Currently though At Dawn has been my jam. And how about that 17 minute version of Dondante at Red Rocks with that sweet jam near the end. That song is so cool.
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Feb 19, 2013, 09:33 PM
Quote from: ManNamedTruth on Feb 19, 2013, 09:23 PM
Quote from: midwesterner on Feb 19, 2013, 06:17 PM
Quote from: oistheone on Feb 19, 2013, 06:02 PM
The WS reissues actually make sense to me -- there is a huge market for them, and the original pressings on eBay go for ridiculous amounts. TMR has always said that they'll keep 'em print as long as they're in business, which is cool too. Nice to have the option to buy a copy of De Stijl pressed from the original analog masters for $20 instead of an original pressing (which doesn't even sound that good) for close to $100.
It's the glow-in-the-dark, water-filled, scratch-and-sniff records that I'm not a fan of. I mean, I love the idea that they can create these funny gimmick pressings to drum up publicity, but I just hate that people actually pay thousands for these things. You know what, maybe it's the TMR collectors I have a problem with actually...
I guess I mind because I did have the original pressings of all of the TWS(including GBMS which I paid a lot for) and it kind of pisses me off that Jack basically deflated the value of those records by repressing them. I guess it is cool that now everyone can own a copy but what about the diehard fans that were buying his albums from the start? I just feel like he doesn't take those people into consideration.
My issue with the Glow in the Dark or Bizarre versions is that TMR doesn't always release the pressing info so people are spending crazy a mounts even though there could be 100 to 1000s of them. I am fairly certain at this point that for the tri colors there are maybe 100 more printed than what they release.
This is my same issue with the vault I would like to know how many of each are pressed. However I have been very happy with the Vaults out put lately. The Gold Dollar show and jack live at TMR are great. Now it is time for some 2003 TWS release.
I know it sounds like I am complaining a lot and I really am a huge Jack fan and I think that is why I am so critical of him lately.
I'm a big music fan but only started getting vinyl a couple years ago. I'm thankful for any and all reissues that might come because not everyone can shell out a lot of money for original pressings. I buy records to listen to them, so i don't care if something's been devalued by a reissue. Actually i don't even think that's true because look at some of the original pressings of various band's albums, even though there's been a bunch of other reissues the original will still be worth more. You come off as a huge snob, like if you don't have the original albums when they came out then you don't deserve to have them.
I was going to say something to the same effect, but didn't want to sound like an ass. The idea that there should only be 1 pressing and that was for the fans who bought it and the rest are SOL b/c their purchase will lose it's value isn't very rock n' roll, to me. I have heard Jack White say that every album ever pressed should always be available. I agree.
yup
"i was called white trash and a scumbag and when i politely asked them to leave they wouldn't"
Actually, this is the part of your post that I am most concerned with. This is your home? And you just let them stay after they called you names and refused to leave? Are you a sloppy host? Or were you being precisely sloppy?
[/quote]
I would not say that i'm a sloppy host, they just wanted to stay and make the situation worse. I think the major problem was how the girl in the conversation was completely oblivious to how facetious her boyfriend was becoming. How awkward the room started to feel for everyone was so very intense. Even people who call these two individuals close friends were like ummm yeah how much did they drink? Very Strange. I think the dude was looking for a fight and I'm not going to give that kind of behavior my attention so I lite up a cigar and sat with good people and rambled about things other then Jack White. I don't plan on seeing these people any time soon.
On another note, this conversation that shifted to reissues of Vinyl, I personally love them. I picked up the first two Flaming Lips on vinyl. Had never heard their first two albums, and i love the hell of them. Also i've always meant to pick up the Beatles box set but i never seem to have the money when i see a copy on vinyl. Tax return hopefully will be enough. But i still want a new guitar or amp. hmmm decisions.
On the topic of the Beatles, i propose two questions. Let it Be or Let It Be Naked? And Does Rocky Raccoon while listening to it with full intent make you happy, sad or are you indifferent?
Quote from: ffghtrs on Feb 21, 2013, 02:34 AM
On the topic of the Beatles, i propose two questions. Let it Be or Let It Be Naked? And Does Rocky Raccoon while listening to it with full intent make you happy, sad or are you indifferent?
Easy: Both. Either/or need not apply.
Quote from: ffghtrs on Feb 21, 2013, 02:34 AM
I would not say that i'm a sloppy host
no no no, sloppy is a compliment
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Feb 21, 2013, 09:56 AM
Quote from: ffghtrs on Feb 21, 2013, 02:34 AM
I would not say that i'm a sloppy host
no no no, sloppy is a compliment
And that's the thread, folks!