Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wwittman]

John Ivan wrote on Sat, 20 January 2007 15:35

...l. I would say, I'll leave it up to him to decide whether drug use is generally a good idea or not regarding making those records. Also, he really did co-write most of that music. ....

oh PLEASE.

[John Ivan]

wwittman wrote on Sat, 20 January 2007 18:04

John Ivan wrote on Sat, 20 January 2007 15:35 ...l. I would say, I'll leave it up to him to decide whether drug use is generally a good idea or not regarding making those records. Also, he really did co-write most of that music. .... oh PLEASE.

  What!!?? He shaped a BUNCH of that stuff with counter melody , big ass arranging, edits and so on..If there has ever been a producer who can be called one of the writers, I would say he's it.

By the way, This really is one of may very favorite bands of all time and I understand that John and Paul are great writers but George M had a LOT to do with how that stuff moved us. I think..

Ivan...................

[wwittman]

I think great arrangeing does NOT equal songwriting, sorry.

he didn't WRITE the songs.

and without their vision and pushing the limits all the time, it's unlikely he would have even tried most of the the things they ended up doing.


but that's neiter here nor there.

either way, his opinion of their drug use is only that.. his opinion.

The enourmously MORE creative elements there, by the hugest possible margin (we're talking about THE BEATLES here) both used drugs and apparently it didn't lessen their ability to do good work.

if they would have done BETTER without drugs, that's truly frightening to contemplate.

I don't think drugs made The Beatles... but I also don't think they hurt them.
which is my point.

[John Ivan]

Ya know, looking back on what I wrote, I except that he did not in fact write those tunes. We are indeed talking about the Beatles here and as you know, I'm a HUGE fan of their work.. There have been to many cases in my life of me ending up writing things for people who used me to arrange and produce and I should not be so short sighted about it and project this idea so easily.. . Point taken..

As for the Drugs, it's worth pointing out that from what I can gather from reading, they were not heavy abusers of drugs.. Hey, I spent many years smoking weed. I tripped my ass off too and there is no doubt that it either allowed things into my mind that simply were not there before,or, allowed things that were there to come forward. In the end however, I have found ways to do this with my mind and soul without getting high and It nags at me that perhaps I could have gotten here without doing so much damage.. I'm in pretty good shape when I consider what I put myself through. Actually Being alive is dumb ass LUCK in my case..

I just think most people would be better off if they didn't do this to their Mind and Body. I also strongly believe that one should be able to grow and smoke what ever they please. I also think the WAR on drug's as it's being waged from a "Moral" point of view is none of the governments business. My blood is my blood and if I want to dump bad shit in my blood then, that would be my problem, until I DO SOMETHING that makes it someone else's problem, at which point you can Lock me up..

It's the same old shit, get caught with a trunk full of weed, go to prison for 15 years, Knock off a drug store with a hand gun, go to prison for 2? 5? Maybe...

Sorry for the OT post..

Ivan..........................

[maxim]

ivan wrote:

"without doing so much damage.."

how much damage from weed and tripping?

you can't exactly kill yourself with those things

the only organ that may have suffered is your lungs, but it's nothing compared to what 20 cigarettes a day can do to your alveoli

if you have stopped inhaling smoke, your cilia can regenerate (albeit at a slower rate than when you were younger)

[maxdimario]

wwittman wrote on Sat, 20 January 2007 05:05

I think it's a fool's errand to compare a musician's work at age 25 to his work at age 60 and draw the conclusion that drugs, or changes in his drug use one way or the other, are the major reason for the differences. One might likely say that the 60 yr old McCartney is less edgy as a musician than the 25 yr old, but he's used marijuana all along (by most accounts) yet one might also likely say that the 60 yr old Clapton, who gave up his younger day drug use, is ALSO less edgy than his 25 yr old self. drugs have nothing to do with either.

..could be.

I have met non-druggies who stopped creating after they had their peak years..

many artists did their best work under the influence..

maybe you're right.

[rnicklaus]

I believe Musicianship, Engineering and Weed opened for Hamilton, Joe Frank and Dennison, after Reynolds left and the band had peaked.

[maxdimario]

Bob Marley

[John Ivan]

maxim wrote on Sun, 21 January 2007 02:47

ivan wrote: "without doing so much damage.." how much damage from weed and tripping? you can't exactly kill yourself with those things the only organ that may have suffered is your lungs, but it's nothing compared to what 20 cigarettes a day can do to your alveoli if you have stopped inhaling smoke, your cilia can regenerate (albeit at a slower rate than when you were younger)

Well, I should be clear , I was drinking, I did Blow for a while, I didn't sleep a lot, blah blah blah, we've all heard it before and so on..

I feel better, I can think, I'm a better player, writer, engineer, dad and so on..

Perhaps this is not for everyone..

Ivan....................

[maxim]

i just wish people wouldn't dump all the "drugs" in one basket (unless one goes shopping in one of those dutch "pharmacies")

alcohol and cocaine are very different beasts to marijuana and lsd

nicotine, opiates(inc heroin, morphine and codeine) and alcohol can and will ruin your life (even if you may appear to function on the outside)

amphetamines (inc speed, cocaine, ice, ecstacy, pseudoephedrine etc) can screw you up for a while if you take them regularly, but are, relatively, harmless if used in the short term

caffeine and marijuana are used regularly by a LOT of people without any significant side-effects to long term health (other than the smoke inhalation issues mentioned earlier)

lsd, mescaline, psilocybin, ketamine and other hallucinogens are "single-use" drugs and are not "habit-forming"

[RMoore]

 

wwittman wrote on Sat, 20 January 2007 05:05

I think it's a fool's errand to compare a musician's work at age 25 to his work at age 60 and draw the conclusion that drugs, or changes in his drug use one way or the other, are the major reason for the differences.

I think people always fail to consider far more important factors like what are the differences in concentration, focus and distraction going on when people are say over 30 as compared to people coming up with their peak ideas in their 20's..

Obviously things like work, career, family, kids, wives etc are going to be part of the equation ...

people just have less time to daydream and strum upon their guitars..

Free time for unencumbered youngsters to be able to think, work hard with no distraction, hone one's craft has more influence on the resulting creative outpourings IMO than any 'mind expanding' drugs

[maxim]

i think, excitement anh fresh outlook have a lot to with it

but don't give up just coz you hit 30!

when you get over the hill, there's always another hill waiting...

[maxdimario]

when you're young you never judge some new experience, you just live it..no matter how stupid it may seem from the outside.

as you get older you tend to judge everything based on your experiences and fears and you lose the ability to experience mistery and awe like when you are younger..

I think that has a lot to do with some of the creativity going out the window.

[rnicklaus]

Sony Bono adds his thoughts on this subject via this film clip (that doesn't quite make it to the end)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9rXWj2TITs&eurl=

[John Ivan]

         He sounds so STONED!!  

{sorry}

Ivan...............