Print

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

[bblackwood]

Gaucho is nice on vinyl, I'll give it that...

[halljams]

David Schober wrote on Wed, 20 April 2005 13:05

I do find it a bit amusing that some feel the need to jump in and pile on about how much they don't like it.  There are a lot worse albums that have been made.  Those kinds of comments feel a bit like low-brow snobbery to me.

I can understand that the music on say, Gaucho, is approached in the opposite way that some may like to make music, but in all maturity, and in keeping with a mindset of a student of the art of music and recording , how can anyone disregard it merits, i mean really.

[seriousfun]

David Schober wrote on Wed, 20 April 2005 05:05

...   The boys did borrow from time to time.  There's an old Blue Note recording of a Horace Silver tune called Song For My Father they lifted.  Note for note the intro is exactly the same on Rikki Don't Lose That Number.  Still, they made a song out of it that's nothing like the orginal.  Who knows which came first, the borrowed/stolen riff, or the actual song? ....

If you hear the intro to "Song..." and the intro to "Rikki..." on the radio (or any non-critical delivery), I guarantee that you will not know which is which. The character of the recordings are obvious with critical listenting on a high-quality system, but SD surely meant to copy "Song..." as closely as possible.

Quodlibet.

I suppose that today, SD could just sample the recording, but then again they (their record company) were the first to sue for that. The quoting was obviously meant to evoke a mood, but beyond that, their intent is anybody's guess.

[jimmyjazz]

RKrizman wrote on Wed, 20 April 2005 00:17

wwittman wrote on Tue, 19 April 2005 22:29 So Ashlee Simpson's lack of singing ability is her strength? I think both she and Cindy Lauper could be poster girls for the statement that "style is a function of your limitations".  There are lots of reasons to despise "Girls" other than for it's ticky-tack highhat sequence.

Uhhh, WTF?  How you can draw any parallels between Cyndi Lauper and Ashlee Simpson is beyond me.  It's like trying to compare Bruce Springsteen and John Mayer.  Sure, they both write songs, but . . .

[RKrizman]

Come on, everybody, what's up with the Cindi Lauper fetish?  Are you guys kidding?
I mean, I can still picture her standing there in her spangled leather poncho, with the studs that match her eyes........oh,.... wait a minute......

-R

[RKrizman]

[quote title=jimmyjazz wrote on Wed, 20 April 2005 11:21]

RKrizman wrote on Wed, 20 April 2005 00:17

wwittman wrote on Tue, 19 April 2005 22:29 So Ashlee Simpson's lack of singing ability is her strength? Uhhh, WTF?  How you can draw any parallels between Cyndi Lauper and Ashlee Simpson is beyond me.

They're both just girls who want to have fun.

-R

[J.J. Blair]

David, I remember Gary Katz telling that story at Jeff's funeral.  Funny, I almost posted that myself.

On a side note, half of the Tribute To Jeff record was tracked here, and if I recall, "Babylon Sisters" was one of the tracks they cut.  I think every single Yo Cat plays on that thing, which isn't necessarily a good thing.  To make it worse, Creatchy would always hit the talk back button and say, "Yo, cats."  

Swear to God.

[David Schober]

J.J.,

I heard some of that tribute album.  While Jeff was a guy worthy of tribute, I thought that album was bad idea from the start.  I mean after all, if you want to do a tribute to Ray Charles, the worst thing to do would be to have some folks go out and try to sing his tunes.  

I can see how the "yo cat" vibe, which Jeff hated and he wasn't, could show up.

[jimmyjazz]

RKrizman wrote on Wed, 20 April 2005 11:49

Come on, everybody, what's up with the Cindi Lauper fetish?

I've been a huge fan of hers from Day One.  I think she is unique, engaging, and yes, extremely talented.  Your mileage may vary.

[J.J. Blair]

David, there are so many things wrong about that record, I wouldn't know to start.

[wwittman]

Without meaning to hijack the thread...
Joan is incredibly  easy to record.. she just sounds LIKE Joan on any good mic.

but I don't care if you think EVERYTHING I do is utter crap... doesn't negate my OPINION about Steely Dan.

It's not a sound OR a musical ethic that *I* find appealing.

If you do that's great. Lots of people do.
Just as lots of people love Cyndi.

Doesn't mean you can't hate it.

I happily acknowledge what talented songwriters Becker and Fagen are.. it's their RECORDS I dislike.

And likewise if you don't get what an amazing SINGER Cyndi is, well... you don't know great singers then.
no matter what YOU think about her records.

But Steely Dan is a kind of audio sacred cow... so many people seem to love that recording approach that it becomes almost heresy to say one doesn't like it.

Yet it's also not hard to find LOTS of people who DON'T like it.
Especially rockers, or thsoe predisposed in a more rock direction.

Flame away if you like, but to ME, Supertramp is everything Steely Dan could have been if they had an ounce of real rock in them. (especially the Ken Scott records, Crime Of The Century and Crisis What Crisis).

Steely Dan is Supertramp after the castration.
Musically, but ESPECIALLY in the recording.
Another fairly sterile and cerebral band, but much more of, first off, a real BAND (instead of a long jingle date with high priced studio guys) and, mostly, INCREDIBLY good recording.
If I have a personal WOW recording of THAT type (as oposed to a full on rock band) it's Crime Of The Century.


but it's funny... people can even dis The Beatles without drawing the kind of personal hatred and attack that words criticising Steely Dan do.
Overly sensitive?
Insecure? {g}

[J.J. Blair]

William, I find that the first two records have a rawness that the rest lack.  Maybe it's because they were still actually a band at that point.  I'm surprised that you feel that way about those two records, if in fact you do.  Hell, "Boston Rag" is practically an homage to Hot Rats.

Gaucho, or as they should have titled it - Gotcha!, is kind of like the difference between early Roxy Music and then Avalon, except Avalon is far more interesting than Gaucho.  It just doesn't sound like Roxy Music to me.  It's like what happened to Sting solo compared to the Police, but without the wine coolers and the lame yuppies.



I always say, Steely Dan were great for their songs, not for the mindblowing guitar solos (which I love) or the pristine recording.  If any of us ever write a song as amazing as "Deacon Blues", we should be so fortunate.

[gtoledo3]

I had never thought about it like that, but the Supertramp comment is pretty accurate I think.

[RKrizman]

wwittman wrote on Wed, 20 April 2005 20:09

but it's funny... people can even dis The Beatles without drawing the kind of personal hatred and attack that words criticising Steely Dan do. Overly sensitive? Insecure? {g}

I don't see anyone here getting their nose out of joint about Steely Dan.  It is what it is.  They're not rockers, they're their own unique thang.  So be it.  

It took "Time after Time" to show me what a great singer Cindi Lauper was.  Unfortunately, with her first hit she came off like a novelty act, which wasn't helped by the stupid video.  All of which has nothing to do with this thread.

I think Joan Osbourne also was slightly miscast in her big hit song.  Isn't she really more of a blues belter?  I think both of these singers were sort of fodder for someone else's concept.

Was Gaucho really a digital recording?

-R

[halljams]

wwittman wrote on Thu, 21 April 2005 01:09

Overly sensitive?

Well perhaps more sensitive the subtler things that SD payed attention to. Musically i think people have scientific musical minds, and also they have emotional musical minds. Having both working and lubed up just allows for more pleasure baby.