Jump to content

Share some music thread


Pine Barrens Mafia

Recommended Posts

For the Beatle-philes who forgot or maybe this is new...

 

This song, along with Only a Northern Song, was completed by early-June 1967 and held on an ice floe until release with the YS album.

 

It's still not determined who summoned up the feedback intro, most likely Paul as he was most into that of the three.

 

George wrote this as a celebration of LSD, but after his visit to San Fran shortly thereafter turned against that method of utopia and advocated TM instead, claiming the effects of both were essentially the same. (hmmmmmmmmmmm........)

 

A very underrated psychedelic blast, great lead and Hammond organ work, that would have been a lot more ahead of its time if released around Sgt Peppers instead of after the White Album.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pointing the finger at nobody in particular, here. But the longer this thread goes, the more I'm reminded of Sturgeon's Revelation (sometimes called Sturgeon's Law):

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law

 

Years before I ever heard of Sturgeon, I came to the same conclusion---but I wasn't as generous as Sturgeon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pointing the finger at nobody in particular, here. But the longer this thread goes, the more I'm reminded of Sturgeon's Revelation (sometimes called Sturgeon's Law):

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law

 

Years before I ever heard of Sturgeon, I came to the same conclusion---but I wasn't as generous as Sturgeon.

 

Just so I understand: your posts were the 10% (or less generous) and everyone elses's shared music was crap?

 

I thought I was done with that crap argument when my father passed away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just so I understand: your posts were the 10% (or less generous) and everyone elses's shared music was crap?

 

I thought I was done with that crap argument when my father passed away.

 

No, that's not what I meant. But it's a good guess, as I am a well known music "snob". I actually thought this was going fairly well--well, you know, for the musical tastes of the hoi polloi, the "common man"---you know, morons.

 

 

But as thing progressed, the masses showed their usual lack of taste. That's really all I'm saying.

 

And, BTW, this isn't an "old music vs new music" thing. I think 95% of just about everything is crap. And, yes, I know I'm an a$$hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, that's not what I meant. But it's a good guess, as I am a well known music "snob". I actually thought this was going fairly well--well, you know, for the musical tastes of the hoi polloi, the "common man"---you know, morons.

 

 

But as thing progressed, the masses showed their usual lack of taste. That's really all I'm saying.

 

And, BTW, this isn't an "old music vs new music" thing. I think 95% of just about everything is crap. And, yes, I know I'm an !@#$.

 

Thanks for the explanation but I think I understood you all along. As you said yourself, you're a music snob, if it's not to your taste its in the 95%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thanks for the explanation but I think I understood you all along. As you said yourself, you're a music snob, if it's not to your taste its in the 95%.

 

No, again, understandable, but wrong. There is plenty of music I know is of high quality---it just isn't for me. In those cases, I think I'd be better off if I could appreciate it, but I simply don't. I'm actually fairly self aware.

 

Keep in mind, for me, music is about that: MUSIC. Not image, genre, costumes, stage shows---all that extraneous stuff. In fact, most of that stuff turns me off, even to "quality" music. I suppose that's another thing I need to get over. But I tend to like music I think will be listened to for years. Not stuff that is "of the moment" and is likely to be forgotten in 10 years, if that helps. Quality music (even the stuff that isn't for me) stands the test of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, again, understandable, but wrong. There is plenty of music I know is of high quality---it just isn't for me. In those cases, I think I'd be better off if I could appreciate it, but I simply don't. I'm actually fairly self aware.

 

Keep in mind, for me, music is about that: MUSIC. Not image, genre, costumes, stage shows---all that extraneous stuff. In fact, most of that stuff turns me off, even to "quality" music. I suppose that's another thing I need to get over. But I tend to like music I think will be listened to for years. Not stuff that is "of the moment" and is likely to be forgotten in 10 years, if that helps. Quality music (even the stuff that isn't for me) stands the test of time.

 

I think you don't get yourself and the fish reference. You basically denigrated 95% of posters shared music choices based on the bolded.

 

Call me out if I missed it but I don't remember many (if any) "this band has a great stage show/image" comments.

 

WRT to the last bolded piece, what's the statute of limitations when we can determine a song is good enough to be considered "high quality"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...