From what I know of them, it's a little from column A, a little from column B. For the one forum, mostly A.Originally Posted by Brice
Maybe because they weren't intelligent enough to grasp it.Either that or too lazy to read the article.
From what I know of them, it's a little from column A, a little from column B. For the one forum, mostly A.Maybe because they weren't intelligent enough to grasp it.
Anyone listen to Xavier Rudd? A friend gave me a bunch of his cd's last week, and I honestly can not stop listening to them. I love them.
I didn't know if there were any other fans around here.
Only the gentle are ever really strong.
What kind of music is it Heather? The name sounds familiar.
hmmm, I don't really know how to describe it. It reminds me alot of John Butler Trio though.
Here's a video, it's probably not the best, but it's the first thing that came up.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Szkj_TCeo"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Szkj_TCeo[/ame]
Only the gentle are ever really strong.
Sweet. I love some dobro.I'll have to check some of his stuff out. Thanks for the heads up.
I think you'll enjoy his stuff Ryan. Check out White Moth first or Food in the Belly.
I've known about him for awhile now, because he's played with DMB in the past, but I just never got around to checking him out. Now I'm kicking myself for not listening to him sooner.
Only the gentle are ever really strong.
Then be sure to check out Jerry Douglas if you haven't already.Sweet. I love some dobro.
One of my favorite songs of the past 10 years:
Bebo Norman, Walk Down this Mountain
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sFG4ofzeVg"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sFG4ofzeVg[/ame]
All in due time. You know how I like to savor new artists like expensive wines.Then be sure to check out Jerry Douglas if you haven't already.Sweet. I love some dobro.
Indeed. Just making sure the finest vintage is on your radar, which in terms of living dobro players, is Jerry Douglas.
Thanks for the recommendation my friend. Duly noted.
I'm the same way, when I find someone new that I like I tend to listen to them non-stop for awhile before I move onto something else.All in due time. You know how I like to savor new artists like expensive wines.Then be sure to check out Jerry Douglas if you haven't already.Sweet. I love some dobro.
Only the gentle are ever really strong.
Jayson, here's the famous Some Devil video. I figured I'd post it here so others could see it. Enjoy!
What I particularly like about this version, is all the feeling and emotion that he sings the song with. It's wonderful when you see a musician loose their self in a song. It adds so much more to the music.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkdovGAyFeY&feature=channel_page"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkdovGAyFeY&feature=channel_page[/ame]
Only the gentle are ever really strong.
He's definitely into it. I can see why you like it so much.
Yes, I was going to pass on another version, but since you hadn't heard it before I thought you'd appreciate that one more.
Only the gentle are ever really strong.
Who could ask for anything more?
Article on the results of study which may suggest that humans are born hardwired to appreciate rhythm. I'd like to get a copy of the study itself. This may explain why Ella seems to really like it when I play the Ramones.
http://www.babycenter.com/204_babies...3:2&pe=2UvPvpa
Babies are born with rhythm, study says
Tue, Jan 27, 2009 (HealthDay News) — Babies who smile when they hear a Beatles classic may be more happy than gassy, suggest researchers who studied newborns and their capacity to detect rhythm.
"People can easily synchronize to music, because we have expectations about how the beat or tempo will proceed," said study author Henkjan Honing, a professor of music cognition at the University of Amsterdam. "We were very interested to see if we could show that newborns do this as well."
The researchers played rock music for newborn babies while monitoring their brain activity and found that even newborn infants were able to detect an off beat.
"Basically, we had these babies listening to a rock rhythm, which is very regular, and once in awhile, there is a missing downbeat," said Honing. "We can infer from this methodology that these babies have a high expectation of a beat on a moment which is completely silent."
The findings, which were expected to be published in this week's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, add to a growing body of evidence about babies' understanding of the world around them.
"It's evidence for the fact that babies have a central rhythm when they are born," Honing explained. "It's pre-language, it's very musical and very rhythmic."
"There are studies that show infants can distinguish between their language and a foreign language in utero, and they are probably using rhythm to do that," said Ann Senghas, an assistant professor of psychology at Barnard College of Columbia University. "The downbeat is like an edge finder, or the boundary of rhythm."
But some researchers are cautious about extrapolating that humans are wired for music specifically, preferring to focus on the larger communicative benefits.
"You don't have to conclude that infants are specifically wired for music, but you can say that infants are naturally wired to find language in the world," explained Senghas. "We pick up on it by music, and we enjoy having it because of music, but I don't think we're wired for music."
The researchers agreed that the study raises several important questions for future studies to answer.
"You could say that these mechanisms also support communication, so we're very interested in how these might affect parent-child interaction," Honing said.
"It would be interesting to see how languages are shaped by these processes," said Senghas. "When you have children who seem to not be picking up on language correctly, it gives us one more thing to know what typical children are like to see if something is wrong."
That's crazy awesome.
Big town's got its losers, small town's got its vices...
Apparently the Springsteen Super Bowl Halftime performance was pre-recorded except for Bruce's vocals.
This causes me to seriously question Bruce's integrity. This is a man who made his reputation on his legendary live performances. For someone like him to agree to miming a live performance while a tape played is quite upsetting. I expected better things from someone like him. I thought we were long past the era where artists were forced to pretend to play live when they appeared on television. Obviously some still do but I thought those were the ones whose music is primarily a studio creation and can't actually perform live, not a band that earned its way into the recording studio as a live act. So disappointing.
Secondly, it only further reinforces my previous criticisms of the performance itself. For the band's timing to be off on a pre-recorded performance is unacceptable. They could always record another take and get it right. Same goes for the mix. If it's pre-recorded the sound can be tweaked so the bass and drums can be heard clearly as opposed to what was aired last Sunday.
All in all, it makes me question a lot of previous opinions I had about Bruce.
--------
Did Bruce Springsteen's band pre-record their Super Bowl performance?
http://www.nme.com/news/bruce-spring...eet-band/42549
Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band pre-recorded the music that was played during their Super Bowl half-time performance on Sunday (February 1), according to one of the event's producers.
Apparently the only live element of the performance was the Boss' vocals, while the music was laid down ahead of time.
“The Super Bowl performances are all on tape,” producer of Super Bowl pre-game entertainment Hank Neuberger told the Chicago Tribune.
“There is no way you can set up a full band in five minutes with microphones, get all the settings right, and expect to get quality sound,” he said. “The Super Bowl has been doing that for years with virtually all the bands.”
The music for 's pre-game performance was also pre-recorded, as previously reported.
It doesnt make me question bruces integrity much cause hes still the boss and is still awesome, but it really makes clear what a commerciallized fiasco the halftime show is, and I dont think it was prerecorded I just think it was a sorry spectacle, if it was prerecorded it might have sounded better
if the worlds gonna end then let's get it over with, i got shit to do
Yeah, it doesn't make me question his integrity either. With the new album, it would have been hard to turn down an opportunity like the Super Bowl. I'm not surprised to find out the majority of the performances are pre recorded, and it might have been more the decision of his label than his personally. Professional Sports and everything are mutually exclusive for me because I hate professional sports- no offense Jayson. I just couldn't care less, whether its Tom Petty, Paul McCartney, or the Stones. If they're playing the super bowl, I'm not even interested enough to record the half time show. It'd be like going to a shitty festival and being disappointed they didn't play songs any differently from the radio. It was a publicity stunt and if anyone expects anything more, I think their expectations might be out of line.
With an act that's already established for 30 years, I don't think it's exactly a make or break opportunity for them. It's not like they needed the exposure or anything.
I'm not either. I am surprised Bruce agreed to it though and I would be immensely surprised if this far into the game the label tells Bruce anything. He's not some up and comer. He's made the label millions of dollars. He can pretty much decide what he will and won't do to promote his music at this point.
I think it would be significantly different if they actually played live in real time at said shitty festival. A festival gig is not a publicity stunt, it's a real gig. It wouldn't be the greatest live performance ever but it would be an authentic live performance, not dress-up and pretend.
I don't think too highly of the Super Bowl Halftime show as a gig either and I have certainly made fun of every band that has done it to date (except Prince because he put on a real performance and played that guitar like it was on fire). Still, as cheesy a gig as I thought the Super Bowl was, I still thought the performances were real. Now I know better.
It is just a publicity stunt as you've said, but that's precisely what makes me question his integrity. I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect an artist who built his career on his reputation as a live performer to know the difference between the two and choose accordingly.
Have you read anything by Bruce himself, Jayson? I wonder how much control he actually had. I realize that he's not an up and comer, but sometimes that means very little depending on the terms of recording contracts. I've been very surprised by some of the things I've read about Eric Clapton even this late in the game.
I think he has enough control to say no and that's what I'd expect of someone of his stature when asked to fake a live performance. I strongly doubt that at this point in his career a record company can force him to do anything he doesn't agree to himself. I'm sure he and his legal team are savvy enough to not have things in the contract that Bruce would be opposed to doing. My mistake was apparently in calculating those things Bruce "would be opposed to doing" to include a fake live performance. Lesson learned on that one.
The fact of the matter is, whatever the reasons are, he did it. Short of a literal gun to the head, I can't envision a reason it's acceptable for an artist of his reputation to present a synch-up performance as a genuine live one. I expected a bit more from him than I do someone like Ashlee Simpson. Lesson learned there as well.
Ashlee Simpson is the best thing to happen to music since the Beatles.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
