|
|
 |
|
Poster:
|
Capt. Cook |
Date:
|
October 20, 2009 09:37:00pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
1. I'm going the whole Grateful Dead Movie and the unfortunate Steal Your Face (quickly dubbed Steal Your Money by the press). Given the amount of time and money and energy shoved into this mess... Jerry must have realized the boon-doggle onslaught. Band caught running at half speed... No new songs... Ho boy, the movie put me to sleep the first time I saw it.
2. The Sphinx Rules (Kinda like the Joba Rules) Meaning too much of a good thing is too much fun. 1978 and the band is dragging its heals. Bored? Nice time to try an across the world roadtrip. Europe 72 this is not. The recording is crap. The playing is lazy.
Camels 1. GD 0
3. Closing of Winterland 1978. The real fun in this whole night is the wonderous drums into Not Fade Away featuring Matt Kelly amoung many others. The Dark Star is tepid and out-of-tune and really only the Wharf Rat which is pure spirit shines. Over-blown and wasted.
Okay. I looking for suggestions for the next two.
|
Poster:
|
jerlouvis |
Date:
|
October 20, 2009 10:12:48pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
1/22/78 Jerry plays a few licks from a bad movie soundtrack and people lose their minds.A good Jack Straw decent Other One and hot U.S. Blues does not deserve all the hoopla this show receives.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 05:42:43am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Dire? Are you gonna take this sleeping like a dog?
|
Poster:
|
Yankee9 |
Date:
|
October 20, 2009 10:34:35pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
I definitely agree with your take on 12/31/78 show. The first two sets are above average, and the thrid set is a big rush job. Overall a drastically overrated show.
Here's a couple more:
5/10 and 5/11/78: Great SBD recording but booooring IMHO. Also, I never understood what the big deal was about 5/6/81. Another mediocre show that gets a ton of publicity when there are better shows all around it.
|
Poster:
|
fenario80 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:42:09am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Oh, boy! I'm with you 100% on 5-6-81. I was at those shows, and would have definitely picked 5-8 if it had been up to me ... Dick loved the big "Caution" jam, I think is what it comes down to.
As for 5-10 and 5-11-78 - I have great affection for 5-11, and I think that a lot of people do, too, both because very high quality copies of it were in circulation forever, and because it's a rare opportunity to hear the boys cutting up. And I think that they included the very clean and polished, but boring, 5-10 in the DP for contrast, just to show just how unusual 5-11 really is.
Peace out!
|
Poster:
|
deadpolitics |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 04:03:58pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
5/11/78 Springfield is a pretty darn good show. It is rumored that the band consumed mescaline for it, so perhaps that is why it is well promoted in the community - thusly making it a candidate for being over-rated.
yet, it is a pretty hot show. lots of energy from the band on the opening CR&S and BIODTL. Slows down with a nice FOTD and LLR has a nice crescendo ending. Things mellow out for a while until the set ending LL>Supp which is quite snappy. Scarlet>Fire is nice with everybody definitely feeling the mescaline (?) by the last vocal jam in FOTM - high energy. Dancin' has Bobby coming in early and cracking everyone up for the rest of the song. Not Fade Away has some really nice riffs from Jerry that I haven't heard elsewhere and Stella Blue, while not being perfect, has a really emotional solo from Jerry.
I have a really nice AUD of this on my iPod:
http://www.archive.org/details/gd78-05-11.aud.vernon.6317.sbeok.shnfHmm, I guess this over-rated stuff is all relative depending on whether you consistently listen to a certain show, thus giving it a well earned position of fantastic when there are thousands of others out there.
|
Poster:
|
Cliff Hucker |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 01:36:14am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
1977
The entire year!
No extended free-form jamming
Cookie cutter popout shows, youve heard one, youve heard em' all
Overrated!
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 05:41:12am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Ha--probably cause I was there...I defn pref'd 75, although only three shows for me that yr...
|
Poster:
|
dogsinapile! |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 06:15:23am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Totally agree. I have never understood everyone's fascination with 1977. As you said - no extended jamming, similar setlists, etc. I like some of the mid to late 80's stuff better. At least they were stretching out sometimes and mixing up the setlists more, in spite of the other issues they had at the time (drug use, vocal decline, etc.)
Give me a good ol' 73 or 74 show anytime.
But this is what makes the Grateful Dead so great - one man's trash is another mans treasure.
|
Poster:
|
Lou Davenport |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 07:12:18am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
In defense of Spring 1977, Jerry's guitar tone was about as beautiful as it ever got, and his solos were both harmonically adventuresome and largely successful. The SBDs had a rich, fat sound, too.
|
Poster:
|
direwolf0701 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 07:18:23am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
i'm with you on that thought Lou - cookie cutter setlists be damned - they sounded DAMNED fine!!
|
Poster:
|
ganges |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 08:21:21am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
I'm with both of you!!! 77 is my favourite year, but I have to say I always felt in the minority here, which is perfectly fine! GC might support us here, too...
|
Poster:
|
grendelschoice |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 08:25:12am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Well, it's hard for me to imagine why anyone wouldn't automatically regale 1977 as BY FAR the band's greatest year.
But that's what makes horse races. I'll just repeat at the risk of redundancy ;-) that the reasons I think '77 is the best is that
1) The sets, while largely similar, are played pristinely with few if any of the verbal and musical flubs that marked the band's earliest years, and certainly their 80's-90's period.
2) The vocals are not yet shot a la the 80's and especially Jerry in the '90's.
3) The mastery of material they've been playing for years up til this point now allows them to open up the jams on songs that before were pretty tame (listen to any pre-1977 Jack Straw, then cue up a '77 and try telling me the song hasn't become far more blazing now.)
4) Terrapin Freaking Station material. 'Nuff said.
5) Cliff, you're one of my favorite forum-ites...but dude, I want to give you the Python fish-slapping dance every time I hear you says there was no extended jamming in '77. JUST NOT TRUE. Go RIGHT NOW to 5/26/77 and listen to the 20+ minute monster jam on NFA. Go NOW to to the OTHER ONE from the Winterland June run and tell me that's not an extended jam project. Oh, and BTW, I'll take the jamming from 10/29/77 on EYES and LIG and ESTIMATED --over some formless feedback nonsense of 45 minutes from some lame '73 show any old day, thank you. Length does NOT equal quality (a way of saying 'size doesn't matter', I suppose ;-)
The jamming in '77 was just more laser-focused. You get more bang for your buck.
Also, they rocked the house in '77: SAMSON, DEAL, PASSENGER, TOO, TRUCKIN', 1/2 STEP...all were just blazing rock animals that year. Overrated? I say not, sir!
Now, what IS overrated?
OK, here are my votes:
6/30/85. Everyone raves about the Shakedown. Why?
5/6/81. Agree: don't see why this was a Dix Pick. Pretty decent but not especially great '81 show. 5/1/81 is WAY better.
2/15/73: Why this is one of the most downloaded shows ever is beyond me. 6/22/73 is a million times better, as is almost any late-year '73 show when Donna was on hiatus having her kid. Oh, and while we're on the subject: don't get me started on '77 set lists being similar when virtually EVERY 1973 show looks exactly on paper like the one before it. Even the Darkstars are ridiculously predictable. (Nice jazzy jamming for 20 minutes followed by ten minutes of ugly noise into something nice on the other end.)
WALL OF SOUND and 1974 in general: Ugh. Vocals sound tinny. Sound overall is high treble; Phil suffers. Some nice exceptions thrown in (6/14, 2/22 and 2/24 among them) and VERY GOOD China>Riders this year, but overall a pretty un-even and I believe overrated year. No wonder they needed a break when it ended.
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 08:54:52am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
good points on '77 but even i have say that 10-29-77 is overrated. You agree i am sure.
Interestingly 2 of the 3 exceptions that you point to for '74 were not actually full wall of sound shows (the ones in Feb) so it is consistent with why you don't like the year as much.
2-15-73 downloads is a classic example of the problem with equating downloads with popularity. When this place was basically unattended for 2 years, that show was the "featured show" in the box in the upper left hand corner of the home page. Views count as downloads so I am sure that every time someone new came to the site, they clicked the link. Many of those "top downloaded shows" were featured at one point during the last 4 years.
Now 9-19-70 has occupied that feature box for months, although this is not due to lack of site upkeep it is by order of the Prime Minister who will not allow them to change it.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 09:16:05am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Bwaaahhhaaaa!
Pardon that emotional outburst. Wait til I replace it with 12-29-68 next year...
Speaking of posts that go ignored, as you alluded to with one of yours (of course, I forgot which of the many), I mentioned the biz about some 70s shows not sounding as "intense" as they did live, and though we discussed this many times in the past, no one responded yesterday...do you think the point you made about 74 shows/wall contribute to this "70s shows often suck recording wise" (over-stated for effect!)? One of my consistent probs with Oct 74, SYF album, is the low intensity sound, IMHO...flat, uninspired--blah (again, the recording moreso than the playing).
Or is my whole critique of the sound of 70s DPs, SBDs, etc., just another example of my myopia/early era bias? Does Grendel say "WTF is Tell on about now?! I think 5-7-77 is as well recorded and intense sounding as any 71 show!"
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 09:41:37am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
I actually asked about WoS boards and why they sound the way they do once and the post was not ignored. I thought it might be because of the mics they were using to eliminate feedback from having them in front of the speakers resulted in a change in the ambient sound. Not sure I ever got an answer but I do think they sound different. By contrast there are some '77 boards that, to my ears, sound incredible. I assumed that some of this was because of the types of halls they were playing that year and the Mosque show always comes immediately to mind. Although I am not a musician I don't think you can discount the effects of the changes in equipment that occurred from the end of your era. Jerry switched guitars going into '72 and it did change his sound. For me songs like Bertha and Loser have always sounded better in '71 because of the raw sound of Jerry's guitar. I don't think this is because of the quality of his playing, just the sound that quality produced coming through different guitars. Although I think Jerry took that sweet sounding guitar in '77 and altered his solo in Bertha to something that sounded pretty nice. I just like the '71 sound better for those songs. Bobby changed his playing and his equipment after the break in fashion that also could be perceived as having less intensity. As has been mentioned here on many occasions, the band also played with the tempo of songs through the years and out of the break it seems that more slowed down than sped up. That said, I loathe '77 versions of Saint Stephen.
I don't think this makes one era quantitatively better or worse, however it can easily explain why some one like you would prefer one era while Grendelschoice could prefer another. Which brings me back to my problem with discussions of things being overrated (you knew i would get here at some point, we need Earl to insert his beating a dead horse emoticon). I think it gets confused too easily with personal preference.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 11:21:54am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Oh yeah--I think this is a big issue...Jerry's tone is the one thing I have harped on continually (hmmm--ignoring your posts must have led to me thinking I was the only talking about this fact...harumph).
But, I would respectfully disagree a bit on what the inference from that is...for example, stretching your point, one could say, "WT is off base cause he doesn't like Jerry's singing in 95! It just changed!" and we would counter with, "no, it was degraded" and I think, have a point. Those that argue it is all taste have actually countered that counter with "but a degraded voice sounds better for his songs!" to which I counter "pffftt!"
Anyhow, another good day, and another exchange that leaves us a little closer to understanding why we sometimes get something out of not ignoring one another's posts...
|
Poster:
|
robthewordsmith |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 12:23:25pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
12-29-68 - is that supposed to be good or something? I just listened to it and thought it was a bit, you know, blah.
What's up with that then, eh?
|
Poster:
|
Cliff Hucker |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:24:28am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
I agree with you entirely Lou!
|
Poster:
|
TOOTMO |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 07:37:59am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
"Cookie cutter popout shows, youve heard one, youve heard em' all"
If we're talking about setlists, can't that be said for most years? I don't think there was any great variety going on in 68 or 69, though I could be mistaken. I would think that most Forumites could guess within a year or so of when a show was played just by looking at the setlist.
In my opinion, the most varied setlists of all time came in 2009.
TOOTMO
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:06:54am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Oh yeah, we early era types do put up with some very consistent set-lists for sure...and given the long "suites" sometimes shows might only have 8-12 songs total, whereas latter eras generally might have 20-25 songs total...?
Of course, we do get the complex shows of 70 in which they mix in multi song acoustic sets with electric jam sets, and that was variable in multiple respects.
But, still--69 has some shows that are the same night in and night out, like the Fillmore Boxed set reveals.
|
Poster:
|
TOOTMO |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:12:21am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
"Of course, we do get the complex shows of 70 in which they mix in multi song acoustic sets with electric jam sets, and that was variable in multiple respects."
PM Tell, I concur completely.
I think the biggest culprit contributing to the cookie cutter feel of the later shows was the drums/space DMZ between "2nd set, pre-drums" and "2nd set,post-drums". It just chops the show up into such smaller pieces. And, once certain songs to took up residence in a certain quarter of the show, they very rarely strayed from their slot. This creates such a degree of predictability that even stoned hippies can call a song and sometimes be correct!
TOOTMO
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 11:20:14am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
The drums space section was my chief gripe at the time...though I go on about vocal degradation, Jerry deterioration, Hunter lapses in new material, etc., for post 75 or so, it was defn drums/space that bored the crap outta me at the time, and esp evident when I was trying to break a newbie in to the whole experience.
They defn seemed to have more of the "mailing it in" potential as Jerry used more and more, as Earl and others have noted, from about 78 on...Just watching Jerry hop around stage during JBGoode at Fillmore Closing DVD, big smile on his face, looking utterly alive, brought the contrast home to me with what I saw in 78-82 in which he often appeared about as lifeless as one of CLIFF's hour old decked fish...sometimes even the same open mouthed blank stare.
|
Poster:
|
DeadRed1971 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 03:53:28am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
2009 was the first time in like forever that the band or any other incarnation of it had locked themselves away for weeks at a time rehearsing for upwards of 10-12 hours a day working on their live stuff. Think that would've happened when the fat man was still around?
You would've never heard Touch of Grey AND New Potato Caboose in the same show with Jerry ever.
|
Poster:
|
jerrys beard |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 12:02:21pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Bias up front that I gravitate to 68 - 72 and am trying to reach further. But 77, while I appreciate the musicianship and find myself head bobbing, just doesn't have the spark that I find in those earlier years. I know it is suppose to be the Golden Age of the GD and all, but seems rather formulaic as noted in other posts. 78 is even worse, very uneven performances although some of the drumming that they brought back from Egypt had a good influence on the band, in my opinion.
At the risk of being ad nauseum, it comes down to opinion, and my tastes run to extended jams, particularly of a somewhat manic and psychedelic nature and you just can't beat Dark Star>St Stephen>The Other One or a great Caution or Viola Lee Blues.
Someone mentioned the variety of the Dead 09 tour and was fortunate enough to be backstage for the Forum show. The boys were pumped and gave it their all. Great setlist, very adventerous and well played, again my opinion After the show I spent about 30 min talking with Mickey about radio astronomy (I'm a geek) and he spent the entire time wiping the sweat off with a towel. He was completely spent. It is that kind of energy that I hear in 68 - 72, but finding missing in some of the later years. Even Jerry said they dropped a lot of songs because they were too hard to play. I would rather hear them take the chance and fail, with the possibility of being transcendent, then sticking to a "safer" setlist with fewer chances for failure, but also fewer chances for transcendency.
Probably a few hundred examples showing why my emotional analysis is dead wrong, which is why I usually try to lurk in the background, leaving posts to much more intelligent individuals.
|
Poster:
|
Cliff Hucker |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 05:16:38am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Well you sound much more intelligent than the folks who are convinced the band peaked in 1984 (probably because that was when they were attending shows)
Hope you will continue to contribute here...
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 06:02:28am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Hey JB--I'll echo the Fisherman and say outstanding! Of course, I agree completely...
|
Poster:
|
jerrys beard |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 06:10:03am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Thank you gentlemen...perhaps I shall stick my toes in the water more often.
|
Poster:
|
billydlions |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 04:52:39am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
6-10-73. Why is this show so popular? A few songs with very little jamming from the Allman Bros and it becomes the most downloaded show (at one time anyway). It's a very average show in an average year.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 05:42:17am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
I hope JOTS doesn't find this...
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 06:18:32am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
i had the exact same thought!
|
Poster:
|
dogsinapile! |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 06:23:59am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
1. 5-8-77: Just another 77 show. Well played, but so were the other shows at this time.
2. Any show with Branford, especially 3-29-90. Other than the Eyes that reminded them just how good that song could be, I felt Branford to be a distraction, much like Hornsby became later on.
3. 1-22-78: Already mentioned, but why does a little tease from an overrated movie warrant all this attention. Rest of the show is par for the course given the time period.
4. Any New Year's show, especially 1978. Usually the definition of anti-climatic.
5. ????
|
Poster:
|
Dudley Dead |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 07:10:49am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
Sometimes I feel the late Brent, "Post coma," shows get more praise than they deserve. I think the Cornell show is overrated, but only because , as you said , the surrounding shows may be just as good or close; the same could be said for Veneta .
I feel the 12/31/78 show is overrated, (boy do they look tired)!, I was at the UCLA show the night before and it MIGHT be better played on a whole, no Dark Star ( the NYs one seems a bit tepid, tentative, to me ) or Other One , but we did get Hamza and pals !
And , yes , Egypt is not as bad as it's detractors say, but nothing that great either . A big missed opportunity ,
Oh, and beware any review that describes an 80's show as being "high energy," usually means rushed , tempos, no real transitions, breathless "artificial energy" rhythms . That sort of "fake excitement, from aging rock stars ," sort of feel , you sometimes get .
|
Poster:
|
Death&Mercy |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 06:51:03am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
I have to make 78-12-31 the most overrated. I just find the show to be ragged. Not a huge fan of the Egypt stuff either, but I'm not sure I'd call that overrated. Most consider the playing to be average at best. And the GD movie run is also overrated imo. In fact, I was turned off by 74 after spending a lot of time listening to those shows. Luckily, I discovered the brilliant June shows soon after. 1977? I agree, overrated. The band is tight, and Jerry is unbelievable at times, but I just don't find the spark in the music. I don't like the sound quality on a lot of the tapes from the year either. Sounds like they're playing 200 yards away from you, and the drummers just muddle things up. And agree with Billy D, I'm not a big fan of 73-06-10. That tour marks the end of vocal Dead as far as I'm concerned, and, for the most part, they just don't tear it up like they do in the fall.
But 1978-01-22? Always one of my favorite shows. 1st set tunes Jed, TMNS, and Jack Straw are in the best ever conversation, and the rest are well played. Was never a huge fan of the 77-78 Bertha > Good Lovins, but the Terrapin is well played. And the post-drums segment is very strong imo. TOO > St Steve > NFA > A&A - all jammed out well. Jerry's voice is shot throughout, but he just rips up so many tunes here ... I love it.
Can't call any 90's show overrated because they just get bashed so often. 90-03-29 never sounded that great to me though - just too flat.
Good thread folks.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 07:35:49am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: mid 70s recordings are flat, uninspired...blah |
You know, the poor sound quality of tapes and then DPs and so on, of the 70s, really put me off...76-79, at least of what I've heard, often sound as you described...none of the intensity comes thru...I never could figure out if it's the mix, or the levels or the playing, but the overall feel is like you were recording it with ear plugs, from within your ear or some such silly analogy, as you indicate.
We talked about this alot when I first showed up here yrs ago, and most folks agreed...it also is obvious that Jerry's style has changed from my early era, and that is part of it, but it is something bigger than that, and pervasive.
Again, this is not a critique of the playing and singing that I don't esp care for, but the quality of tapes and DPs which indicate to me it was how the shows were being recorded...75 shows sound a bit better, but nothing like 71 shows....
|
Poster:
|
Death&Mercy |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 07:43:19am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: mid 70s recordings are flat, uninspired...blah |
In a lot of those 71 tapes, it seems as though Jerry is plugged directly into your brain. A wonderful listening experience. I just don't get that in the 77 recordings.
|
Poster:
|
DeadRed1971 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 03:30:58am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: mid 70s recordings are flat, uninspired...blah |
One would be hard pressed to find a year in which so many new, and mostly previously unrecorded, songs not only debuted in the live show (Capitol Theater in Feb., Keith's first shows in Oct.), but the band made those songs sound perfect right out of the box. I chalk it up to the single drummer theory. Some of you die-hard purists will say the 1971 songs led to the band becoming more pop-oriented and uninspiring, and lacking the 25 minute Dark Star's and such, but to each his own I guess.
|
Poster:
|
DeadRed1971 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 03:44:21am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: mid 70s recordings are flat, uninspired...blah |
That, and I must defend the year of my birth.
|
Poster:
|
cosmic charlie dupree |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 04:58:15pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: mid 70s recordings are flat, uninspired...blah |
My birth year as well, and I dig 1971 big time! The sound is so fresh, vibrant, fat.... crisp. They're still youthful sounding, whereas even by 1974 they seem to have lost alot of that irreplaceable youthful vigor.
Meanwhile, you & I were crying for our milk.
|
Poster:
|
cosmic charlie dupree |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 07:04:58pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: mid 70s recordings are flat, uninspired...blah |
Thanks for the pointer - i I've been meaning to discover another '71 gem, and this is a new one to me.
|
Poster:
|
billydlions |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 07:37:06pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: mid 70s recordings are flat, uninspired...blah |
Is it just me or is April 1971 one of the best months ever? This must be Pig's peak with the band. 4/8, 4/13, 4/17, the Fillmore shows, it just doesn't get any better (and I'm an 80's guy saying this)
|
Poster:
|
SkyDawg |
Date:
|
October 23, 2009 12:38:13am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: mid 70s recordings are flat, uninspired...blah |
April was great, but so was November and December of '71. December just SHINES! I don't think they played an off show during the whole month! From Boston, to Madison Square Garden, the Fox Theatre in St. Louis, the Hill Auditorium in Ann Arbor and Winterland in San Francisco you will find a treasure trove of shows. A VERY IMPRESSIVE run of shows! Here is but ONE favorite from December:
http://www.archive.org/details/gd71-12-10.sbd.yerys.1311.sbeok.shnf
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 07:50:35am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
'77 sucks as does the end of '74 and '78 and the post-Coma Brent years or for that matter any high energy show from the '80s.
I never really understand the point of these threads. Overrated doesn't mean bad but somehow these turn into bashing threads. Fine something is deemed overrated, what does that mean? Why do we care if it overrated and really really good?
I like '77!! The shows are enjoyable to listen to and frankly if you think the TOO and drums sequence from 5-25-77 or the Eyes>Dancin or H>S>F from 2-26-77 are not interesting jamming, you should perhaps go back and listen.
Yes, I like the Buffalo show better than the Cornell show but to say Cornell is overrated because the next night was just as good if not better is meaningless. Are you saying that you wouldn't recommend someone go listen to Cornell who has never heard it? Please.
Oh I think the Europe '72 was also a bit formulaic in nature and I think there are better shows in the August-October of that year but does that make the tour overrated and should not recommend it to people? Not a chance.
No formula in '69 either right? Good thing they only played DS>St. Stephen>11>Lovelight once or twice.
6-10-73? I have no idea why it was downloaded more than other shows, but that does not mean that people think its the best show. I have never heard anyone ever suggest it ever was.
Egypt? I had never heard these before I got here and everything I ever read about them was that they sucked. Hell even Jerry made that comment on Letterman in '87 (i think, check youtube). Well I don't think the last night there sucked at all. I would call that show underrated not overrated.
Sorry for the rant but it seems to me that if you like a show enough to listen to it a second or third time and more importantly would recommend it to another person, then it doesn't really matter if it is overrated, underrated or unrated. It's the good ole grateful dead.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:09:41am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
Hmmm...still smarting over the PHD glut thread yesterday, eh? JK!!!
I do think there is a point though to understanding popularity of shows/yrs...esp if we see some influence of the non head pop critics (ie, many non head folks I know tell me about the best show being from 77, etc. without knowing first hand, etc. Not saying that's why of course).
Anyway, more criticism threads! More early era is best threads! More anyone that doesn't agree with me shall be banned threas! Bring em on...more guns in the Valley, Marion!
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:32:53am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
Actually it was the "no geniuses have NIH grants" comment that stung....
Seriously. I completely agree that it would be interesting to understand the reason behind the popularity of certain shows or years. However simply saying something is overrated does not address that. Additionally since it is all subjective it is very difficult to say who's opinion counts more. I seem to recall that Dick agreed that Cornell and Veneta were overrated, but at the same time I think he called 12-31-78 one of the greatest shows ever! Ratings are in the ears of the beholder and given the vast differences in what we all like we will all rate things differently. For example, my guess is that you think EVERYTHING after '72 is overrated (you don't listen to it, so it seems to be a logical conclusion). Direwolf hates Pigpen so he would likely view '68 as overrated. My point is unless you know everyone's bias, simply calling things overrated is meaningless and it would be sad if people read this stuff and were influenced by it without knowing why. As an analogy, I like to drink wine and there are lots of wine critics to get scores from. I have found that my tastes don't match all of theirs and that for me, it makes no sense to follow certain critics recommendations while others i trust. So consider the source of the rating before considering the rating.
Final point is that overrated does not mean suck. Something can be great and overrated.
|
Poster:
|
skies |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 10:17:16am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
Is this Elbow considered a genius ,or is that overrated ? I listen to advice and then decide my tases and opinions ,except abut wines which i don't like anyway .
|
Poster:
|
direwolf0701 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:21:51am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
"Sorry for the rant but it seems to me that if you like a show enough to listen to it a second or third time and more importantly would recommend it to another person, then it doesn't really matter if it is overrated, underrated or unrated. It's the good ole grateful dead."
well said!
|
Poster:
|
Cliff Hucker |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:25:50am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
Now I never said '77 sucked, my friend! Just that it was overrrated!
Some kind folks here are convinced that 1977 is the best year ever, and I find that laughable. Those same dudes cannot understand why the Bowman and I are so fixated on '68...
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 09:29:20am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
I read your post and understood what you meant, but take a look at what followed it. I don't think anyone actually said it sucked but the comments seemed to be heading in that direction. I just can't figure out why it matters if something is overrated thats all.
|
Poster:
|
Cliff Hucker |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 10:22:16am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
Go get a bottle of Clos de los Siete :)
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 11:50:53am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
planning on it. Hopefully I won't find it overrated!! :-)
|
Poster:
|
SomeDarkHollow |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 10:36:51am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
The Grand Poobah of Quality |
Agreed. One man's "overrated" is another man's "holy shit,that was awesome!!!" Who are we to judge him/her?
Any ratings that I hand out are noted as purely personal opinions and they all carry a caveat emptor disclaimer. I guess I'm saying that as far as I recall, we have yet to appoint the Grand Poobah of show rating. Yes, yes I know, there is a plethora of self-appointed poobahs out there (we all know who we are).
Oh, yeah, and if you don't agree with me, you most assuredly suck sweaty donkey sack.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 11:25:21am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: The Grand Poobah of Quality has Spoken |
Who are WE? WHO are WE?!?
I would've thought after yesterday's thread it is clear that a great many of us are geniuses, though unfortunately with very little to look forward to since we are all well over the hill...except for little punks like Max Chorak, who hasn't been around for ages now that I think of it...
I shall follow your excellent lead and have a portable donkey sac sweat soaked suckling device ready for mail order delievery to the next poster critiquing the early era, or most anything I happen to babble on about in my next post.
|
Poster:
|
SomeDarkHollow |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 11:42:48am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: The Grand Poobah of Quality has Spoken |
Ahhh, but will it be both portable AND potable?
OK, this is quickyl sinking into a bottomeless pit of pointlessness.
I love it.
|
Poster:
|
TOOTMO |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 10:04:44am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: The Grand Poobah of Quality |
"Well, we have yet to appoint the Grand Poobah of show ratings"
Uhm, hello? J-Boy?
TOOTMO
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 10:09:38am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: The Grand Poobah of Quality |
I give this response 3.1416 stars!
|
Poster:
|
TOOTMO |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 10:12:14am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: The Grand Poobah of Quality |
Well, el, you got me thinking about the j-boy now: is it possible that "j-boy" is really Bill Walton? Has anybody ever seen the two of them in the same room at the same time?
TOOTMO
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 12:26:34pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: The Grand Poobah of Quality |
Excellent! Another score TOOT!
|
Poster:
|
Dudley Dead |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 05:12:38pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
Easy ! Just a bunch of geeky fun ( a least on my part !) . Note the "Sometimes", I start with . I should have been a bit more careful, with my "80's", comments . There are plenty of "High Energy" shows from that era I love , I guess I was more thinking of rather ,reviews , that seem to mistake the kind of rushed "fake" energy , for real energy ( this ,of course is all in my exalted opinion !).
Though , as a rule I prefer pre-Brent era , I really like ALL the Dead eras, and savor them for there unique qualities ; and I have been listening to a lot of 79-81 stuff lately !
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 05:28:33pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Why Does Anyone Even Listen To This Band? |
Hey no worries! I wasn't picking on anybody, I just used your "high energy" comment because I thought it was kind of funny in this context. I was really questioning the value of the exercise. I think its good to have reviews, both good and bad and agree that not all reviews are accurate. I just thought that overrated was becoming confused with bad.
|
Poster:
|
skuzzlebutt |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 10:35:17am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't "suck", but it is overrated... |
I agree on both the Egypt run and the Closing of Winterland being overrated. The mythology surrounding these shows is FAR more powerful than the actual music, which in both cases is a little on the sluggish side.
I can partially agree on the GD Movie being overrated in that the "retirement" run of shows was not that great compared to the way they were playing earlier in the year, but 30-plus years after the fact the movie itself is a pretty fun document of that period and I love the bonus disc footage included with the DVD.
But to me, the number one grand all-time heavyweight champion most overrated GD show/event/anything has GOT to be the 8/27/72 "Field Trip" (note that I said the show is overrated- not that it “sucks”, “blows” etc). Great shows were the rule rather than the exception in 1972, and I think there are any number of shows from this year as good or better then Veneta. Okay, I know, it has a great "Dark Star" and "Bird Song", and yeah, Kesey was involved, blah, blah, blah....but I'm sorry: I can think of 3-4 shows from the European tour and another half dozen from later that fall which I think are much stronger as complete, start-to-finish performances.
|
Poster:
|
hippie64 |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 11:24:50am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
I love the 2nd set 09-14 Son Et Lumiere Giza,even w/ the prob's in Scarlet>Fire, Has one of the bet Samson's I ever heard.
I"m actually listening to it now man the S>F is a mess It must of been all the hash LOL
|
Poster:
|
waynecs |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 06:05:26pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
Opinions are overrated.
|
Poster:
|
skuzzlebutt |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 06:15:26pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
Rating stuff is overrated
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 07:29:53pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
You'd think we'd be getting sick and tired of having to defend the fact that some folks want to critique the posters that critique critiquing. This has got to be about the tenth exchange of significance (ie, more than just a few posts) in which we do this...and I always end up defending the right to make judgements about judgements...it's really not dissimilar to the deep philosophical issue I was alluding to earlier: that is, "post modernity is crap", in a slightly different guise.
|
Poster:
|
Jim F |
Date:
|
October 21, 2009 11:36:54pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
Calling Veneta and Cornell overrated is overrated. And complaining about what's overrated is overrated.
|
Poster:
|
jglynn1.2 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 01:52:05am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
So basically this whole thread is overrated? Or maybe underrated?
I'm confused
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 05:52:13am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
It seems to me that if its okay to critique critiquing than it is equally okay to critique the critique critiques (it all comes back to the forum about a forum!!). And yes we have been down this road before and I found it equally frustrating that we learn little from this. Take this Veneta subthread for example. Skuzzlebutt states that he can think of several shows from both the spring and fall tours in '72 that are better than Veneta but doesn't name one. So how can one validate his (or hers, although that seems unlikely with a name like skuzzlebutt, no?) judgement? I suspect he is correct (i like 9-21 better personally and really enjoyed the 10-18 show that i listened to for the first time last week with that PITB>drums>DS>Dew>PITB). However I personally can't think of any show, including the ones i mentioned, from '72 that has a better sound quality than Veneta and one can not exclude the effect of sound quality of tapes when ratings were determined and historic shows were considered historic, but I don't think I heard this mentioned at all. Interestingly if you go over to the LMA and click on the most downloaded show on the whole site, the reviews of the sound are very good and the reviews of the music are terrible, so one can not simply look at the overall picture to determine if something is good, bad, overrated or underrated. The "why" it got the rating is essential to determine if the critiques are deserving of a critique. Availability of shows was also likely to be an influence on status. Again in the end I doubt skuzzlebutt or anyone else (with the exception of Dick) would not recommend a newbie to listen to that show or many of the other things that came up as overrated in this thread.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 07:12:47am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
Of course, I'll support any argument for critiquing ANYTHING, whether it be a simple upfront critique, a critique of a critique, or even a critique of the lack of a critique (recall most everyone critiques those that hold back ANY sim-blance of a critique if they were uncritically present at a particular show they choose to uncritique since their critique skills were checked at the door soon after they ingested the usual mind-altering and critique suppressing drugs of choice).
Unlike some, I see the power of critique as one of the defining human endeavors, and certainly an activity that helps us define ourselves and improve our abilities to evaluate the world around us and thereby our place in it. We all know writing is perhaps the most useful method of self exploration, and in the writing of a critique, in articulating a well examined position of evaluation, I think we force ourselves to think clearly...probably moreso than in any other exercise.
However, I might see more problems with it if my beloved early era was the target of such attempts. I just realized that in all these threads on "over-ratings", no one ever selects 10-12-68 or 12-29-68 or 9-19-70 (although I do recall someone saying that DS from 9-19 wasn't obviously a top five for them...shudder!).
Interesting...I will perhaps overstep in saying that I think this is another line of evidence that the early era really is best, and that even many of the lovers of the mid/late 70s feel they must work harder to defend their own selection of some show from 77 or even 73 relative to any of mine...?
Good morning L! Did you notice that yesterday was fine, but no up to the day before? Suppose good days on the Forum just "happen" and we can't insure it necessarily...just depends on the mix of posters, the mix of topics, and whether Dire is struggling with irregularity again.
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 07:28:23am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
Good Morning to you too, WT!! I enjoyed yesterday although for different reasons than the day before. It brought out a very interesting take from Jerry's Beard, while the silliness of the day before would probably have scared any sane individual from hopping in. Different but entertaining nonetheless.
Your interpretation of the lack of overrated shows from the early era is interesting although there could be another reason that I am sure you don't want to hear. Maybe not enough people care about 10-12-68 or 12-29-68 to bother. Of course I for one do. However I have asked questions about 10-11-68 twice in the last week and did not get a single response that was on that topic. Alternatively it could be that its you old school curmudgeons that pick on those '70s and '80s shows in an attempt to justify your own preferences and by extension own existence.
Hmm, I might have just called Miss D. a curmudgeon. Nah she listens up to '74.
Regardless i am really enjoying this little gem from the curmudgeon era
http://www.archive.org/details/gd67-10-22.sbd.miller.18101.sbeok.shnfExcellent NPC although the Lovelight is cut. Jerry is also shredding the TIFTOO!! Still has the old lyrics. Holy Crap, this is the first one!! Happy Birthday TIFTOO!!
|
Poster:
|
jglynn1.2 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 08:05:34am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
LOL - yeah if only a few old farts are clinging to '68 how much critiquing will there be.
On the other hand how can you overrate recordings that you're simply glad exist at all?
I just don't listen to enough old stuff to be critical and almost always enjoy it when I do listen - although sometimes it takes a while for my ears to adjust for the poorer recordings - but there is usually gold under the dirt.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 08:27:43am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
"old school curmudgeons that pick on those '70s and '80s shows in an attempt to justify your own preferences and by extension own existence."
Ah, the old "your attack is merely an indication of your own weakness with respect to precisely what you attack!" critique of our critique-y-ness! Absolutely Freudian, eh?
But, since I said it first (ie, when I said 70s folks are insecure since the 70s are over-rated, they realize it, and leap to the defense), this is only so much "I know you are but what am I!" and that juvenile defense is really only credible when SDH uses it...
As to how many of us exist, it does seem to me that a fair number of posters along the lines of J'sBeard fess up every so often...maybe I just notice them more, but it seems to happen regularly.
Wonder where Miss D is these days...? I may have scared her off with all my attn, as it may have been a bit too creepy for her...however, don't think I didn't notice you know quite abit about her what with that comment about 74 and all...you aren't taking notes, are you?
|
Poster:
|
deadpolitics |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 12:40:56pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
Just cranked up That's It For The Other One from TDIH and its wonderful. Jerry freaks out nicely before the verse and Phil is symphonic and syncopating beautifully. They come round in a circle and off we go into the land of ego-death. You can feel the quaking, shivering, pulsating nature of this psychedelic ball of energy. Nice.
I've had this recording for some time but haven't appreciated it in a while and coming back to it makes it even sweeter.
Veneta 72 has psychedelia pouring off of it.
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 02:57:06pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Veneta doesn't 'suck', but it is overrated... |
DP: others will moan at the repetition of it, BUT if you want to hear THE OOne, go directly to 12-29-68, track six, right here...
|
Poster:
|
Mandojammer |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 10:01:27am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Pardon me.... |
....but is this the 3:10 to Yuma?
Wait a minute Mr. Conductor - haven't I seen you recently?
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 12:27:54pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Pardon me.... |
...no, this is the 3:15 to Gila Bend.
|
Poster:
|
robthewordsmith |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 12:38:58pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Pardon me.... |
"Willoughby. This stop is Willoughby!"
"I know where I'd like to be."
'Where's that?"
"A place called Willoughby, a little town I manufactured in a dream."
|
Poster:
|
Yankee9 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 10:58:17pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Pardon me.... |
A Stop At Willoughby is the best Twilight Zone episode of all time IMHO.
|
Poster:
|
Mandojammer |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 01:02:20pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Pardon me.... |
I would like to see Geena Lee Nolin Bend over.
At 3:15, 9:28, hell, just about any time.
And I don't even like blondes that much.
Number 9 below needs no description..........
This post was modified by Mandojammer on 2009-10-22 20:02:20
Attachment: Gena-Lee-Nolin-9.jpgAttachment: Gena_Lee_Nolin_014.jpgAttachment: gena-lee-nolin_6.jpg
|
Poster:
|
elbow1126 |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 01:08:05pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Pardon me.... |
now that's my kind of thread hijack!!
|
Poster:
|
William Tell |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 01:12:36pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Pardon me.... |
Well, yes...but, if one is allowed to critique such wonderous things, I would humbly offer that nature generally requires no artificial enhancement...
|
Poster:
|
Mandojammer |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 01:20:48pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Pardon me.... |
I too was having trouble with the clear violation of Nature's Laws.
Particularly, gravity.
Or perhaps, echoing PMT's sentiment, the manner in which such a law is subverted.
Or not......
Methunked....
This post was modified by Mandojammer on 2009-10-22 20:20:48
|
Poster:
|
high flow |
Date:
|
October 22, 2009 05:52:28pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: Top 5 Most Over-Rated |
In general, I find the recordings of 1966-1971 to be most pleasing to the ear.
Of course the act of recording these shows was an art all it's own. We often comment on sound quality when discussing these recordings. It would be interesting to have more information from the SBD engineers. Did they arrive late to the venue? Were they using old reels because they ran short and had to make do? Were they using back-up equipment because somebody spilled a Heiny on the "good" machine? Were they too baked or hung-over to care? Was it 100* and 100% humidity in the dance hall?
I'd like to know how the forces outside the sound system effected one's ability to make a great tape.
TVNews
OpenLibrary
