Musical Hopes & Fantasies For 2013

Billy Gibbons pre-ZZ Top psych band the Moving Sidewalks will be performing a handful of live dates next year. This excites me and it's something that I know I discussed over drinks about ten years ago. "You know, I'd love to see a Moving Sidewalks reunion." "Yeah, that'll never happen," one friend was quick to point out. And neither will a reunion of all four Young Rascals, right?

If I had my druthers:

A new David Bowie record will be released and it will not be produced by Tony Visconti.

Live music will become age appropriate. When Wilco comes to town, they play a seated venue with a proper start time and not some outdoor GA cornfield on a rainy day with a $60 rain or shine ducat. When Ty Segall performs, he can jam as many 20 year olds into a tiny club and hit the stage at 11:45 on a Tuesday, if he feels like it. And while we're at it, if Bruce Springsteen can keep his ticket prices under a $100, so can every one else. And while we're at it, I love you John Hiatt and Joan Osborne, but you guys are not $85 a ticket acts. Sorry guys.

The trend of artists performing full albums in concert will continue, but not at the expense of abandoning the rest of the back catalogue. Mix it up for the fans. Think about the fans. Learn your songs for the fans. 

The cost of new vinyl will drop to something a tad less odious than $26 a record.

Jazz artists will start swingin' again.  If I wanted to hear a piano trio cover Nirvana and Radiohead, I'd...well...nothing. I don't.


Todd Rundgren and Daryl Hall will turn their two brilliant episodes of "Live From Daryl House" into a record and tour.

Music journalists and critics will pull back on the hype reins just a bit and start telling like it is. Maybe a few less new Dylans and new Beatles in 2013 will help the jaded and the cranky appreciate the new guys a bit more.

Andy Partridge, Colin Moulding, and Dave Gregory will shake hands and release one more new record as XTC.

The following artists will release stripped-down-back-to-basics records:
Rolling Stones



So what are your musical wishes for 2013?

Burn Out, Fade Away, Or Be The Rolling Stones

This is something I posted as a comment on Burning Wood's "12-12-12 Recap":


When does it end? At what point do Rolling Stones fans, of which I am one, just admit that what they are playing...the music they are making... the sounds...just ain't cutting it?

I'm not looking to start an unnecessary firestorm with Stones diehards. I'm simply looking for an understanding as to why the handful of 50th Anniversary shows that have taken place thus far, with below standard and predictable set lists, with ticket prices close to $1000, with Mick Jagger's voice sounding more and more like Ian McKellen and with Keith Richards so obviously struggling with his axe, haven't frustrated more people. I love this band. I've defended this band right through 1989's "Steel Wheels," and even sang high-praise over their last tour. But something is just not right with these last few shows, and few but me, seem to see and hear it.

So is it me?

I went on to say this-

What is this loyalty? Is it just about longevity and nothing else? They don't even play for the fans anymore. Look at this current set list. I don't care how old they are, how long they've been around, how cool Keef is or how amazing "Sticky Fingers" is, this band is done. It's ok. Just say it.


I do understand loyalty. So in retrospect, that shouldn't have been a point of discussion. Yet, I know people who were trashing The Who and their live performances as far back as 2002, when only Keith Moon was missing from the mix. Pete & Roger were all but laughed at for their Super Bowl performance. Why? Where was the loyalty there? What makes Mick & Keith immune to the critical bashing taken by other dinosaur acts? The Stones certainly aren't any more relevant. If anything, Jagger's attempts to stay relevant usually amount to some crappy new music with some hip producer, or the signing on of "relevant" artists like Lady Gaga and Christina Aguilera for guest spots, and yet the Stones roll on, sounding older and older, and raping the fans in every way possible.

One last thing I wrote in that comment--

Beatles fans never had any qualms at all trashing Paul McCartney's solo work, sometimes even before listening and this was when Macca was half the age of the Stones and putting out records that were at least as good as any of the Stones records since 1981. 

While we're at it, what about Bob Dylan? The guy gets abused at every turn. Again, I'm not looking for a discussion about who is better. The Beatles, McCartney, The Who, Dylan or the Stones.  I just want to know, are we truly enjoying the Rolling Stones these days, or are we watching them the way we'd watch our crazy Uncle Ed warble through "I'll Be Seeing You" at his 90th birthday party, with respect and pathos, while secretly wishing we could just have some cake and go home.

"Stop Children, What's That Sound?"

The Beatles and the Rolling Stones. You know'em. You love'em.

In two separate conversations this week, with two dear friends who also happen to be two wonderful bass players, the topic of who was better, The Beatles or the Stones, was discussed. One friend simply said, "Apples and oranges." The other? "It's not apples and oranges. They were two rock and roll bands who came out of England at the same. One was better. Simple."

My intention this week is not a Beatles VS. Stones debate, though feel free to weigh in, if that's what will float your boat.

Some friends and I were listening to "Kaleidoscope" by Siouxsie & The Banshees and we all offered a similar opinion. Few bands, if any, sounded like Siouxsie & The Banshees before Siouxsie, and though many "goth," "punk," and "new wave" bands tried after Siouxsie, it was the Banshees who created the sound. A sound we feel was propelled by the drumming of Budgie and delivered with the evil grace of Siouxsie Sioux. Very special, like it or not.

Two others bands, from two somewhat different genres, seemed to have cornered the market on that special sound. AC/DC and The Cars. There were hard rock bands before and aft, as well as new wave bands. But the sound of AC/DC and The Cars is distinctive. It's nothing to shake a stick at. It was their own.

Even The Beatles and the Stones had peers doing the same exact thing at the same time. Not as well, but they were there with the same sound. As years went on, bands from the 60s right up to the present, emulated the Beatles harmonies, chord changes and overall sound. With the Stones, it's only rock and roll, so that sound was hard to avoid.

So your headstart---Siouxsie, AC/DC, and The Cars-

What successful band truly had an original sound, a sound that seems to have been created with the release of their first LP?

Your Best Records Of 2012

It's that time of year, folks. Time for making lists. Best this. Worst that. Most whatever.

So how about you?

What are your favorite records of 2012?

I have 20 that I hope to post by Wednesday morning.

Feel like posting yours.  One, ten, or twenty.  Feel free!

(The photo has nothing at all really, to do with anything. Just records on my floor.)

Grrrrrrr!

 ----Intro: Sympathy For The Devil
01. I Wanna Be Your Man
02. Get Of Off My Cloud
03. It's All Over Now
04. Paint It Black
05. Gimme Shelter (with Mary J. Blige)
06. Wild Horses
07. All Down The Line
08. Going Down (with Jeff Beck)
09. Out Of Control
10. One More Shot
11. Doom And Gloom
12. It's Only Rock 'n' Roll (But I Like It) (with Bill Wyman)
13. Honky Tonk Woman (with Bill Wyman)
----Band Introductions
14. Before They Make Me Run
15. Happy
16. Midnight Rambler (with Mick Taylor)
17. Miss You
18. Start Me Up
19. Tumbling Dice
20. Brown Sugar
21. Sympathy For The Devil
----- Encores
22. You Can't Always Get what You Want (with full choir)
23. Jumpin' Jack Flash

 

Well, there it is. Last night's set list from the Rolling Stones first show of their 50th Anniversary Tour. 

With the exception of "I Wanna Be Your Man," and of course, the addition of Bill and Mick, what about this "special" set list is so special? Maybe it's the brass balls addition of "Out Of Control," a song from "Bridges To Babylon," or Mary J. Blige, the most overrated and inept R&B singer to ever fool the masses taking Merry Clayton's role in "Gimme Shelter?"  What I see here is one of the most standard set lists of the Stones' last 10 tours.

I think about the hype and of course, the exorbitant ticket prices---for the hell of it, I tried for a single at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, and pulled the very last section on the floor, about 150 yards away (probably smarter than sitting close enough to see Keith), all the way to the right for a grand total of $831---and it just gets my knickers all tangled. Is this truly the best Mick & Keith can offer on the last go around?

I won't begrudge the boys for playing both new songs from the new ripoff hits collection. That makes sense. But considering the depth of this band's material and the fact that they have always thrown no less than 5 nuggets into each tour, this set seems very pat to me.

Is it me? Am I just a cynical crank? Am I jaded? Please say no.

CAN YOU RECALL YOUR OWN PERSONAL "WORST BANG FOR YOUR BUCK" CONCERT EXPERIENCE?

 

 

Time It Was, It Was

A couple of years ago, my friend Jeff told me I should listen to The Galaxies, a power pop band that was really knocking him out. I did and I loved it. Great melodies, solid harmonies, and enough hooks to snag a flounder.  But one song in particular did something to me.

I had been riding a train home from Jersey, iPod on shuffle, and "An Ocean Between Us" started to play. By the end of the first chorus, I found myself blubbering. Second and third times through were no better. I had to slink down in my itchy seat, fearing an unnecessary concern from a conductor and worried I might have to explain. I didn't want to. I just wanted to listen to the song again, if you can believe it.

 



Might have been my frame of mind at the time, but I found that subsequent listens, while not as powerful, still left me weak. Time has passed and this song found its way to last week's "Weekend Mix." During playback of that set, it happened again. That song and that chorus triggered that ride, among other things inside of me. I guess that's the way it will forever be with "An Ocean Between Us."

I wrote to Jeff simply to thank him for suggesting The Galaxies and I told him what I just told you.

He replied:

"Great idea for Burning Love? Songs that really get to you in ways that are really wonderful or really awful."


Another one for me is Simon & Garfunkel's "Old Friends/Bookends," a masterpiece of music and storytelling if there ever was one.  Of course, the backstory of Paul & Art adds to the drama. Their happiness, their sorrow. Everyone can relate. But it's the strings that really say it all, beginning at the very end of "Old Friends" and continuing into "Bookends." That moment of chaos, the swelling of emotion that slowly and sadly winds down and resolves, is one of the most powerful stretches of pop music ever recorded. In less than a minute and without one word sung, we live a lifetime. It never fails to tear me up.

Any songs and stories you'd like to share on this subject? Wonderful or awful, feel free.

Who's Irreplaceable?

I am a little more than halfway through the recently released Pete Townshend memoir. Nothing too revelatory as of yet, but it has been very entertaining. One thing though that has been mentioned a number of times was Townshend's on again/off again affair with Keith Moon's playing. A recent documentary about the making of "Quadrophenia," which aired chopped to bits on VH-1 last week, shows Pete expressing the same feelings.

Basically, Roger loved Keith as a drummer and Pete thought he overplayed. While Pete was constantly hearing "boom BAP boom BAP," Keith was forever playing "boom da TING biddily BASH BOO BOOM, dugga-dugga-CRASH." (Actual Townshend quote, I swear.)

I've been on a Who kick for what seems like months now, playing everything from the early records to Roger Daltrey's lame solo work to bad sounding bootlegs. I also managed to find a soft-spot for some of the material on "It's Hard," particularly the Entwistle tracks. But, the difference between the band with Keith Moon and with Kenney Jones is like the difference between firing a bullet and throwing one, as the expression goes.

 (I do want to give props to Zak Starkey, who I think is closer in spirit to Keith Moon than Kenney Jones. I guess it helps when Keith Moon is your teacher.)

This is not to say Kenney isn't a fine drummer. Just listen to the Small Faces and the Faces. Stellar. But the two records with Jones, "Face Dances" and "It's Hard," the former released just a little over two years after Moon's death, have a vibe-change that is hard to ignore. Can one man make that much of a difference?


Are there other bands you consider completely different animals after replacing just one member?

Lead vocalists should not be considered, or bands like Foreigner, a band touring with NO original members.

Life & Depth

It's fair to say that the pages of Burning Wood aren't always kind to new artists. I try occasionally to get "with it," but the fact remains, I am rarely impressed with what is it out there. I don't feel any pressure to like what has been hyped. I do try, though.  I go in fresh and excited, but I usually come out nonplussed.

"Really? 4 STARS?"

Recent suggestions have been new records from Tame Impala & King Tuff, both of which sound like records with half-baked ideas, but lack depth and ultimately go nowhere, at least to these ears. I enjoyed both of these records until I didn't. I made it through almost all of Tame Impala, but gave up when King Tuff got under my skin about 4 songs in.

On the other hand, I've just discovered how wonderful Andy Fairweather Low's early records are, thanks to a suggestion by our friend BuzzBabyJesus. Yeah, "Spider Jiving" and "Le Booga Rooga"  are 30 years old, but they are new to me and both are solid displays of that loose and ramshackle style of rock and roll, when bands didn't take themselves too seriously and still managed to make serious music.

It starts with the song. Somewhere underneath the bells and whistles, low or hi fi, there has to be something to sink my teeth into. Unless of course, you have a whole package. The Ramones, immediately come to mind. Not exactly Rodgers & Hart, but man how it all worked!



So...that being said...

SUGGESTIONS FOR THE BEST NEWISH BAND

or, in the case of Andy Fairweather Low

SOMEONE YOU'VE BEEN LISTENING TO FOR YEARS THAT HAS REMAINED UNDER THE RADAR

David Bowie, Or How I Need To Be Careful What I Wish For

I have been thinking about David Bowie's latest stretch of inactivity, which is going on for about 7 years now. I am a fan, and at times have been fanatical, especially when defending his output since 1995, which I think is criminally underrated. I keep hoping I hear something other than the occasional Bowie "sighting" on the streets of New York, which is starting to become on par with the Yeti. I really do need some new music, and at least some positive news regarding his health, as this hiatus began soon after his heart attack and subsequent surgery.

I also never not think of my pal Steve Simels when thinking of David Bowie. For you regular readers of Steve's indispensible blog Power Pop, you will be familiar with his somewhat legendary disdain for The Thin White Duke.

So I had an idea.

Wanting to start a discussion about Bowie, with positive points being made about his ever-changing styles and fantastic records other than "Ziggy Stardust," I thought it'd be great to have a point/counterpoint intro, with me showing the love and Simels vehemently disagreeing, setting the stage for more thoughts and dialogue.

I asked and I received this, a gift from Steve, whose following words are just too marvelous.

Before you continue, I want to stress, I sincerely love what he wrote, even if I disagree with a lot of it. I've removed nothing.


Sal -- I should preface this by saying I've mellowed on the subject of the Thin White Duke, to the point I will even admit that there are occasional Bowie songs == Heroes, Golden Years, Rebel Rebel -- that, should they come on my radio unbidden, I wouldn't change the station. In any case, most of these opinions were formed during his 70s heyday; I was a self-righteous twenty something at the time, so such opinions were justifiable. Today, of course, less so.

That said here's a list.

1. The early records (post the Lower Third, but pre-Ziggy)

Impossible to distinguish from the work of noted rocker Anthony Newley, and if I wanted to listen to Anthony Newley, which I never have, I would listen to the real thing, not Bowie's thin gruel.

2. Ziggy Stardust

Or as we call it at Casa Simels -- "Flash Gordon and the Gay Guys From Outer Space." Possibly the most asinine concept in the history of rock concept albums, and with one or two exceptions -- possibly "Hang on to Yourself" and "Suffragette City" -- the songwriting is absymal.

3. The singing

If Bowie isn't the least soulful vocalist ever, I don't know who is; worse, that pre-rock crooning style of his has provided the template for generations of unlistenable singers on both side of the pond.

4. Pinups

One of the three worst covers albums ever made. The other two, of course are Bryan Ferry's "These Foolish Things" and

Duran Duran's 1995 Thank You.

The former, I think, is an utterly appaling concept record in which Ferry, nitwit that he is, advances the concept that Bob Dylan's "A Hard Rain's Gonna Fall" has something in common artistically with Lesley Gore's "It's My Party" other than the fact that both were originally recorded by sentient mammals.

The latter, on the other hand, is merely a sloppy mess in which one of the world's most useless bands pays tribute to its non-roots and tries, unsuccessfully, to convince the world that Simon Le Bon has any business performing a Public Enemy song.

Pin Ups, however, I think is exponentially worse. At the time it came out, somebody who hadn't yet heard it (Lester Bangs, actually, who quoted me without attribution in his subsequent review) asked what it sounded like and I replied "Like twelve versions of 'Let's Spend the Night Together' on Aladdin Sane." (At the time, of course, Bowie's "Let's Spend the Night Together" was generally conceded to be the single lamest version of a Stones song evah).

What I would have added, time permitting, is that the entire attitude that Pin Ups exudes (reeks of, might be a more accurate phrase) is a Look at Me I'm Wonderful contempt for the material. The album, IMHO, is the work of a guy who's convinced that these silly little songs and the people who recorded them are ever so trivial and ridiculous, so thank god that he -- The Greatest Star -- is deigning to give them a little undeserved, reflected, acclaim in his trademark bullshit campy ironic way.

Not to mention that the singing is flatout awful; the affectless, emotionless, pretentious pseudo-operatic bleating Bowie subjects the songs to is light years removed from the punkish snarl and passion that most of them (with the possible exception of The Mersey's "Sorrow") require.

Have I mentioned that I hate the goddamn album?

5. Young Americans and the fake soul period

Unlistenable on every level, and "Do you remember President Nixon" is so bogus and stupid I don't even know where to begin.


Ahem....

Soooo.....

It was "Aladdin Sane" and not "Ziggy Stardust" that first introduced me to David Bowie, and being a kid and a Rolling Stones fan, I went right for Side Two, Track Three. I was blown away. I heard punk rock even though it hadn't existed yet. I heard "Let's Spend The Night Together" like I had never heard it before. Fresh and exciting and insane and with great playing on top of it all. I still love it and I still don't understand the "lamest version of a Stones song evah" moniker.

I also love "Pin Ups," and I don't feel any of the words Steve used above to describe it. Bowie had been and still is friends with Ray Davies, Pete Townshend and David Gilmour, just some of the artists covered on "Pin Ups," so the feeling that Bowie regarded these songs and their creators as silly seems wrong. Are any of the covers on "Pin Ups" better than the originals? Maybe "Sorrow," but otherwise, no. But on its own, Bowie's collection is again fresh, if a bit bombastic.

Steve and I do agree to some extent on Bowie's soulless crooning, though I am obviously more forgiving. It's just one of his styles, just as Dylan had his "Nashville Skyline" voice and Ray Davies his "Arthur" voice. Bowie's crooning can be wonderfully affective, especially on his masterwork "Station To Station," which I am hoping is not included as part of the "fake soul period" Steve mentioned.

I've always thought Bowie was one step ahead of the game, even through the nadir of his existence, from 1984-1990. That period of releases, though mostly dreck, still had moments of originality. It saddens me to think that after such a fantastic string of releases starting with 1993's "Black Tie, White Noise" through what I feel his one of his very best pieces of work 2002's "Heathen," David Bowie has possibly hung it all up for good.


If I had to pick 5 --

1. Station To Station
2. Hunky Dory
3. Low
4. Aladdin Sane
5. Heathen

If I had to pick 5 more...

6. The Man Who Sold The World
7. Ziggy Stardust
8. Diamond Dogs
9. Black Tie, White Noise
10.Heroes

Clever Covers

Ah yes. The cover version. The world loves a cover version.

As much fun as they are, it is a rare occasion when the cover is superior to the original.  One example of that rarity is Deep Purple's cover of Joe South's "Hush."






What I am interested in is not necessarily a cover version that is superior to the original, though you are all welcome to suggest your favorites. I am looking for examples of a fresh take on an old song. Frank Lee Sprague's mash-up of Bad Company and James & Bobby Purify, which is featured over at Burning Wood, is knocking me out. It's brilliant. It isn't faithful. It's exciting. And most important, it isn't some phoned-in, acoustic, shoe-gazing, ironic twist of a song.


The first time I heard John Wesley Harding's acoustic reading of Madonna's mega dance hit, "Like A Prayer," I was gobsmacked. That practice got old very quickly, as it seemed everyone was slowing down and sweetening hard rock and heavy metal tunes. Big whoop!

I want something clever.

The Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame & The Inevitable Yearly Debate

It's that time of year again, when the great debates on the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame begin. These debates aren't always about who should or should not be inducted. Sometimes the talk is just plain trash. Not everyone, including some musicians, cares about this building or what it represents.

For our purposes here, I'd like to focus on this year's nominees.

Here they are:

Of the 15 nominees, who does not belong?

The three that jump out at me on first glance would be Heart, N.W.A., and Paul Butterfield Blues Band.

I've loved Heart since day one. The great powerhouse that is Ann Wilson remains one of the best voices in rock and roll. But there needs to be something more than just the novelty of being a successful band fronted by sisters. Early records sounded like Led Zeppelin and the later, more successful records were badly produced, rock-radio schlock. Since then, not much. They haven't really had a hit in 22 years.

While I hope Public Enemy gets in on their first try, I just don't see N.W.A. as a worthy addition. I won't take away the fact that they pioneered gangsta rap, but there needs to be a bit more substance and not just controversy. Public Enemy has depth. N.W.A.? Well, I'm not feeling it. 3 officially released records is just not enough.

I'll admit I've never been a fan of the Paul Butterfield Blues Band, and that has a lot to do with my skepticism regarding their nomination. And again, just not enough music there. Are two "classic" records enough?


Of the remaining dozen, I'm only really on the fence about The Marvelettes. Great music, as always, from Motown, but unlike The Temps or the Four Tops, or The Supremes, or Marvin, The Marvelettes lack the star power, and quite frankly the amount of hits.

Who am I most happy about?

The Meters and Deep Purple, the latter getting a push over on Burning Wood.

Thoughts?

Discussion?

The Poisoned Well: Your Most Disappointing Favorite Artist

I saw Prince play live for the first time in 1981 at a small club in NYC called The Ritz. It was soon after I discovered what is still my favorite of his records, "Dirty Mind," and only a short time before I saw him again at Radio City Music Hall touring behind his first real success, 1983's "1999."
Then came "Purple Rain," and the rest, as they say, is history.

Between 1984 and 1997, Prince Rogers Nelson became a personal obsession. Some of it had to do with the quality and diversity of his output, obviously. During that time, Prince was convincingly covering genres from dirty funk, psychedelic pop, jazz fusion, heavy metal, electronica and rhythm and blues. But it was the bottomless pit of unreleased music that sealed the deal for me. It was an endless supply of more of the same, and so much of it was good. In many cases, it was better than what was commercially available.

I couldn't get enough.

Here was an artist, arguably the only artist, who could sing freely about sex, and somehow still please the masses. Prince held nothing back. He'd perform in a jockstrap and grind on a stage prop bed. He'd use words like motherf**ker and p*ssy liberally.  No one seemed to mind. We were captured by the sounds, the whole package probably. There was no time to be shocked or offended by a few nasty words.

Plus, this little motherf**ker could play the guitar.
 
But then, between 1989 and 1997, the road got a bit rocky.

Batman. Jehovah. The name change to a symbol. Larry Graham. A wedding. Lawsuits. Jehovah.

 There is still a wealth of fantastic music to be found during those years, and as a matter of fact, "Graffiti Bridge," "The Gold Experience" and "Emancipation" remain favorites, if a bit dated. But something happened inside the man that no jockstrap or James Brown groove could fix.

It began to fall apart.

The music Prince has released since 1999...the year, not the album... is some of the most tossed off and soulless music of not only his career, but in the history of music.

"New Power Soul"
"Rave Un2 The Joy Fantastic"
"The Rainbow Children" (THE RAINBOW CHILDREN!!)
"N.E.W.S"
"Musicology"
"3121"
"Planet Earth"
"LotusFlow3r"
"MPLSound"
"20Ten"

What the hell happened? That is one impressive line of crap.

Here's his new track.



Meh.

The streak of unlistenable Prince music has gone on for so long, it has made me less of a fan of all the music I had once loved.

The well has officially been poisoned.

So, all that said--

Who is the one artist who you once loved but now can no longer tolerate? The one artist who has poisoned your well.

I only ask that you follow one guideline.

This artist must be someone you've consistently given the benefit of the doubt. In other words, if you loved Joe Jackson's first three records and then were appalled by his forays into latin pop and jazz and haven't listened to a record since 1982's "Night & Day," Joe is not who I am looking for. It must be someone who you've welcomed into your musical life through thick and thin, and then finally woke up and smelled nothing but the thin. Someone you still listen to, though you know the bloom was off the rose many albums ago.

Bob & Paul & Neil & Paul

Here's Jeff K.:

Reading David Carr's excellent profile of Neil Young in the Times prompted me to spend a good part of Sunday morning listening to a series of Neil Young bootlegs, highlighting his live performances and best recordings from 1966 to last year. More than forty years after they were recorded, his early songs still seem fresh and interesting to me and I can still feed off the energy of a live performance of "Sea of Madness" from 1970. Yes, as Carr and everyone else points out, Young isn't the most consistent writer, but his highs easily set standards that have rarely been matched or surpassed, and he is a true artist, willing to put himself out there on a limb and fail, if it means being true to himself. 

Earlier this week, Soundsource sent this to me:  

His longtime manager and friend Elliot Roberts describes Young as “always willing to roll the dice and lose” and says: “He has no problem with failure as long as he is doing work he is happy with. Whether it ends up as a win or loss on a consumer level is not as much of an interest to him as one might think.”

Back to Jeff K.:

That raises a really interesting question to me. Of Neil, Bob Dylan, Paul Simon and Paul McCartney, who to me remain the best living musician/songwriters to come out of the 1960s, who is the greater artist? Can you pick one?


I need some time to weigh in. I'll be back. In the meantime....

One More Cup Of Coffee Before We Go

We sure love lists, don't we?

I want to take one more Dylan poll.

Last week saw a splendid return on your Bob Dylan faves. Of course, the obvious follow-up would be "Worst Dylan Songs," right? Not gonna do it. I'm not opening the flood gates for the unanimous denouncement of "Wiggle Wiggle." Too easy, and I really don't mind that song.

I think this is more interesting.

Pick one Bob Dylan song...just one...that you detest.

Now you may hate "Wiggle Wiggle" so much, that it has to be your answer. That's fine, if that's what it is. But I'm thinking more along the lines of a song that isn't normally cited as Zimmy's nadir, but a song that just does not work for you.

For years, I could not listen to "Get Back" by The Beatles. I hated everything about it, from Paul's nasally vocals to Ringo's galloping snare drum. I've since come around. I don't love it now, but I won't turn it off.

On the other hand, I WILL turn off "Honest With Me" from "Love & Theft." The slide guitar riff is relentlessly annoying and enough to send me running the second I hear it.

Let's see what you've got.

Remember....JUST ONE.

Your Favorite Bob Dylan

The premise seems simple, but the task may prove otherwise.

What are your 10 favorite Dylan tunes?

I know some of you will find it hard to come up with ten and I can't help but say, I just can't wrap my head around that.

Many things amaze me about this man, not the least of which is how 40 years after his first recording, he managed to write my single favorite Dylan tune.

I occasionally obsess over Bob Dylan, so much so that, the last time I saw him live, I could not take my eyes off of him. Even as he stood aside and drank some water while Charlie Sexton took a solo, I was riveted. There were also moments where he just stood still as the band played, and I focused on his inactivity. Just standing. It was that interesting to me.

So, the 10...

Note I said "favorite" and not "best." 


I only ask that #1 needs to be #1. 2-9 can be in any order you'd like.  Feel free to expound on your choices. Or just offer your choices. It's up to you.


MINE

#1- Mississippi
(Any version. I don't care. They all work wonders.)

2-9 (Alphabetically)

Abandoned Love
Every Grain Of Sand
Hurricane
Idiot Wind
Like A Rolling Stone
Mama You Been On My Mind
Positively 4th Street
Sweetheart Like You
You're A Big Girl, Now

(This wasn't easy.)

I'd also like to mention "Percy's Song," but it has to be the Fairport Convention version.

Remember, #1 needs to be #1.

Don't Hate Me Because I'm A Power Ballad

Anonymous commented on last week's post:

"And what about the power ballad? Guilty pleasure or waste of time?"

I've never liked the term "guilty pleasure" when referring to music. I'd like to think that if I like something it's because there's something there to like, unlike say "Seasons In The Sun" by Terry Jacks. Though, if you happen to like "Seasons In The Sun," then you must have found some redeeming qualities. No guilt, I say.

But the "power ballad," like heavy metal, seems to get no respect. Believe me, I understand. Sometimes.

I'd opt for a Hot Vicks enema over listening to "Every Rose Has Its Thorn" by Poison every time. But not every power ballad is as crappy as that stupid crappy piece of crapola.

Not sure why this comes to mind, as the original song is neither a power ballad nor heavy metal, but I know many who needed John Wesley Harding's acoustic take on Madonna's "Like A Prayer" to finally admit, "Hey that's a really great song."




I can't help but think if John Hiatt covered Steve Perry's "Oh Sherrie," that song would suddenly be in hot rotation for a lot of us. Irony rules, I guess.

What about this? Tolerance is non-existent in my life when it comes to Christina Aguilera, but it's mostly because of her melismatics. (And partly because of everything else.)

 Is this better?

Anonymous also mentioned Cheap Trick. He asked, "Why was 'The Flame' their biggest hit?"

I'd like to save Cheap Trick for another Burning Love? post, but I too am baffled by the success of "The Flame." Not necessarily because I hate the song, though I don't like it very much. I just don't think that particular song comes close to representing the best of what Cheap Trick has to offer. So my issue is not with the "power ballad," but with the people who made "The Flame" a bigger success than "Mandocello." Who are you? Show yourself!

I happen to like the next song. It's "Unbelieveable" by America's favorite punching bag, Def Leppard.  Again, this is not about whether or not this song is as worthy as Hoagy Carmichael's "Stardust" or "Sir Paul's "For No One." (What is?) I just wonder occasionally...or maybe more than occasionally...why this particular "sound" is such a mighty turn-off.

I will give you this--the cheap drum machine and chintz 'n' glitz production are not the wisest of sonic decisions. But, strip it of its gloss, come down a bit on the bombast and that melody on the chorus rivals many of our favorite, well-respected tunes. Couldn't you hear Adam and Chris of Fountains Of Wayne harmonizing and absolutely killing this tune?

 I feel no guilt.

If you're still with me, tell me:

Fave power ballad?

Why you'd rather have a Hot Vicks enema than listen to Journey?

That said, I think this is one, hook-filled monster of a song, Yamaha DX7 notwithstanding.

(Guilty pleasure?)

Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

 (Gene Simmons, Nassau Coliseum 1979. Alex Lifeson and Geddy Lee, Palladium 1980. Pics taken by me. Me, Zappa's Brooklyn, pic not taken by me)


I listened to Black Sabbath's "Heaven & Hell" this weekend, the first with Ronnie James Dio taking over for Ozzy Osbourne. That record came out in 1980 and 32 years later, I still play it with the same enthusiasm.

This also made me realize, as Burning Wood approaches its 4th year, that hard rock and heavy metal is rarely represented on those pages. It's not for lack of trying. I've made several attempts, with posts, or at the very least, dashes and pinches, with songs or videos by everyone from the aforementioned masters of doom, to Rush to Thin Lizzy to Motorhead and back. And the response has mostly been...well...unresponsive.

Why?

We have no problem listening to punk rock and Joni Mitchell. Some of you have expressed love and respect for both the Beastie Boys and Bobby Darin. Our minds are clearly open. So what gives?

I'll say this, I'm not talking about the hairspray and camera-mugging stylings of inferior, poseur bands like Poison or Cinderella, though I did see the latter open for someone, might have been Kiss, and I loved every minute. I'm talking about the guys that do it well.

So many suggestions from readers over the years have never...yes, never...produced a hard rock or heavy metal record for Burning Wood readers to explore. Maybe it's my fault for not writing about this music more often. Maybe you're all ready to come out but never felt comfortable.

The following are some of my very faves that I still listen to with great fervor and absolutely no irony.  Feel free to critique, good or bad. Though, comments like "This sucks" really aren't helpful. Better yet, add to the list, if you hear what I hear.

Again, I love this music with the same truth as I love The Beatles and Todd Rundgren and James Booker and David Bowie. I'm interested in knowing why you don't...or hopefully do...assuming you've not run off already.

And sorry, politics and complete assholiness aside....this rocks.

Songs & Records: RECAP

A fine job by all!

Many thanks.

Here are some of my faves of your suggestions:

And two from the incomparable Julie London:

Finally.....


Your "amazing" Weekend Mix compiled from your "amazing" record suggestions:

TRACKLIST

Don't Worry Baby- The Beach Boys
Hush- Deep Purple
From Head To Toe- Smokey Robinson & The Miracles
Gimme Shelter- Rolling Stones
Hurt- Johnny Cash
Kentucky Rain- Elvis Presley
Sally Go Round The Roses- The Jaynettes
Tainted Love- Gloria Jones
Baby, Now That I've Found You- Alison Krauss & Union Station
Avenging Annie- Andy Pratt
Money- The Beatles
Try A Little Tenderness- Otis Redding

the zip

See you on Monday with Topic #2.

Songs & Records

As a kid watching the Andy Williams hosted Grammy Awards, separate categories for Song Of The Year and Record Of The Year never made sense to me. I had no one to ask what the difference was, so I just stewed when Stevie Wonder won both...and everything else for that matter. Once I learned the difference, I never listened to music the same way again. Suddenly, I was able to appreciate so much more.

For those who don't know:

Record of the Year is given to the artist who performs the song and the people who produce the track. Song of the Year is also awarded for a single or individual track, but the recipient of this award is the songwriter who dreamed up the song in the first place.

Yeah, whatever Grammys. I prefer to listen this way.


AMAZING SONG/TERRIBLE RECORD

FAIR SONG/AMAZING RECORD

INFANTILE SONG/FANTASTIC RECORD

GOOD SONG/MEDIOCRE RECORD

GOOD SONG/AMAZING RECORD

OKAY SONG/FANTASTIC RECORD

AMAZING SONG/AMAZING RECORD

Over to you.....