Rock Town Hall • Rock Music Discussion

RTH Challenge: Which Townsperson Has Seen the Least National-Level Bands More Than One Time?

Sep 262011

Double your pleasure!

Tonight a Townsman is taking his kids to see Foo Fighters. This will be the second time said Townsman, who will remain nameless until he outs himself, has seen “the Foos,” as he tells me The Kidz call ’em. He, like me, sees way less concerts than might be expected considering his encyclopedic knowledge of greatest hits albums and how opinionated—and right—he prides himself in being. We got to talking about it. Not counting cult and underground bands we’ve loved and seen multiple times (eg, Pere Ubu, Gang of Four, and Big Dipper, for myself), beside Elvis Costello it’s possible that neither of us has seen a national-level band more than one time. (By “national-level” I mean big enough to have been on commercial radio, have albums stocked in major chain stores, be big enough so that “regular people” at work are likely to know who you’re talking about if you bring them up in conversation.)

That’s right, he’s seen Nick Lowe twice, but the first time as an acoustic opener, so maybe that doesn’t count. I was supposed to go to that second show with him but had to stay home for, uh, security reasons. Tonight my Townsman friend will leave me in the dust, joining us tomorrow with what are likely to be spot-on comparisons between the two Foos’ shows he’ll have under his belt.

Can anyone beat my record of only having seen one national-level band more than one time? If not, what band have you seen the most times, not counting your friends’ bands or bands you’ve opened for? (I’ve seen Pere Ubu 6 or 7 times.)

Ka-Raaay-Zeeeee Eyes!

Posted by Mr. Moderator

Sep 262011

Ian Anderson is just one of rock’s many practitioners of ka-raaay-zeeee eyes. Sometimes we like to believe our rock ‘n roll heroes are capable of actually peeling back society’s layers of civility and letting loose with just how ka-raay-zeeeee life is. Madness, I say! Anderson is one of many rock singers who have delivered on our expectations. What other lead singers come to mind who consistently roll out a pair of ka-raay-zeeeee eyes?

Previously…

Rock Town Hall’s Saturday Night Shut-In: Life After REM

Posted by Mr. Moderator

Sep 242011

Sounds of the Hall in roughly 33 1/3 minutes!

In this week’s edition of Saturday Night Shut-In Mr. Moderator welcomes a newly active Townsperson, then ponders life without REM… Not really, not the second part, but he does play two live tracks from the band, songs he can’t identify but hopes you can! It’s an odd show, as your host dips into some proto-post-punk and worries that he’s pissed off an old friend.

[audio:https://www.rocktownhall.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/RTH-Saturday-Night-Shut-In-46.mp3|titles=RTH Saturday Night Shut-In, episode 46]

[Note: The Rock Town Hall feed will enable you to easily download Saturday Night Shut-In episodes to your digital music player. In fact, you can even set your iTunes to search for an automatic download of each week’s podcast.]

Once and For All: What’s the Most Popular Non-Hit Single Ever?

Posted by misterioso

Sep 232011

The single stiffed, but…

Every once in a while I get to thinking about songs that everyone knows–or, at least that have achieved huge popularity and recognition–that were not hit singles. My case in point is The Romantics‘ “What I Like About You.” Everybody knows that song. It didn’t make the Top 40, though.

There are various reasons why such a song might take off later rather than sooner: maybe it had poor distribution or bad PR in the first place, maybe later it gets used in a commercial or movie or (now) videogame.

I have a few criteria in mind.

I am talking about songs that were released as singles only–so no “Stairway to Heaven” and what have you. No album tracks. That’s a separate category.
By “not a hit single” I mean it didn’t make the Top 40. I know that the invocation of Top 40 skews the discussion away from modern times when the Top 40 as we knew it has ceased to have any meaning whatsoever. Special pleading is welcome.
Most subjective is “everyone knows it.” Use your judgement. Polling data are not required. A once-obscure song that is later used in a movie or commercial does not necessarily translate into a song that everyone knows. The 13th Floor Elevators‘ “You’re Gonna Miss Me” is known by a lot more people because of its use in High Fidelity, but most people don’t know it. We’re looking for major penetration into people’s brains here.

Please Explain: MUSIC!

Posted by Oats

Sep 232011

Seriously, what is this shit?

The Unbearable Irrelevance of Relevance

Posted by misterioso

Sep 232011

Relevant or just plain good?

Now try this:

Irrelevant or just plain shitty?

Although I certainly agree with the general gist of Machinery’s REM thread, and would, myself, add at least 10 years to his over-generous assessment of REM’s breakup being “15 years too late,” I think that framing such a discussion around “relevance” is a mistake. No performer is going to remain relevant forever. Some great performers do not attain relevance while they are active, even. Relevance is largely irrelevant. What matters is the quality of the work. REM’s work after, let’s be generous here, Document may be more relevant than what came before, or it may be less relevant. I have no idea. Perhaps many people find “Everybody Poops”–er, “Hurts”–to be far more relevant than “Radio Free Europe.” I suppose there is nothing preventing a mawkish, bathetic, and dull-as-dirt song from being relevant to people.

Since of course the Stones have been mentioned, the problem with their post-Tattoo You (say) records is not irrelevance, it is shittiness. You might say that the two are related, but in all fairness, the best Stones record ever was not going to make them relevant in 1990.

Let’s try this exercise again:

PLEASE EXPLAIN: Fugazi

Posted by hrrundivbakshi

Sep 232011

I swear I’m not trying to be an asshole here, and I admit to not being all that familiar with their work, but — man, I’ve never really understood Fugazi. And I’m from Washington, DC!

Minor Threat, I get. HarDCore punk, yeah, “straight-edge,” yeah. All sinews and tendons and youth and loudness and anger. Got it. But Fugazi? I dunno, man. They strike me as being, like, a grown-up, much artsier, much proggier Minor Threat. And I’m not sure it translates.

Which is not to say I don’t understand the process/problem of growing up punk. And I have to say, the Fugazi backstory rules. All that jazz about $5 shows, $10 albums — yeah, very Clash, very old-school, very un-DC… very cool. To be able to “grow up” and stay like that is pretty amazing. Kudos. But on the musical tip, I fear I must be missing something. So I guess I’m throwing my arms open wide, waiting for the nurturing embrace of a Fugazi-loving Townsman who can help me see what I’m missing. Tell me: why do you like Fugazi so much?

Older Entries Newer Entries