Menu
--- In , "supertwangreverb"
<supertwangreverb@y...> wrote:
> I've listened to the Showmen a lot, in-fact we really studied some
> of Eddie's tones in-depth when we recorded. We really had nothing
> better to do :) and got a little crazy with it. But it was rather
> fun. We specter analized some of the high end stuff on the Showmen
Damn! I'm impressed...
> CD and then matched the specters up on our tracks(these aren't on
> the final album, but we thought we'd try it anyway. I think if you
> have the technology why not play around?). Oddly enough, the first
> thing Zak Izbinsky and Gregg Hunt told me when they heard our
> recordings was, "sounds kinda like Eddie Bertrand."
> Ever listen to the descending riff Eddie plays on Dark Eyes? I
> really think that's a Jag with flatwounds. Our producer though,
> Eddie may have had a second line going to the board, because it's
so
> thuddy and clear. But really I think that's what a Jaguar with
> flats through a Dual Showman sounds like.
>
> Squad Car, Scratch and Mr. Rebel all sound like a Jaguar when
> compared to We Are The Young, and when you listen to the other
vocal
> tracks the Showmen were doing at the time We Are the Young was
> recorded, which by the way sound like a Strat, you can compare
those
> tones to the tones on We Are the Young, and things start to match
> up.
Alright then. I'll take your word for it.
> Doug Hensen also told me so, he was there! So there!!! :P
What exactly did he tell you? Please share.
> Hmmm, I wouldn't say the Finks were better than the Bomboras. I
> think I prefer the Bomboras, but I also wouldn't say they were
> better than the Finks. As for lacking character, I couldn't
> disagree with you more. Just by looking at the cover of Fill'er Up
> and Go, reading the liner notes and listening to that Lo-Fi
> recording you can really hear some magic that those first wave surf
> bands had.
I really don't think that recording is lo-fi, but I'll totally agree
that they captured the authentic sixties sound. I just don't hear
much of THEIR personality in either the sound or the songwriting,
that's what I am saying. So, though it makes a very pleasent listen,
ultimately it's just too derivative for my taste. Something that I
would never say of the Bomboras or the Huntington Cads, both bands
being very original, as well as really damn good (especially the
Bomboras).
> It's actually slightly romantic when you thikn about
> it. I really like my trad. looking and sounding surf bands, and I
> think those have more character than some of these foogies in t-
> shirts I see in surf bands. But this all depends on how you define
> character, it sounds like you're talking about distinguishing
> someones sound from other bands. Some rather shitty bands have
> character in that regard.
Yes, I meant sound. And I don't mean simply sounding different for
its own sake - I mean being 'good different', if that makes any
sense. Bands that managed to allow their personality through and in
the process created something new that was still very much tied to
history and tradition of surf music. Put their own thumbprint on the
history of surf music.
If you're talking about image, maybe you can clear one thing up for
me: I remember very few sixties bands sporting the sweater look back
then. It seems that almost all of them would play in suits. So, it
always seemed to me that it's not quite accurate to wear cardigans if
you want the trad look. Given that your own band sports that look,
please explain to me your view on this. What am I missing?
> > Gosh, Bill, I sense a bit of hostility. What's up?
>
> Nothing is "up" that didn't mean to come off as hostile. Why beat
> our brains out arguing our personal preferences? That's all my
point was.
Fair enough. So, why did you respond to my post to tell us that you
prefer bands that use the offsets? I don't get it. If you didn't
want to beat your brain out, then you could have just said nothing,
right?
> Hmmm, when did I say YOU said surf bands should stop using Jags/JMs?
Well, when you said "God forbid you be a little different.",I
interpreted that in such a way. Sorry if I misunderstood.
> Ha, well you sure take this argument personally. I shouldn't have
> responded with an agreence to Dano's claim. It's really not ALL
> that important now is it?!
Believe me, Bill, I don't take this argument THAT personally! It's
not like I'm awake at night thinking about it. But, all of us spend
a lot of time around here discussing unbelievable minutae. None of
it is really that important, but it is often fun to air our opinions
and argue about them. It's not a big deal. But I have seen a
tendency among the more-trad minded folks (and I would definitely
consider myself a part of that crowd, though maybe not to the extent
that Bill and some others are), mainly on other lists, to bash the
Strat. It's cool, it won't make me cry, but hey, I'll stand up in
defense of the Strat's trad credentials. That's all that I was
trying to say. No need to get ourselves into a tizzy over it,
though!
Long live the Fender Holy Trinity!
Ivan
PS So, Bill, how do I get your CD? I don't know why I haven't
checked it out yet, gotta do it.
