Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

General music discussion.
Silent Majority
User avatar
Singer-Songwriter Nancy
Posts: 12397
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 8:28pm
Location: A republic of mind
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Silent Majority » 27 Jan 2017, 7:29am

Dr. Medulla wrote:
26 Jan 2017, 5:32pm
matedog wrote:
26 Jan 2017, 4:55pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
25 Jan 2017, 8:22pm
Speaking of rock trivia, I just finished listening to the audiobook of the Daily Show oral history and here's an old-fashioned Matedog Special. What Bruce Stinkspleen song did Jon Stewart have played when he came on stage at the start of every show?
He did Land of Hopes and Dreams and BTR on the last Stewart ep. I'll go with BTR.
You were obliged to get that one and you didn't fail.
Image
Is that the book with Wyatt Cenac talking about his shitty time there?
Yup, that's covered (tho the story first came out when WC did a podcast). Pretty nasty all around, but WC comes off overly sensitive in it all. I don't think anyone who was there supported his interpretation of it all—that JS did a minstrel imitation of Herman Cain on air— including black staff and performers. But at the same time, JS got defensive very quickly and allowed it to become a shouting match.
Huh, think I'll give this a listen.
'Dares to have a vision'

www.pexlives.libsyn.com/

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 69949
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Dr. Medulla » 27 Jan 2017, 8:59am

Silent Majority wrote:
27 Jan 2017, 7:29am
Huh, think I'll give this a listen.
It's pretty damned celebratory of Jon Stewart, with many of those he butted heads with—politicians, media figures, and performers—calling him a genius and ethically superior and all that. Which isn't to deny his talent or that he did turn TDS into a useful forum for critique, but it does have an aura of hagiography to it. Still, I was unaware of a lot of the conflicts and other politics behind the scenes, so it satisfied a certain voyeuristic interest. Colbert and Oliver, to no surprise, seem like the funniest and most genuine people of the batch.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 69949
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Dr. Medulla » 13 Sep 2017, 6:57pm

Curious bit of trivia: This album sold the most copies in the UK in 1965, 1966, and 1968, and was second to Pepper in the 1960s overall.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 34295
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Marky Dread » 13 Sep 2017, 7:30pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 6:57pm
Curious bit of trivia: This album sold the most copies in the UK in 1965, 1966, and 1968, and was second to Pepper in the 1960s overall.
I hear Julie Andrews singing now.
Image

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 69949
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Dr. Medulla » 13 Sep 2017, 7:52pm

Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 7:30pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 6:57pm
Curious bit of trivia: This album sold the most copies in the UK in 1965, 1966, and 1968, and was second to Pepper in the 1960s overall.
I hear Julie Andrews singing now.
Bingo. I was just thinking about David Hajdu's book, Love For Sale, and the popularity of Broadway and movie soundtracks well into 60s, when rock supposedly dominated. So as much as kids were buying Beatles and Rolling Stones records, their parents were buying even more albums of show tunes.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 34295
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Marky Dread » 13 Sep 2017, 8:03pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 7:52pm
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 7:30pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 6:57pm
Curious bit of trivia: This album sold the most copies in the UK in 1965, 1966, and 1968, and was second to Pepper in the 1960s overall.
I hear Julie Andrews singing now.
Bingo. I was just thinking about David Hajdu's book, Love For Sale, and the popularity of Broadway and movie soundtracks well into 60s, when rock supposedly dominated. So as much as kids were buying Beatles and Rolling Stones records, their parents were buying even more albums of show tunes.
Teenagers with not such a disposable income. I blame Rogers and Hammerstein.
Image

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 69949
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Dr. Medulla » 13 Sep 2017, 8:12pm

Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 8:03pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 7:52pm
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 7:30pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 6:57pm
Curious bit of trivia: This album sold the most copies in the UK in 1965, 1966, and 1968, and was second to Pepper in the 1960s overall.
I hear Julie Andrews singing now.
Bingo. I was just thinking about David Hajdu's book, Love For Sale, and the popularity of Broadway and movie soundtracks well into 60s, when rock supposedly dominated. So as much as kids were buying Beatles and Rolling Stones records, their parents were buying even more albums of show tunes.
Teenagers with not such a disposable income. I blame Rogers and Hammerstein.
Not so much a lack of cash—at least in the American context—as it was the historical oddity of young people with free time and lotsa cash that drove rock n roll's emergence, but that it wasn't until the mid 60s that rock started to become an album-oriented format. Prior to that, one distinction between adult music and teen music was the format. Adults listened to lp's; teens listened to 45's. One of the signals of rock becoming serious—it was no longer rock n roll—was that the album rose in significance. Indeed, pop music (ugh, that's for kids and girls) was all about the 45. It's a fascinating history of how popular music splits itself up and signals seriousness and all that. It's a lot of self-deluding horseshit, mind you, but still fascinating.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 34295
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Marky Dread » 13 Sep 2017, 8:39pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 8:12pm
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 8:03pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 7:52pm
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 7:30pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 6:57pm
Curious bit of trivia: This album sold the most copies in the UK in 1965, 1966, and 1968, and was second to Pepper in the 1960s overall.
I hear Julie Andrews singing now.
Bingo. I was just thinking about David Hajdu's book, Love For Sale, and the popularity of Broadway and movie soundtracks well into 60s, when rock supposedly dominated. So as much as kids were buying Beatles and Rolling Stones records, their parents were buying even more albums of show tunes.
Teenagers with not such a disposable income. I blame Rogers and Hammerstein.
Not so much a lack of cash—at least in the American context—as it was the historical oddity of young people with free time and lotsa cash that drove rock n roll's emergence, but that it wasn't until the mid 60s that rock started to become an album-oriented format. Prior to that, one distinction between adult music and teen music was the format. Adults listened to lp's; teens listened to 45's. One of the signals of rock becoming serious—it was no longer rock n roll—was that the album rose in significance. Indeed, pop music (ugh, that's for kids and girls) was all about the 45. It's a fascinating history of how popular music splits itself up and signals seriousness and all that. It's a lot of self-deluding horseshit, mind you, but still fascinating.
Oh yeah for sure. There is something a lot more romantic about a 7'' 45rpm single a lot more rock 'n' roll. Get your message across in 2mins 30seconds albeit political or just plain old fun. Teenagers with short attention spans ...and onto the next thing, no time for albums especially when the best thing on it is going to be that single track you already forked out for.
Image

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 69949
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Dr. Medulla » 13 Sep 2017, 8:54pm

Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 8:39pm
Oh yeah for sure. There is something a lot more romantic about a 7'' 45rpm single a lot more rock 'n' roll. Get your message across in 2mins 30seconds albeit political or just plain old fun. Teenagers with short attention spans ...and onto the next thing, no time for albums especially when the best thing on it is going to be that single track you already forked out for.
In some respects, that was punk's signal that it was breaking from the rock norm that had emerged over the past ten years. Punk revered the 45, the quick blast, to say your piece, especially when you've only got two songs in you. The album is serious and about permanence and all that; the single is immediacy. That's one thing that I've really become fascinated by in the last five years while studying cultural history more seriously—what do technological or distribution changes do to artists and audiences? We like to focus our attention on the artists or the music or the audience, but it's that big goopy middle between that affects all those things and how we perceive them.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 34295
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Marky Dread » 13 Sep 2017, 9:02pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 8:54pm
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 8:39pm
Oh yeah for sure. There is something a lot more romantic about a 7'' 45rpm single a lot more rock 'n' roll. Get your message across in 2mins 30seconds albeit political or just plain old fun. Teenagers with short attention spans ...and onto the next thing, no time for albums especially when the best thing on it is going to be that single track you already forked out for.
In some respects, that was punk's signal that it was breaking from the rock norm that had emerged over the past ten years. Punk revered the 45, the quick blast, to say your piece, especially when you've only got two songs in you. The album is serious and about permanence and all that; the single is immediacy. That's one thing that I've really become fascinated by in the last five years while studying cultural history more seriously—what do technological or distribution changes do to artists and audiences? We like to focus our attention on the artists or the music or the audience, but it's that big goopy middle between that affects all those things and how we perceive them.
Plus of course your best track should be the single (not always the case) but it helps as that's the one that will receive the radio play and attract your audience. Of course in the case of punk the difficulty for some bands was getting that single air time.
Image

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 69949
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Dr. Medulla » 14 Sep 2017, 6:33am

Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 9:02pm
Plus of course your best track should be the single (not always the case) but it helps as that's the one that will receive the radio play and attract your audience. Of course in the case of punk the difficulty for some bands was getting that single air time.
And that's again where punk mostly mixes that commercial purpose up. As a rule, punk bands didn't expect to get radio play (some didn't want it), so the 45 is just about getting something out there as cheaply as possible to what's going to be a tiny audience.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 34295
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Marky Dread » 14 Sep 2017, 10:37am

Dr. Medulla wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 6:33am
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 9:02pm
Plus of course your best track should be the single (not always the case) but it helps as that's the one that will receive the radio play and attract your audience. Of course in the case of punk the difficulty for some bands was getting that single air time.
And that's again where punk mostly mixes that commercial purpose up. As a rule, punk bands didn't expect to get radio play (some didn't want it), so the 45 is just about getting something out there as cheaply as possible to what's going to be a tiny audience.
I'm not really sure that the punk bands didn't want success (I'm talking about the UK bands here) as they all got some to some degree. If your message is wort hearing then you need all the media outlets to get it across to as many people as possible. The punk attitudes of not caring if your record only sells one copy was just good talk at the time. The bands here that sold little were just not that good really. I think this rule applies far better to the post punk bands who were not afraid to mix up the musical formula with new ideas/sounds.
Image

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 69949
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Dr. Medulla » 14 Sep 2017, 10:54am

Marky Dread wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 10:37am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 6:33am
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 9:02pm
Plus of course your best track should be the single (not always the case) but it helps as that's the one that will receive the radio play and attract your audience. Of course in the case of punk the difficulty for some bands was getting that single air time.
And that's again where punk mostly mixes that commercial purpose up. As a rule, punk bands didn't expect to get radio play (some didn't want it), so the 45 is just about getting something out there as cheaply as possible to what's going to be a tiny audience.
I'm not really sure that the punk bands didn't want success (I'm talking about the UK bands here) as they all got some to some degree. If your message is wort hearing then you need all the media outlets to get it across to as many people as possible. The punk attitudes of not caring if your record only sells one copy was just good talk at the time. The bands here that sold little were just not that good really. I think this rule applies far better to the post punk bands who were not afraid to mix up the musical formula with new ideas/sounds.
No, I'm not saying punk bands didn't want success, just not success measured in the same way that "mainstream" bands did/do. The goal isn't the mansion and swimming pool and supermodels and hanging out with Hollywood stars. Pressing 1000 45's and selling 900 and being able to gig regularly can be a huge success for a punk band, whereas not reaching the Top 40 would be a huge flop to a run-of-the-mill pop star. The scale of expectation is quite distinct.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 34295
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Marky Dread » 14 Sep 2017, 11:18am

Dr. Medulla wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 10:54am
Marky Dread wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 10:37am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 6:33am
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 9:02pm
Plus of course your best track should be the single (not always the case) but it helps as that's the one that will receive the radio play and attract your audience. Of course in the case of punk the difficulty for some bands was getting that single air time.
And that's again where punk mostly mixes that commercial purpose up. As a rule, punk bands didn't expect to get radio play (some didn't want it), so the 45 is just about getting something out there as cheaply as possible to what's going to be a tiny audience.
I'm not really sure that the punk bands didn't want success (I'm talking about the UK bands here) as they all got some to some degree. If your message is wort hearing then you need all the media outlets to get it across to as many people as possible. The punk attitudes of not caring if your record only sells one copy was just good talk at the time. The bands here that sold little were just not that good really. I think this rule applies far better to the post punk bands who were not afraid to mix up the musical formula with new ideas/sounds.
No, I'm not saying punk bands didn't want success, just not success measured in the same way that "mainstream" bands did/do. The goal isn't the mansion and swimming pool and supermodels and hanging out with Hollywood stars. Pressing 1000 45's and selling 900 and being able to gig regularly can be a huge success for a punk band, whereas not reaching the Top 40 would be a huge flop to a run-of-the-mill pop star. The scale of expectation is quite distinct.
Oh yeah sure I understood your original posts meaning. Here in the UK all the better bands The Clash/Pistols/Jam/Buzzcocks/Stranglers/Genreration X/Damned etc all had a great measure of success. With the Buzzcocks independent "Spiral Scratch EP" ended up with more repressings than being on a major. I get how hip it was to deny the champagne and swimming pool lifestyle of the previous generations huge stadium rock bands and bring the music a little closer to home. Howver every young punk grows old and into marriage/home ownership etc ect ect. Most of that first wave of UK punk are wealthy now.
Image

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 69949
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Rock n Roll Trivia Challenge 2014: Micky Dolenz' Revenge!

Post by Dr. Medulla » 14 Sep 2017, 11:48am

Marky Dread wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 11:18am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 10:54am
Marky Dread wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 10:37am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
14 Sep 2017, 6:33am
Marky Dread wrote:
13 Sep 2017, 9:02pm
Plus of course your best track should be the single (not always the case) but it helps as that's the one that will receive the radio play and attract your audience. Of course in the case of punk the difficulty for some bands was getting that single air time.
And that's again where punk mostly mixes that commercial purpose up. As a rule, punk bands didn't expect to get radio play (some didn't want it), so the 45 is just about getting something out there as cheaply as possible to what's going to be a tiny audience.
I'm not really sure that the punk bands didn't want success (I'm talking about the UK bands here) as they all got some to some degree. If your message is wort hearing then you need all the media outlets to get it across to as many people as possible. The punk attitudes of not caring if your record only sells one copy was just good talk at the time. The bands here that sold little were just not that good really. I think this rule applies far better to the post punk bands who were not afraid to mix up the musical formula with new ideas/sounds.
No, I'm not saying punk bands didn't want success, just not success measured in the same way that "mainstream" bands did/do. The goal isn't the mansion and swimming pool and supermodels and hanging out with Hollywood stars. Pressing 1000 45's and selling 900 and being able to gig regularly can be a huge success for a punk band, whereas not reaching the Top 40 would be a huge flop to a run-of-the-mill pop star. The scale of expectation is quite distinct.
Oh yeah sure I understood your original posts meaning. Here in the UK all the better bands The Clash/Pistols/Jam/Buzzcocks/Stranglers/Genreration X/Damned etc all had a great measure of success. With the Buzzcocks independent "Spiral Scratch EP" ended up with more repressings than being on a major. I get how hip it was to deny the champagne and swimming pool lifestyle of the previous generations huge stadium rock bands and bring the music a little closer to home. Howver every young punk grows old and into marriage/home ownership etc ect ect. Most of that first wave of UK punk are wealthy now.
Which does raise the question of whether making all that cash means an artist is still a punk or is their a loophole if they don't doggedly pursue it. But that's a whole other can of worms.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests