Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

ch-scene - Re: Eh, Whatever

ch-scene AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: RTP-area local music and culture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: grady <grady AT ibiblio.org>
  • To: RTP-area local music and culture <ch-scene AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: Eh, Whatever
  • Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 08:24:23 -0400

gcurrin AT gmail.com wrote:
Ross, you got me: I spend more time on a Web site that I get paid to
help maintain than on a.m.c.h. It's my job, so I do devote some energy
to it. If a reader is wondering about a comment, I try to respond.
That seems fair, right?

Sure, that's all very well and good, but we're still waiting to hear what you think about Local 506, smoking, and cookies.

By the way, none of us get paid to post to a.m.c-h either, unless you count "posting from work" as getting paid to post ;-)

A huge chunk of this is online, where you
can hear-instantly at the Web site-most of the bands we're writing
about. A huge reason for this redesign was to provide for an online
focus: Read about the band. Or just hear them. If you disagree with
our opinion on a band, do tell! There's also a downloadable song of
the week that uses a Q&A and, we hope, a great piece of music to
function as a show preview.

Perhaps I'm simply blind, but the URL for the website is only listed once, in normal type, down in the lower left-hand corner of last week's section, and it's a link to the top level of indyweek.com. Until you figure out how to get my browser to open to the correct page automatically when I open the paper, I suggest printing the URL more prominently, and make a static URL that always points to the current content (such as hearingaid.indyweek.com) so that peeps can bookmark it.

Rather, we're giving the
local music scene loads of positive support and, in a very small
section of the paper, offering opinions on touring bands that we feel
people should pass on if they're on the fence.

This is a wee bit disingenuous. I defy you to find a single Indy reader who was "on the fence" about either the Styx/Foreigner or the Mike Love shows. *Some* of the intention might be to provide this invaluable service to the on-the-fence reader, but some of it is clearly to stretch out the snark muscles a bit.

I feel if you have critics writing about what they love,
they should be able to mention their objections to bands that they
don't love, too.

This is the thing: there are fewer and fewer jobs where listeners are forced to endure exposure to any/all new/popular music that comes down the pike. Working that lone remaining retail job where the PA isn't permanently set to "80s Mix" is one, and "weekly paper music critic" is another, at least if you take the job seriously enough to actually listen to most/all of the music that comes in over the transom.

The rest of the world has moved to a "listen to what's already on my iPod" model. Under that model, expressing a contrary opinion about a relatively unknown band (and believe me, "2 albums on Kill Rock Stars" does not a household name make) isn't really doing many folks a service, because the only people going to the freaking show are people who either want to see their friends' bands play opening sets, or people who heard the album and like it. Are there even people who think "gee, I'll go see anything on KRS!" anymore, other than maybe Dave Cantwell, and that's usually because he's in one of the opening bands anyway?

Moreover, since nobody but rockcrits is forced to develop opinions about music they don't like anymore, you don't even get the sympathetic nod you might've gotten 10-15 years ago. Instead you get this outpouring of "what the fuck, dude?" posts in this thread.

Doesn't mean people have to subscribe to those words
at all, but, to me, the irresponsibility is in giving readers only the
positive half of your "honest opinion" out of allegiance to
boosterism.

An argument I made last weekend while floating in an inner tube on the Haw with some friends. It didn't fly all that well, to be honest (the argument, not the inner tube). I suppose I would suggest that there's a difference between dismissing band X in passing, in the service of explaining why band Y is doing it better, and just outright dissing for its own sake. People seem not to like pot-shots, regardless of justification. They also seem to be really attuned to wording; you could've changed about 15 words in the They Shoot Horses blurb, to make it read more like "regardless of order, the true headliner of the show is CGJ, who do more with their three members than headliners TSHDT do with six," and you might've gotten far less flack.

Although part of the objection seems to be to the "Eh, Whatever" heading. Maybe you should reserve that for shows that you don't feel strongly enough about either way to even write a blurb for? Or reserve the whole section for dissing Walnut Creek shows . . .

I had a good conversation about this with Steve last night, and we
talked at length about one of the main concerns here-that is,
occasionally negative coverage for a national band will hurt the local
bands opening for them.

The reality is that a *lot* of people don't even wanna see 2 or 3 bands per show. If you can write a blurb in which you strongly recommend that someone show up early enough to see the opener, and then (briefly!) note that they can leave before the [lousy] headliner takes the stage, then you're doing everybody a service. I think a big chunk of the objection around here was not to the idea of dissing some out-of-town band, but rather (a) the manner in which they were dissed (in the case of They Shoot Horses vs. CGJ) and (b) the relative amount of space devoted to the dis vs. the space that could've been dedicated to praising the openers, who weren't going to play less-impressive shows by virtue of whom they were opening for.

But, if someone is going to take stock in what
we say about The Ladybug Transistor (and I'm not saying they will!),
then there's a decent chance they've seen us gush about openers Un
Deux Trois and checked it out for themselves.

Here is where Todd Morman would spit his coffee on the screen and then make a rude remark. Dude, most people skim, not read, and when they're skimming, they're processing based on matrices they've already half-built in their heads. Yes, there is a chance that someone whose eye is caught by the phrase "Ladybug Transistor" will have already checked out Un Deux Trois based on your previous mentions, but that chance is about 3%, unless Un Deux Trois were on *another* opening bill for *another* sounds-like-Merge-circa '98 band, and that person knew to show up early enough to see them, *and* managed to figure out who they were, since most bands around here only mention their name once per set, if that.

("This McEntire could
wait forever, and she'd be OK. That's a strength not necessarily
absent on Bellafea albums, but far more visible here."; Un Deux Trois
is bouncy and vibrant, and the 150 perfect seconds of "45rpm" should
make the room's mood more seasonally appropriate.")

Not to go all lit-crit on you, but I wouldn't call that "gushing."

One last thing: Martin, if you'd like to write an "Eh, Whatever" about
either of the bands on Burly Time Records, tell me the best way to get
promo copies to you. Your office is on the way to my office, so I'd be
happy to drop them off.

Be careful, Fiver! He's been promising to drop off copies of those CDs to WXDU for several months now, but something always comes up. Of course, we're not right down the street from the best bakery in the Triangle, so maybe you'll have better luck than we have. Hey Grayson, feel free to leave our copies with Fiver, I know he knows how to find 'XDU . . .






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page