YTSEJAM digest 3865

From: ytsejam@ax.com
Date: Fri May 08 1998 - 18:08:20 EDT

  • Next message: ytsejam@ax.com: "YTSEJAM digest 3864"

                                YTSEJAM Digest 3865

    Today's Topics:

      1) 1.
     by someone@enteract.com
      2) 2
     by someone@enteract.com
      3) LTE vs. FII, Getting into DT, lots of precious bandwidth wasted
     by Rob Jurado <Jurado@worldnet.att.net>
      4) Re: YTSEJAM digest 3863
     by mpm_2112@ix.netcom.com
      5) Re: But glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity...
     by mpm_2112@ix.netcom.com
      6) re: Spock's Beard
     by Brian Hansen <bhansen10@yahoo.com>
      7) Philly Show
     by Mike Pontrelli <ponte@essc.psu.edu>

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:15:00 +0000
    From: someone@enteract.com
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: 1.
    Message-ID: <199805082109.QAA12002@wheat.farm.niu.edu>

    > From: "Agar, Jonathan (CAP, EURO)" <Jonathan.Agar@gecapital.com>
    > Subject: In defence of elitism

            This is exactly the kind of response I love, not because I have
    something waiting in a can to open up and toss out and defeat
    Jonathan's argument, but because it forces me to rethink my position
    and either better explain myself or admit where I'm wrong. And
    without coming to blows. Bravo. :)

    > So why is elitism a reasoning problem? It just means that people
    > have been 'chosen' (in most cases by themselves). Nothing problematical
    > about that.

            If you're familiar with the philosophy of Kuhn, you understand the
    ideas of incommensurabilities. What is meant by this, is the idea
    that one person's view of something is so completely different than
    someone else's, that he may look at one item and find a tremendous
    value in it, whereas another person will see it as disgusting. Kuhn
    applied this idea to every aspect of life, within a paradigm (which
    is where the song title Paradigm Shift comes from). An example he
    went into great detail with is the Copernican revolution. He felt
    that between the Ptolemaic system and the Copernican system, so much
    of the terminology and linguistic understanding had been warped,
    Copernicus could look at the same group of stars, and be literally
    seeing something different than Ptolemy. Their conceptual frameworks
    were incommensurable.
            I don't subscribe to this theory in the material world. But in the
    spiritual sense, the emotional sense, and the aethetic sense of this
    idea, I think the idea of Paradigms, and incommensurability holds
    extremely firm. A paradigm in music could be how Cock Rock was so
    big in the 80's, but now many of today's generation just can't
    understand why we liked it. Likewise, those of us from the former
    paradigm, often miss the value in Rap and R&B. You have to step
    outside of your paradigm not to miss it.
            Here's a visual example: I really like the hell out of the shape and
    design of the new Range Rovers. To some people, that looks like a
    glorified minivan. Some of these people love low rider pickups with
    really fat wheels, chrome rims, and multiple "carrying handle" type
    spoilers. To them, that's an extreme of automobile beauty. To me
    that's vomit on wheels. Our standards are incommensurable... mine
    can not be right and his wrong, or vice versa. Or if they can, I
    don't see how, and could use your help in understanding. :)
            With an elitist attitude, hypothetically, I as the elitist present
    that I am right for liking the Range Rover and the other dude is
    wrong for liking the pukemobile. You can objectively qualify on the
    grounds of cost, comfortability (maybe), cargo space, speed, smooth
    ride... presentability (you could pick up business clients in a Range
    Rover), etc... but these don't make the Rover more universally
    appealing. There will still be people who would choose to spend the
    same amount as the Rover cost, on a really beefed up, pimped out Ford
    F150.
            When you approach Hootie's music and DT's music and say "DT is more
    complex" then yes, you are establishing a determinable, quantifiable
    characteristic. But that complexity doesn't have anything to do with
    (necessarily) whether the music is better or worse on a universal
    scale. I can show you music by Ron Thal that is so complex that you
    probably won't like it. I can show you music by Tori Amos that is
    simple, but still, many members of this list WILL like it.
    Complexity isn't the issue. It's the overall appeal, which is
    something that I think goes beyond the ideas that can be qualified or
    quantified.
      
    > OK to an extent. But music, or art anyway, can do more than
    > entertain.

            Sure, but in my opinion, and my understanding, art DOES boil down to
    entertainment for the people experiencing it.

    > Doesn't have to. Rappers can carry on being entertained if
    > that's what they want. But there can be more to art than just
    > entertainment. And I don't think rap and such has it.

            This is where the problem comes in. You don't think rap has the
    profoundity of prog for the most part... but there are rap fans who
    say the same thing about metal. To some people, the thumpy beat,
    along with the stacatto rhythm of the rapping, and the melodies
    (there are melodies in almost all rap tunes, let's not kid ourselves)
    convey a similar profoundity to what we feel. I know some people who
    get goosebumps listening to certain rap tunes... they just "speak" to
    these people. I get goosebumps listening to LitS. It speaks to me.
    It entertains me, and offers me insight and profoundity. It's the
    same for me as it is for the rap fan. When you say "I don't think
    rap and such has it" you're making a true statement for yourself... I
    mean, clearly, you haven't heard the rap tune that will get you going
    the way a DT tune will. But does that mean Rap doesn't do that for
    other people? This is the incommensurability.

    > Sometimes people
    > even take the entertainment OUT of art, like that piece they auctioned off
    > which was a phial containing rolled instructions for creating an art work.

            To me, that would be entertaining. That is an awesome idea! (I'd
    never heard of it before).

    > Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but this looks like cultural
    > relativism to me. Just because we think some people have crap critical
    > faculties doesn't mean that no one has any critical faculties.

            It does sort of sound like that, but it's not a moral system. It's
    a system of judging subjectives. Can you tell me which DT song is
    the best, universally? No... you can't... it's subjective. Can you
    tell me which song (out of everything in the world) is the best?
    No... it's subjective. When you say "crap critical faculties" I
    think you're making a leap there. There is nothing to say that
    someone can't be a great philosopher, or a great lawyer, or a great
    judge, or someone who MUST have at least reasonable critical
    faculties, and still like rap music. Sure, there are idiots who like
    rap, and sure you can discount them by saying that they're idiots, so
    they must be wrong. But have you been on this list long? There are
    morons on this list (I may argably be one of them). You don't think
    that they're wrong because they have crap critical faculties. You
    think they're right because they match your opinions. :)

    > 'elitists' don't want to make people listen to or like 'better' music. They
    > just want people to recognise that there's more to prog than there is to
    > rap, for instance.

            What I'm arguing is that it is inaccurate to say that there is more
    to prog music as an artform than there is to rap music as an artform.
            Why are some men "lip men" and some men "ass men" and some men
    "...upper torso men" when it comes to their tastes in women? Why do
    I like girls who are physically fit, and some of my friends like
    girls who have more meat on the bones (Baby got back!)? Clearly, my
    attraction to the physical beauty of one female over another IS a
    relative issue. There may be a happy medium at which everyone would
    agree "This woman has the perfect body" but chemically, I have a
    reaction to some women that I do not to others, and other men
    have a chemical attraction to women that I do not find
    attractive.
            Beauty is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder.

    Go Home and Practice!

    Chris Ptacek
    someone@prognosis.com
    http://www.prognosis.com/madsman

    ------------------------------

    Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:15:19 +0000
    From: someone@enteract.com
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: 2
    Message-ID: <199805082109.QAA12006@wheat.farm.niu.edu>

    Sorry for the length!!!

    > I'd have no self-respect if I didn't place my standards above those
    > of certain others I could think of.

            I have a lot of self respect, and I refuse to place my standards
    above anyone else's, when it comes to art or beauty. It doesn't make
    sense to do so. The differences in standards are incommensurable.

    > introductions, and I found new things to see in primitive art, but a
    > lot of modern and abstract art still left me cold.

            Me too... I just don't get it. I miss the beauty. But some people
    study Picasso for their whole lives, and just spooge over the beauty
    of the artwork. I prefer several surrealist artists who many art
    critics would say "are not anywhere near the calibre of Picasso."
    Does that make me wrong? Does that make them wrong?

    > If a work depends on my reaction more than on the work itself, then
    > I don't have respect for the artist.

            How can artwork NOT depend entirely on your reaction? You have to
    experence it, and then react to it for it to convey anything to you at
    all, whether that be pleasure, pain, taste or distaste... art must be
    experienced to be understood at all, and that experience will form
    your reaction for you. I don't think that a painting you've never
    seen can hold any artistic value for you. If you're deaf, and never
    hear DT or Coolio, you can't say which is better, to you, as an
    artform... or which there is more to, or which is more profound. You
    never experience it, so you have nothing relevant to say about it.
    Yes, a painting that you never see may have been the ultimate visual
    experience you could ever have, had you a chance to see it, but
    without seeing it, and experiencing it, you couldn't form your idea of
    whether it's good or bad.

    > I think rap is similar. If you want poetry, get poetry.

            Why? Why do you have to get a collection of William Blake's work,
    instead of experiencing a different form of poetry? Okay... how's
    this: You like poetry? Get poetry. Put down that DT booklet and
    ignore those lyrics. Why should you want DT's lyrics, when you can
    have poetry? James should stop singing words... he should just stand
    there and hum the melodies. I know you didn't say that, but without
    expounding on your meanings, this is a reasonable conclusion to come
    to from your argument. Rap is a different kind of art than poetry.
    Or maybe it is a type of poetry. I don't know. But what you
    said doesn't make a lot of sense to me, and I hope the above example
    shows you why I don't think it makes sense.

    > But don't pretend the rap medium is more than redundant and
    > superfluous.

            I'm not pretending. I'm asserting that it is, in reality, often
    more than redundant and superfluous. Or maybe I'll agree, but then
    state the Prog is nothing more than a bunch of tired out licks, high
    pitched vocalists and overly ambiguous lyrics. No... that's not what
    I think.

    > The Beatles do have some complexity, mostly added by George Martin,
    > to whom they owe most of the respect they get.

            Not on the level of the complexity of DT. They're simple even by
    the standards of "The Foo Fighters." But I HOPE I've already
    established an argument as to why complexity is not a relevant
    criterion. If it was, DT wouldn't be "good" enough for me... I'd
    have to go full on into reharmed jazz and 20th century compositions,
    like Webern and Copeland and Ives, and ignore the simple "rock" or
    "Prog" that's coming out. There isn't a song in DT's discography that
    compares in harmonic complexity to some of the jazz I've heard. But
    many of DT's songs are much more beautiful, and much more expressive
    to me.

    > This is tantamount to saying that the Western canon is of no more
    > objective value than a baby playing on a toy trumpet if ever someone
    > says he prefers little Stevie to John Milton. I think we can do
    > better than that. If you haven't got the vocabulary, if you can't
    > use what's gone before you to stand on, you can't move mountains.

            This example was used as the problem case for me a year ago, or so.
    I have to answer that to some people, little Stevie is more musical
    than Mozart. It's a fact... I mean... it sounds impossible, but let's
    assume that Stevie's parents are people who spent years trying to
    conceive a child and failed. After a decade, they adopt a child. The
    music this child makes may be infinitely more beautiful to the
    parents' ears than Mozart's works. To us, that's nonsense. But how
    do we claim that Mozart is better, when to some people, even if only
    two, Mozart is not? Stevie's music may fail to entertain us... to us
    it may not be better at all. It may suck. But it's STILL profound
    music to the ears of the parents. It STILL conveys emotion. It STILL
    brings insight. It could not succeed any more as an artform to the
    child's parents. And that is all you can hope for.

    > Elitists are good.

            Disagreed on principle.

    > There can't be objective standards in music in terms of coolness or
    > jiveability.

            Agreed.

    > But just as wave theory says what tone resolutions can and can't
    > work, it should be possible to say that x is more harmonically
    > complex than y, or that a has themes with counterpoint while b is a
    > one-line melody.

            You're about to make a BIG jump. Wave theory says which tone
    resolutions clash and which do not. Agreed. Wave theory does not say
    which tone combination will be better to MY ears or to YOUR ears or to
    Mozart's ears. X can be proven to be more harmonically complex than
    Y. Agreed. But Harmonic complexity does not = profoundity, and
    does not dictate a standard of "bad, better or good.". If you don't
    agree with this, mail me privately, and I'll make you some MP3s to
    attempt to prove this to you via experiment.

    > And that this piece is more profound than that piece.

            This is the HUGE leap. Harmonic complexity is a quantifiable, yes,
    but give me some way of measuring profoundity that will hold true
    between all music listeners of reasonable intellect. No one will
    argue that a piece with key changes and polyrhythms and technique is
    less harmonically complex than a piece that stays in one key and just
    chugs away slowly and repetetively. That'd be like arguing that
    "1+1=37". People WILL argue that a simple song like Kashmir is more
    profound than Metropolis. There's no standard that I can think of to
    establish that would show the Zep fan that he's wrong (and I don't
    believe he is wrong).

    > Numbers have nothing to do with it. We're elitists :-)

            The argument was that there should be some hierarchy of standards.
    Offer me some other way of establishing a hierarchy. This wasn't a
    point presented to argue for or against elitism. It's a different
    argument.

    > Not that they're wrong to like it, only that their music is less
    > complex and less profound than ours.

            You keep mixing complexity and profoundity. I don't think the two
    are related by any necessity. To ME, any relation between the two is
    at least partially coincidental. If your experience differs, that
    only further establishes some slant of relativism.

    > I can't agree, sorry. Art conveys insight, art evokes by reference
    > to itself and the cultural heritage it springs from.

            Sure. That can happen, and that can be a part of what artwork is.
    But that doesn't mean that it's not entertainment on some basic level.
    Or expression on the primary level for the artist.

    > The theatre of the absurd didn't entertain people, or certainly not at first.
    > But it did give people insights. Entertainment wasn't the issue. People
    > who saw Waiting for Godot in the 50s may have been more entertained
    > by the Benny Hill show, but Benny Hill is less meaningful art than
    > Samuel Beckett.

            Again, to those who catch the profound expression and insight in the
    work, the art is successful. To those who do not catch on, Benny Hill
    may be more successful. Both can be considered works of art. They
    don't express the same things, but that doesn't mean one is better
    than the other. Laughing can be as profound as crying, etc.

    To those who are totally annoyed by this thread, I apologize. It's
    being discussed, and I've been addressed directly, so I felt it was
    okay to reply. If you can't handle it anymore, politely mail me
    privately. If your reply is not polite, I'll disregard it, just to
    annoy you. :) If there are more than just 2 or 3 people who hate
    this thread, I'll refrain from posting in it anymore.

    Go Home and Practice!

    Chris Ptacek
    someone@prognosis.com
    http://www.prognosis.com/madsman

    ------------------------------

    Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 14:28:38 -0700
    From: Rob Jurado <Jurado@worldnet.att.net>
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: LTE vs. FII, Getting into DT, lots of precious bandwidth wasted
    Message-ID: <35537905.7F5F6520@worldnet.att.net>

    Okay...I'm now enlightened. I got LTE about 16 hours ago. I bought the
    thing
    near my cousin's house about eighty miles from me. Yeah, I paid too
    much.
    Probably could have gotten it cheaper through mail order/the
    www/whatever.
    Do I regret it? Hell no!!! TMW kicks butt. I can't get enough of this
    CD.
    Kindred Spirits is my favorite so far. Woo-Hoo!!!!

    Mike Portnoy, if you're listening, GREAT JOB!!! Please relay the kudos
    to
    Messrs. Rudess, Levin, and Petrucci. A+!!!

    Okay, jammers. Just wondering if there are any jammers that would have
    preferred
    to hear the playing on FII go more in the direction of LTE. I think
    that there are
    some who would have liked to hear Rudess as the new DT keys guy. Just
    wondering what you think. Personally, I love FII. I give it an A now.
    There's
    some stuff that I don't really dig as much (JLMB) , but I'm getting into
    it more. I like that stuff more and more. Back to the aging of FII
    thread... I would have given it a B- when I first heard it. I was
    definitely trying like hell to like it better considering the flooring I
    had when I heard ACOS and when I finally appreciated Awake and really
    got into DT, which brings me to another thread, one that's not quite as
    old.

    I guess I'll join the band wagon with the "How I got into DT" stories.
    When I
    first heard DT, I was definitely not excited. Sure, I was into guitar
    oriented stuff
    like Michael Hedges, Tuck Andress, Extreme, Vai, Satch, Van Halen, Reb
    Beach. I kind of liked QR. Also, I was sick of the crappy hair metal
    of the late 80's. (In that category some would include the
    much-maligned band of the afforementioned Reb Beach.) Anyway, I was way
    into Soundgarden, Alice In Chains, Red Hot Chili Peppers. So, to me, if
    it wasn't guitar oriented or alternative (as it was then), it
    was crap. OH MY GOD...I forgot my asbestos vest!

    I saw PMU's video on eMpTyV during my senior year at Vassar College in
    good old Poughkeepsie, NY. I bet the weather was horrible at the time.
    I seem to remember freezing rain, trenchcoats, and my L.L. Bean Maine
    Hunting Shoes complete with thinsulate. Not a pretty picture. I'm
    freezing just thinking about the freezing rain and thawing ground.

    So...I hated that PMU chorus. "Pull me under/ I'm not afraid". I
    thought, "What is this crrraaaappp!!!??? Pull me under what? Afraid of
    what? God!!! That guy's voice is ridiculous!!! The guitar riff is
    kind of cool, though. Anyway, I hate this crap. Why can't they show me
    some Extreme? Put that "Stop the World" video back on. Nuno is a
    god!!! Oh...Soundgarden. Okay, I'll keep watching. Chris Cornell
    Rocks!!! Thank goodness that stupid Dream Theater crap is finished.
    God! Just the name of the band is completely pretentious. I bet
    they're all these Berklee grads that can play the shit out of their
    instruments, but can't write a SONG to save their lives. Oh...sure,
    Doc. I'll have a Piels' too."

    Fast forward to 1994, or whatever year that was. I was waiting in
    Berkeley, CA for "Waiting for the Punchline". Nuno and the boys were
    kind of taking a long time.
    So, I just studied my lessons for my master's. I got hungrier and
    hungrier for some
    hard rockin' stuff by people who could play. I'd had enough of Tuck
    Andress and
    John Coltrane. It was time to rock out!!! "Where the hell is Extreme's
    new album?
    What?!? It's delayed?!? DAMN!!!"

    So, dejected, I went about the rest of my life lamenting the lack of
    good rock with
    hard guitar and good musicians. Then, I read a positive review of
    "Awake" in
    Guitar magazine, I think. "Okay...okay. The magazine says they're
    good. Also,
    in Mesa/Boogie's 'Amplitudes' newsletter this Petrucci character seems
    okay. Actually, he seems pretty cool. Anyway, he can't be all bad,
    because he likes Mesa stuff. I'll satisfy my hard music jones with this
    "Awake". Still hate the band's name,
    though!"

    So, I went to Tower Records on Durant Ave. and grudgingly bought myself
    a
    copy of "Awake". I thought, "Man, look at these stupid record covers.
    This is
    going to suck, but what am I going to do? There's no new Extreme to be
    had.
    Achhh! I'm desperate. I'll see what these jokers have to offer. After
    all,
    Petrucci seems to know what he's doing, and that might be good enough
    until
    Nuno and the boys get their stuff on the shelves. Sure it's not going
    to be
    funky and bluesy like Papa's Culture or Preacher Boy and the Natural
    Blues, but
    it's time to rock!!!"

    So, I put the thing in the CD player. I was bored silly. Sure, I
    thought it was
    nice and hard, but I just didn't have any fun listening to it. Extreme
    put out
    their new album a few months later. It kicked my ass. I was loving
    every minute
    of it. I loved that Extreme was getting into that "We're trying to
    capture a live vibe" band wagon. But to paraphrase another trendy phrase
    from a few years prior (pre-alternacraze), I was looking for a harder
    sound. So, what did I do? I fished out that "Awake" CD from the unruly
    pile on top of my CD player. I gave it another chance even though I
    still thought that Dream Theater was a bunch of Berklee guys that could
    play the crap out of their instruments, but couldn't write a SONG. At
    least, it was harder without getting too hard for my delicate
    sensibilities.

    I was washing dishes with DT playing. Needed some hard tunes for the
    drudgery
    that is house work. What came on and seduced me? "Scarred" started
    slapping me
    in the face with it's brilliance. I was like, "Wow...this is
    incredible!" It was like
    I finally understood. I got it right then and there. I still remember
    walking into
    the "living room" area of my apartment, thinking, "Why haven't I
    realized how good this stuff is? I'M A MORON!!!"

    Soon, all the stuff I didn't like about DT, the name, the album cover
    art, KJLB's
    voice all became wonderful seasonings in the DT soup. I finally heard
    JM's and
    MP's kick-ass skills. I finally realized how good JP was. Soon, I
    wasn't really
    reading Extreme newsletters as much. I joined the ytsejam as soon as I
    found
    out about it. Jammers were kind enough to tell me their opinions on
    what
    my next DT purchase should be. I think it was I&W. Then, ACOS. Then,
    LiT. I learned that balls and chunk is where it's at. I learned that
    JP is
    an "exaggerator," or something. Rock Discipline. LatM. TSM single.
    WDADU.

    Had to leave the jam for a while when I lost internet access. Then, I
    was jonesing
    for new DT. I ended up going to med school in the Philippines in June
    of 1997. I finally got e-mail again shortly after seeing an
    advertisement for FII in Guitar World or something. Got back on the
    jam. My father, who is also living in the Philipines now, was in the
    U.S. for a while. He asked me if he could bring back anything for me.
    I asked for FII, an absolute necessity at the time.

    Here I am spending my April-June "summer vacation" back home in
    California. One of my goals was to see some good live music here,
    because there is so little of it in the Philippines. So...I thought
    maybe DT would be touring. Sent some mail to
    the band via the rsabbs.com site. I asked the band to grant my wish of
    playing SoCal while I was still on break. MP sends me a note regarding
    plans to play
    the Galaxy and HoB. Woo-hoo!!! Love ya, MP!!! I'll be at the HoB on
    May 17, the night before I have to fly back to the Philippines. It's
    also my 27th b'day on May 20.
    So, that concert is like my own little glorious b'day present and a
    going away party too.

    I love DT more than ever now!!! All this from a guy who couldn't stand
    the chorus
    to PMU when he first heard it. Back to LTE and Kindred Spirits for the
    5th time.

    -Rob

    ------------------------------

    Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:34:35 -0500 (CDT)
    From: mpm_2112@ix.netcom.com
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Re: YTSEJAM digest 3863
    Message-ID: <19985817146618467@ix.netcom.com>

    >>On the subject of Charlie D. Yes I admit he doesn't have the best voice
    out there... but sometimes it reminded me of Geddy Lee (bassist and
    vocals of Rush). And maybe for people who have never listen to Rush,
    this is difficult to appreciate this kind of vocals.<<

    I dissagree. I mean, in his early years, Geddy could really wail, the Canadian gov't could amplify his
    vocals on Anthem and Temples of Syrinx and use it as an ultra-sonic device. But, I guess if you took a
    more nowadays version of Geddy's voice, it can come close, but no cigar IMO, then again, I haven't heard
    many Dominici tracks, since I dont have WDADU. the only stuff I've heard is Real Audio stuff off the net.

    Matt

    ------------------------------

    Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:34:33 -0500 (CDT)
    From: mpm_2112@ix.netcom.com
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Re: But glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity...
    Message-ID: <199858163539641@ix.netcom.com>

    Ok, I want to ask a question to all the Rush fans out there (since they are the best example I could find).
    Do you consider Rush any more unlistenable because of Half the World, Test For Echo, Stick it Out, Roll
    the Bones, Cold Fire, Time Stand Still, Subdivisions, New World Man, Distant Early Warning, Big Money,
    (I really could go on for a while...but I'll stop now). Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that around the time
    of Moving Pictures and Signals, Rush did get more "listener friendly" (I wont use the phrase "mainstream"
    since I feel it is a bad term) but you still do find stuff like say, Time and Motion, Driven, YYZ, and Leave
    that Thing Alone, as well as Manhattan Project, Marathon, etc. which is more in the progressive realm.
    All I'm trying to say is that, if Rush can get a little listener friendly, while still having some songs retain a
    progressive sound, then why can't DT? So what if they did more songs like You Not Me and Hollow
    Years? They will always (I hope at least) have those progressive songs like Peruvain Skies, Just Let Me
    Breathe (sticking to FII). Look at it this way, they write listener friendly songs, this causes more people
    who would normally not buy DT buy DT while still getting those progressive songs, hence exposing them
    to a whole new type of music. So don't knock DT if they write stuff like You Not Me, they'll still be doing
    stuff like Metropolis.

    Matt

    ------------------------------

    Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 14:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
    From: Brian Hansen <bhansen10@yahoo.com>
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: re: Spock's Beard
    Message-ID: <19980508213212.18119.rocketmail@send1d.yahoomail.com>

    At 03:51 PM 5/7/98 -0700, you wrote:
    >
    >I think the reference is to the episode in which there is an alternate
    >universe and the Star Trek crew have evil twins in this universe. In
    the
    >alternate universe, Spock has a beard.
    >
    >Gonz

    OK everyone, time to tell the real story here. Spock's Beard is not a
    reference to FACIAL hair at all! (For all of you jammers under the age
    of 18, please do not visualize, as this may constitute a criminal act.)

    ;-)

    BH

    _________________________________________________________
    DO YOU YAHOO!?
    Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

    ------------------------------

    Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 17:46:54 -0400 (EDT)
    From: Mike Pontrelli <ponte@essc.psu.edu>
    To: Multiple recipients of list <ytsejam@ax.com>
    Subject: Philly Show
    Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.94.980508174437.7007D-100000@thunder>

    If there is a gatherig in philly, could someone let me know?

    also.. i may be in need of a crash piut that night..

    I nearly fell asleep at the wheel multiple times from the birch hill show

    also.. can someone send me digets 3060?

    thanks!

    AND THANK YOU DT for that MOST INCREDIBLE SHOW OF MY LIFE AT BIRCH
    HILL!!!!!!

    cheers

    -Ponte

    ------------------------------

    End of YTSEJAM Digest 3865
    **************************



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 18:08:58 EST