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