O Brother vs. Morons

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Matt_R
Date: 25 Apr 01 - 10:46 PM

Thanks for the Radiohead plug, Bart! "Creep" is my personal theme song!

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: mousethief
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 12:10 AM

Got the soundtrack today, largely due to this thread. Love it! Thanks everybody for telling us about it!

Alex

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: SeanM
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 12:35 AM

"Po' Lazarus".

I think that's all anyone needs to say to recommend the soundtrack. Though "Big Rock Candy Mountain" and the maniflod versions of "Man of Constant Sorrow" recommend as well. And pretty much anything else ... Aw, heck. Just buy the dang thing.

M

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: mousethief
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 12:56 AM

I must admit that the percussive sound in "Po Lazarus" really jolted me when I first put the CD in the car deck. Is that like shovels hitting the ground, or axes on a tree or something? There's no warning and then THWAACK! Just about jumped out of the driver's seat. A little adrenaline with your morning tea?

As I said, GREAT cd. Walk don't run and get it today.

Interesting to see it was produced by TBone Burnett, who is one of my fave singer-songwriters in his own right.

Alex

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: SeanM
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 01:07 AM

It's axes. If you read the liners, the first track is a Lomax recording of a prison gang breaking wood.

Yeehaw and all that. Can't wait for "Down from the Mountain". Apparently, the Fairfield Four (who do "Lonesome Valley" on the soundtrack) took Lazarus for the live show...

Sounds good to me.

SeanM

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: kendall
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 08:45 AM

Noise will never replace poetry.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Willie-O
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 09:16 AM

DOUGR and whoever cares about "radio deregulation": I don't know what kind of deregulation there was left to do in the 90's that Al Gore could have participated in; as I understand it the most significant change occurred in 1986 on Reagan's watch, and by his direct decree. This was the elimination of the "fairness doctrine" which stated that radio news/spoken word programming had an obligation to present both sides of an issue. This change led directly to the proliferation of right-wing talk shows on American airwaves (there are a few liberal talk shows but they are vastly outnumbered), specifically on privately held stations. Like Rush Limbaugh & Howard Stern.

What other deregulation was there?

Willie-O in the Home of the CBC.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 10:33 AM

There was a big change about the number of "media outlets" - both radio stations and TV stations - that could be owned in a single market by a single entity. Essentially, one big company can own (and program) as many as they want now. This has resulted in the growth of huge media groups like Evergreen and Jaycor that control multiple stations in the same market.

This was a great thing for corporate radio. You could sell advertising for multiple stations, target your programming for very specific demographic groups, maximize the use of your studios and broadcast systems; all ways to cut costs and raise the bottom line. Unfortunately, this also results in many outlets working from the same corporate point of view. There goes the neighborhood.

Hopefully, others can fill in the details or correct any misrepresentations I may have made. I didn't mean, when I first mentioned deregulation, to try to blame it on the republicans alone. Business has friends on both sides of the aisle. Most regulation is imposed for a reason. Those reasons are often ignored when the deregulating fever hits. If the reason is gone, the regulation should go to, but that has not usually proven to be the case.

We seem to have forgotten that the airwaves belong to the people; as such regulation by our representatives should exist without question. Instead, we have auctioned it all off - just like the government did when we acquired new territory, and which this administration wants to do with the resources on public lands today. How many "vast wastelands" will our short-sightedness create?

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: DougR
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 01:04 PM

Willie-O: I bow to your superior knowledge of radio deregulation. I should have checked sources before commenting. I'm a bit familiar with what Bart speaks of and in my opinion, it was a sad day for radio when the big conglamorates took over the airwaves.

As to Right Wing talk shows versus Left Wing, I guess there must be a bigger audience out there in radioland for the conservative point of view than there is for the liberal. I'm sure if the audience was there, radio stations would respond with more liberal leaning shows. And I apologize for thread creep because what I just wrote had nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of this thread!

DougR

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 02:38 PM

I have the nagging feeling that Steve Earl is going to break through on the Country Charts soon because his songs have such catchy melodies. In fact, I'm surprised they didn't release I Don't Want to Lose You Yet off of Transcendental Blues as a single.

Question is: Will success spoil Steve, or will he be the crack in the dyke that floods Nashville with real music again?

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: M.Ted
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 02:47 PM

For those of you interested in(maybe "disgusted by" is a better term) the way that mass-market radio is programmed, let me share a horrifying secret about radio programming that no one has yet brought up--

Being involved in music, as I have been, over the years I have been connected with lots of radio personalities, and more than a few behind the scenes people. One day, I was taping some old albums in the huge but mostly un-used record library at the radio station where the MAGIC format was created (and it was created, with specifications for everything from announcer style to what commercials are acceptable to an ironclad formula for what type of song can be played when in which hour) and I found a stack of cards with song titles, artists names, each with a number rating----"What are these numbers?" I asked, and was told that these numbers indicated how popular the songs were with the format's target audience--"So you can play the songs that are most popular and avoid the songs that they don't like?" I asked, somewhat naively.

"Well, sort of,we do keep anything off the playlist that they don't like, but it is equally important not to play the songs that they really like too often, either. If you create too much excitement, there will inevitably be a letdown--and that could cause us to lose listeners."

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Midchuck
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 02:47 PM

It spoiled him once already. He was up there in the mid-eighties with Guitar Town and Copperhead Road and like that, then he took a considerable vacation at state expense due to recreational pharmaceuticals, and got clean (not his language, that stayed the same) and started over.

I think the best thing he's done was his first album after he started over, Train A'Comin, but maybe I'm prejudiced because it's the most purely acoustic and it has Norman on it. There's also some great stuff on The Mountain, the bluegrass album he did with Del and them.

But to make it on today's Country radio, he'd have to take a good many years of Bland Pills.

Peter.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 03:10 PM

I don't understand why someone hasn't come up with an oldies country format; I'm positive that someday somebody will. It took a long time for oldies rock to become commercially viable, and now you hear it all the time. Maybe "Classic Country", like Classic Rock?

Chicago's one country station does an oldies call-in show on Friday nights and some of that stuff sounds so great. . .

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: GUEST,djh
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 03:10 PM

I remember back a few years ago Johnny Cash took a full page ad out in the trades papers. The country music programmers were ignoring the great Unchained album at the time just as they had ignored the even greater American Recordings collection before it. The ad was just a picture of Johnny giving them the finger.
The sad truth is that we are better off artistically with good music sneaking in under the radar. The industry would undermind the quality with pretty faces and waterdown versions. Who really wants to hear the Backstreet Boys doing "ST James Infirmary" or Aerosmith doing "Muleskinner Blues"? It would happen if that is where the buck was.
Gotta go Al Gore is backing up my toilet.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Peter T.
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 03:21 PM

It is something of a mystery why country music stations don't play old records -- the rock and roll stations do -- what would they do without the Beatles? The only hypothesis that comes to mind is that are ashamed of early country music. That it should be such "unsophisticated" music, full of wierdos and odd voices, is a threat to the consumer image, which is now aimed at low to middle income suburbanites.

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: GUEST,djh
Date: 26 Apr 01 - 03:28 PM

Mousethief and sean, If you don't already know and want more "PO LAZARUS" rounders Alan Lomax Series is AMAZING. The very good "oh, brother" soundtrack pales in comparison to it. and there are like 20+ CDs of them (Volumes based on the American south) and more coming. I recommend Murder's Home,
Southern Journey's- hwy 61 miss.,
both Georgia sea island volumes of Southern Journey's,
Bad man Ballads,
Fred Mcdowell -the first recordings,
Mississippi Saints and Sinners ( or anything else with Sid Hemphill)
or the whole blasted lot of them for that matter.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 27 Apr 01 - 01:41 PM

LEJ, I sincerely hope that Steve Earle does not break through on country radio -- I think he's the best songwriter working today, and if he was to "cross over" to mainstream country radio, I think it would destroy me. Fortunately, lots of people can't stand his voice, and it is certainly rougher around the edges than what you generally hear on country radio. Also, he's an ornery son of a bitch, so he wouldn't fit their marketing plans all that well (plus he's on his own label, which is a small detail they'd have to take care of).

I think it's more likely that we'll start hearing Steve Earle songs done by other artists on country radio (and I agree, "I Don't Want To Lose You Yet" is a good candidate for this). Kind of like the smooth cover versions of Tom Waits songs that we sometimes hear, even though you'll almost never hear the originals on mainstream radio.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Lin in Kansas
Date: 27 Apr 01 - 01:52 PM

Bartholomew and Peter T.:

Some country stations have already figured that out. In Wichita USA, KFDI has "Today's Country" on FM and "Classic Country" on AM. Needless to say, if we're listening, it's AM.

And Guest DJH, I wholeheartedly agree that the Rounder Records Lomax series is terrific--so are the Smithsonian CDs...good stuff.

Lin

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 27 Apr 01 - 02:36 PM

Whistle and Midchuck, good points well made. I find it interesting to trace the paths of the two young upstarts who shook up the Country Scene back in the early 80s with their first albums...Steve Earl and Dwight Yoakam. Both exhibited much of the throw-back roots spirit that I like in Country. Dwight was a definite disciple of Hank and Merle, and he put a duet with KD Lang on Gram Parsons' Sin City on that first one just to give notice as to some of his influences. Steve had a more esoteric background, and you could hear strains of Townes Van Zandt, Duane Eddy, Earl Monroe, and even Springsteen in his stuff. Both hit hard and early, but from that point their paths diverged. Dwight has become the example of what Nashville finds acceptably rebellious, and he's in the regular rotation on the CMT video playlist. He has also drifted further into what I call "Vogue-cover Country"...slick video, glam models, and Dwight in his trademark tight jeans, cowboy boots and ten-gallon pulled low over his eyes. In other words, Dwight seems to have bought into the image and marketing aspect of the music. Steve, on the other hand, has followed his own path, has shown complete disdain for Nashville, and his image is basically that of an ex-druggy Biker with a bad attitude, which is not at all what the Country Marketing Machine is looking for. They prefer their bad boys in the clean-cut and easily digestible mode, like Dwight and Travis Tritt.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 27 Apr 01 - 09:13 PM

Another movie, The General's Daughter, used some honest-to-God traditional music for incidental music. If anyone's unfamiliar with where this folk stuff comes from, I'd be happy to make recommendations and sell them CDs. Just call CAMSCO Music at 800/548-FOLK. THere's some awe-inspiring remastered classic stuff available on CD.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: kendall
Date: 27 Apr 01 - 09:43 PM

It was probably Al Gore who broke my guitar too.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: DougR
Date: 28 Apr 01 - 01:30 AM

Another why, Kendall, it would have been fortuitous for Al Gore to win the election. You could have applied for a government grant to replace your broken guitar! :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: DougR
Date: 28 Apr 01 - 01:31 AM

Oops! I left out the word, "reason," Kendall, but you probably got the gist of it anyway.

DougR

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 30 Apr 01 - 08:37 AM

Very astute, LEJ. I liked Dwight Yoakum originally, but I think you're right that he ended up focusing more on his image than anything else. There's still some real talent and substance there, but he's buried it pretty deep in the marketing BS. As for Steve Earle, I am more impressed by him with every new album -- just an incredible talent, in my opinion.

Subject: RE: O Brother vs. Morons
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 30 Apr 01 - 02:24 PM

Maybe I have a slightly different take on Dwight and Steve Earle. I really like them both, but you can tell that they came to the music from different directions.

Steve Earl is a writer and has managed to avoid the pitfalls that Nashville "stardom" offers. The need to produce product to feed the image invariably stifles a writer. You stop following your inspiration and begin to repeat yourself. Steve Earl continues to move in directions that the record labels can't handle (i.e., market). Substance use, I believe anyway, contributes to his career vicissitudes but doesn't (necessarily) dictate them. Whatever the cause, Steve Earl remains his own man and remains a vital creative force.

Dwight has always been about personality as much as music. He writes some, but has also developed his career using other people's songs. To stay fresh he has developed other creative outlets, such as acting, rather than exploring other styles of music.

Both of these guys have a pretty impresseive body of work out there. I'd be happy to be classed with either of them.