this is the link to junior walker album with taxman
i was thinking about it and this song is bad because its like if the taxman was like a cool ass street hustler... the beatles version is like an uptight nervous shiesty taxman.. but jr walker is a smooth ass pimp taxman that makes you feel good about givin up all your money... its like his theme song when he comes around the block to get his money and he leaves as teh song fades out and you think "god damn that is one smooth ass taxman" and you want to be like him... but you dont wanna be like the beatles taxman because he probably has a big sharp pointy bird nose and beady greedy eyes and a hunch back like mr burns...
23 comments:
Ringo rushed the beat, in my opinion. Always.
No funk in that guy's bones.
I should dig up Neil Peart's commentary on the Beatles, I share his thoughts but not his eloquesnce. The gist is this:
The were great.
Just like many bands (famous and unkown) are great.
But the sheer magnitude of thier celebrity and reverence HAS to be due (at least in part) to mass hysteria and a revisionist history that somehow associates their music with the cultural phenomenae of the 60s.
That part should be taken with a grain of salt.
I din't say it didn't work for the beatles, especially later when George and John staring playing those drowsy melodies. If it had been Charlie Watts it probably would have been a train wreck!
Neil Peart's not my cup of tea either, but his writing is surprisingly good. Avid cyclist too.
Damn, Erik,
This is good shit, we should just have an Eriksaunders.com Music Blog (except there would be nothing left to talk about on the regular blog)
Did Erik say "sheisty?"
Damn, man, who let Professor Griff back in here?
Yeah, "(I've Got My Mind) Set on you" set the music world on its ear...
To lift the sarcasm for a moment -
There used to be a time when ALL those guys (Sly, Jackson 5, Beatles, Elvis, John Lee Hooker, Soul Stirrers, etc.) would get airtime on the same radio station.
If you read any biogrophy of any musican whose carrer zenith pre-dates MTV the common thread is that they drew all sorts of influences from disparate genres because it was ALL on the radio.
With today's Clear-Channel monopoly/monotony and iPod personal containment devices, you just don't get that kind of melting pot. People can't even imagine tuning in to Keith Urban, Rob Zombie, and Fittycent in rapid succession.
That's the beauty of college radio and (less irritating) those few precious stations that remain independant, like:
http://www.xpn.org/
Junior Walker and the AllStars - "What does it take". Those guys can wail.
There's a college paper to be written somewhere about how the lack of B-sides (from focusing on complete CD productions instead of a single-based release structure) has impacted the musical freedom and creativity of bands.
Some of the most experimental and, to me, interesting stuff from George Clinton, The Police, The Clash, etc. came on the "throw-away" tracks on the backsides.
I think some vestige of that lives on as "Bonus Tracks"
Dead Letter Office is, I think, the best REM album and it's a collection of B-sides and other crap they had sitting around. So, I guess I'm agreeing.
You can't discuss opinion? What is music, and any art, all about then?
What metric, pray tell, would you use as the authority by which "good" and "bad" be separated? Lots of people have tried to find that Alchemy, with little sucess. Anyone remember the 2:20 rule for hit recordings?
I guess I don't quite see the subtlety of your point JMurder.
Are you saying that an opinion in the form of a blanket statement (i.e. "The Beatles Suck") is invalid, but articulating your perspective is justified ("I think the massive popularity of the Beatles is due in part to the times they lived in")?
-Cause you sure didn't start off that way.
Oh, and Oasis sucks.
Metric. That's a pretty good band, too
Yeah, I'm calling Halfsies on this one:
I agree partially with you JMurder, in that many people revere the Beatles based simply on the-Emporer's-new-clothes convention. And that's a lame basis for liking anything, and is bound to induce backlash in (usually equally poorly informed) folks. This may be your clique, the jury's still out.
However, I also agree with emory-b that they did in fact have something. I'm not a die-hard fan but I can at least see some artistry.
It also seems to me that you, JM, are making some factual sounding statements without alot of background to support you.
But, emory_b, most of the technical innovations were done ON Beatles, not necessarily by the Beatles themselves. Let's not confuse the two Georges.
It's a complex world, not everything is black-and-white. And that's a fact.
And I thought Star Wars RULED 'till hit puberty.
(last year)
Back to musc industry quality,
For the past few years I have been "threading", as I'm told its now called:
I search online interviews and databases for folks I like (and do the analog thing: Read Leonard Feather or biographies) and then listen to snippets of any other references/influences that come up.
I also run across new stuff from XPN and other music enthusiast friends.
This is how I cope.
And, by the way, from this I've been recently enjoying Joe Tex, Clarence Gatemouth Brown, and Chris Murray.
Though tomorrow I'll be listening to Jr Walker, REM Dead Letter Offce & Eponymous, and Crowded House - thanks mostly to our little discussion tonight.
Thanks!
Can anyone see iTunes making a legitimate impact on music?
It's still mostly big labels, but now consumers have the option of albums a la carte... take what you want and leave the rest. (Think of the savings with any Fishbone album!)
My major complaint about Napster, et. al., was that there was no guarantee of music quality and, if you care, there was the whole piracy/virus thing.
Now Apple has this controlled, establisheshed storefront environment.
Are we really ready to track "record" sales by song download, and (especially with Moore's law still ticking along) are people really going to be satisfied with a software-only music collection?
What's the shelf-life of the MP3 with the MPAA talking about 96kHz/24bit (or better) recording standards?
Emory_B said...
Yeah I need to get out and continue to find new music
I'm telling you, WXPN. I get all sorts of good leads listening for 30 minutes or so. Allot of my collegues rave about it to.
This is a radio station in Philly. We all live in Boston. That should say something...
-Also, check out/rediscover Urban Dance Squad.
Remember "Deeper Shade of Soul"? Yeah, well, the rest of the album's 15 years ahead of its time. Europe new that, but we had to wait for guys like Zebrahead and Beck before we caught on.
Move to Boston, smoking indoors is illegal - no smoke at shows!
Oh, and kudos to ADAM for the Professor Griff comment. I think only people who were Jews (or dating them) in the early 90s would get that joke.
I fear the same thing... what will happen to the music industry when Target and Walmart are the primary merchants?
These are companies that have NO qualms about exerting influence and threatening black-listing to get what they want.
Still, we're not the only ones left wanting more, and here we have this interweb... and myspace, allmusic, etc.
But what happens to consumer expectations on quality when we switch from standardized media (like CD's, etc.) to mp3's and ogg-vorbis and any number of digital formats af varying quality?
I'm seeing the same trend.
man, this site sucks.
man, this site sucks.
Post a Comment