That last line is absolutely true but probably not merely a money thing. In the last 10 years, McCartney has started coming clean about a lot of stuff. Not only is Lucy in the Sky about LSD, but they also heard the Floyd in the room next door at Apple, and re-wrote Point Me at the Sky into the Lucy melody line. 

Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

I think that last line you wrote was a little false.  Maybe in terms of Hendrix, Cream and Pink Floyd (and a lot of the lesser known bands like Creation) did they get a "psychedelic" record like REVOLVER released before the public heard of those bands that were playing London clubs.  But most of the influences that creeped onto earlier albums came from stuff the Beatles heard on records.  A lot of people just didn't purchase those records until after hearing a Beatles record or could even find them due to not having the distribution that EMI and Capitol had.  Donovan can believe what he wants.  He HAD corporate backing.  His label was just slower in releasing his stuff. 

Thane Cesar said:

Also people forget that because of the corporate backing they had, they could absorb influences into their music, record and release them, before the people who influenced them could release their own records (just ask Donovan).

I think that last line you wrote was a little false.  Maybe in terms of Hendrix, Cream and Pink Floyd (and a lot of the lesser known bands like Creation) did they get a "psychedelic" record like REVOLVER released before the public heard of those bands that were playing London clubs.  But most of the influences that creeped onto earlier albums came from stuff the Beatles heard on records.  A lot of people just didn't purchase those records until after hearing a Beatles record or could even find them due to not having the distribution that EMI and Capitol had.  Donovan can believe what he wants.  He HAD corporate backing.  His label was just slower in releasing his stuff. 

Thane Cesar said:

Also people forget that because of the corporate backing they had, they could absorb influences into their music, record and release them, before the people who influenced them could release their own records (just ask Donovan).

Thank you - you said it better than I managed.

Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

I'm probably going to be one of few that agree with you that Beatles changed everything and also point that you got misinterpreted.  They didn't exactly change the world but they had a hand in how many starting viewing it. They changed the way everybody went about carrying on their careers.  A lot of musicians looked at them as a challenge.  If not for them,  a lot of kids would have turning to modern jazz as a form of sophisticated music instead of updating rock.  Classical would have had a much bigger influence.  Rootsier blues and country groups would have been formed instead of garage bands.  AND that's the other thing, for a group like the Sonics to write the songs they did, for an attitude of "we don't want to sound like the Beatles", wouldn't a Beatles have to exist in order to have an anti-Beatles exist?  The Beatles should get a lot of credit as the one who changed the way we think.

matthew rosedon said:

As my original post has been swept up in recent comments I thought I'd respond:

Firstly, the suggestion that EMI throwing money at the Beatles was responsible for their success.  As anyone with a cursory knowledge of the Beatles knows, Brian Epstein was rejected by every major London record label.  In desperation, and as a last chance, he turned to an EMI subsidiary called Parlophone who were known solely, if at all, for producing comedy albums.  The producer of those said comedy albums was, by happy accident, one Mr George Martin - the rest is history.  Similarly, as others have pointed out, Capitol was not interested hence the releases on VJ and Swan before their hand was forced by 'I Want To Hold Your Hand'.  I'm not sure how that constitutes 'buying' success.

One of the posts politely accuses me of ignoring the point that black musicians were doing it first.  Again, anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of popular music knows this to be correct.  The hardline argument tends to say that 'white' music is stolen from 'black' music.  I don't want to get into that here but it is of course true to say that 'white' music is massively indebted to 'black' music.  In all their early interviews, the Beatles acknowledged that debt; they refused to play to segregated audiences.  The Stones were allowed to choose a guest on 'Shindig' (I think); they chose Howlin' Wolf (imagine the shock of that on mainstream US TV at the time); here in the UK Dusty Springfield used her influence to promote a Motown TV special at a time when Motown was barely established here.  It was the first time that a programme consisting of so many black artists had been shown on UK TV.  Now only a fool would say that makes amends for hundreds of years of slavery/imperialist oppression (UK) or slavery/racial segregation (US) but it's a step, an important step, a step in the right direction and a journey of 1000 miles etc. etc.

The Beatles picked up guitars because of Elvis.  Thousands of US garage bands picked up guitars because of the Beatles/Stones/British Invasion and those artists that had already picked up their guitars upped their game e.g. Beach Boys, Dylan, McGuinn etc.  The Beatles didn't block anybodies career, they were, like all great artists, about possibility and hope and about the excitement that lies behind all great art.  Don't be dismissive of teenage girls screaming because they were helping to tilt the word on its axis - John Lee Hooker got it right - 'the men don't know but the little girls understand'. 

I was accused of hyperbole by saying the Beatles changed everything.  I stand by that statement.  In fact, I will go further and say that their artistic achievement is on a par with Shakespeare or Dickens or Picasso or Rembrandt or Mozart.  There I've said it.  Great art does change everything and does make the world a better place.

As an Englishman I am immensely proud that this small island was responsible for The Beatles, The Stones, The Kinks, The Who, The Yardbirds etc (not so proud of Herman's Hermits however)  The downside of that is I get a bit defensive when people attack 'our' music.  I am also a firm believer that people are entitled to their own opinion.  However, I draw the line when words like gutless, mediocre, and Backstreet Boys of their day are used in conjuction with the Fab Four or, even worse, when they're patronisingly dismissed as being an insignificant pop combo who created, by some fluke, the odd hummable ditty.  That I'm afraid can only be answered by meeting said proponents of such nonsense on the field of honour at dawn with the weapon of your choice - swords, pistols, or Phil Collins CDs used like Oddjob in 'Goldfinger'.

But you know this is what I love about this site - the breadth of opinion and the passion shown.  You even get shout outs for Haydn and Bach on here.  Now if someone can start a Beethoven v Shadows of Knight thread we'll really see some sparks fly.

Stay cool everybody.  

 

I'm probably going to be one of few that agree with you that Beatles changed everything and also point that you got misinterpreted.  They didn't exactly change the world but they had a hand in how many starting viewing it. They changed the way everybody went about carrying on their careers.  A lot of musicians looked at them as a challenge.  If not for them,  a lot of kids would have turning to modern jazz as a form of sophisticated music instead of updating rock.  Classical would have had a much bigger influence.  Rootsier blues and country groups would have been formed instead of garage bands.  AND that's the other thing, for a group like the Sonics to write the songs they did, for an attitude of "we don't want to sound like the Beatles", wouldn't a Beatles have to exist in order to have an anti-Beatles exist?  The Beatles should get a lot of credit as the one who changed the way we think.

matthew rosedon said:

As my original post has been swept up in recent comments I thought I'd respond:

Firstly, the suggestion that EMI throwing money at the Beatles was responsible for their success.  As anyone with a cursory knowledge of the Beatles knows, Brian Epstein was rejected by every major London record label.  In desperation, and as a last chance, he turned to an EMI subsidiary called Parlophone who were known solely, if at all, for producing comedy albums.  The producer of those said comedy albums was, by happy accident, one Mr George Martin - the rest is history.  Similarly, as others have pointed out, Capitol was not interested hence the releases on VJ and Swan before their hand was forced by 'I Want To Hold Your Hand'.  I'm not sure how that constitutes 'buying' success.

One of the posts politely accuses me of ignoring the point that black musicians were doing it first.  Again, anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of popular music knows this to be correct.  The hardline argument tends to say that 'white' music is stolen from 'black' music.  I don't want to get into that here but it is of course true to say that 'white' music is massively indebted to 'black' music.  In all their early interviews, the Beatles acknowledged that debt; they refused to play to segregated audiences.  The Stones were allowed to choose a guest on 'Shindig' (I think); they chose Howlin' Wolf (imagine the shock of that on mainstream US TV at the time); here in the UK Dusty Springfield used her influence to promote a Motown TV special at a time when Motown was barely established here.  It was the first time that a programme consisting of so many black artists had been shown on UK TV.  Now only a fool would say that makes amends for hundreds of years of slavery/imperialist oppression (UK) or slavery/racial segregation (US) but it's a step, an important step, a step in the right direction and a journey of 1000 miles etc. etc.

The Beatles picked up guitars because of Elvis.  Thousands of US garage bands picked up guitars because of the Beatles/Stones/British Invasion and those artists that had already picked up their guitars upped their game e.g. Beach Boys, Dylan, McGuinn etc.  The Beatles didn't block anybodies career, they were, like all great artists, about possibility and hope and about the excitement that lies behind all great art.  Don't be dismissive of teenage girls screaming because they were helping to tilt the word on its axis - John Lee Hooker got it right - 'the men don't know but the little girls understand'. 

I was accused of hyperbole by saying the Beatles changed everything.  I stand by that statement.  In fact, I will go further and say that their artistic achievement is on a par with Shakespeare or Dickens or Picasso or Rembrandt or Mozart.  There I've said it.  Great art does change everything and does make the world a better place.

As an Englishman I am immensely proud that this small island was responsible for The Beatles, The Stones, The Kinks, The Who, The Yardbirds etc (not so proud of Herman's Hermits however)  The downside of that is I get a bit defensive when people attack 'our' music.  I am also a firm believer that people are entitled to their own opinion.  However, I draw the line when words like gutless, mediocre, and Backstreet Boys of their day are used in conjuction with the Fab Four or, even worse, when they're patronisingly dismissed as being an insignificant pop combo who created, by some fluke, the odd hummable ditty.  That I'm afraid can only be answered by meeting said proponents of such nonsense on the field of honour at dawn with the weapon of your choice - swords, pistols, or Phil Collins CDs used like Oddjob in 'Goldfinger'.

But you know this is what I love about this site - the breadth of opinion and the passion shown.  You even get shout outs for Haydn and Bach on here.  Now if someone can start a Beethoven v Shadows of Knight thread we'll really see some sparks fly.

Stay cool everybody.  

 

Don, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. But I was making the point that the Beatles were in a position to (basically) take credit for something that wasn't their idea.

It goes back to the revisionism that has surrounded the Beatles since Lennons death. Would we really be having this debate if Lennon hadn't been killed. The reason Chapman shot him was he believed him to be a fake and a hypocrite. Which could be reasonably argued (not to say he deserved to get shot).

I wouldn't read too much into Lennon's FBI file. The peace activist Lennon is a bit of a myth, even his own son said that Lennon was a hypocrite.

Lots of people had FBI files, the MC5, and while they were a cool band, they were to para phase Lemmy "Dumb as Fuck".

Consider the lyrics to Imagine, and how much wealth he had.

I like the tunes, but the rest of it... Natch.

You're right - a pop song won't end a war but it can be part of a cultural shift that alters the zeitgeist and allows opposition to the war to grow.  I would argue that the Beatles (and of course many others) contibuted significantly to that shift.  The file the FBI kept on Lennon showed at least some were worried.

While I also accept your second point, without the sheer quality of what they produced the corporate backing would have been meaningless (and almost certainly not have existed).

This debate has drifted some distance from the original thread.  In the end the music will endure and these cultural issues will be historical footnotes.

Thane Cesar said:

I would say tho' that at times that can be overstated. All You Need Is Love didn't end the Vietnam war. And the political left has been quite revisionistic about Lennons acheivements, as well as the "uptight, hetro, world of white rock n roll" have been quite nasty about Yoko.

Also people forget that because of the corporate backing they had, they could absorb influences into their music, record and release them, before the people who influenced them could release their own records (just ask Donovan).

TC, what you are describing has a name:  LIFE.  Yes life.  In the rain forest vines grow up the trunk of a tree, steals its light, and eventually the tree gets stunted, withers and sometimes dies.  Down below a similar game is being played under and around every rotting carcass. Want to enter that world? Then you'd better arm yourself at least with knowledge and perhaps a rifle.

In other words "fairness" is a construct. And as such it exists only so far as law and custom requires and even then only in the light and when enough people care  (i.e, enough people are personally effected) to take notice.

The Beatles were living things. As was, as a corporate entity, EMI. As is each radio station. As is each consumer of the product of music.

By this I an not saying that ethics should not apply. In my personal life I do my best to make sure that they do. But when I enter the forest it is not with a bible or a sophomore year philosophy book. It is with street smarts (jungle smarts?) and some times, quite literally, a gun.

That the world of art is so effected is nothing new. As Michelangelo. Ask Bach.

and as to their music "changing the world"... Yes it did. If you view the world not as a singular entity or even as the body politic, but as the people individualy. I.e., the way each person in reality views him/herself.

-don

Thane Cesar said:

...because of the corporate backing they had, they could absorb influences into their music, record and release them, before the people who influenced them could release their own records (just ask Donovan).

I would say tho' that at times that can be overstated. All You Need Is Love didn't end the Vietnam war. And the political left has been quite revisionistic about Lennons acheivements, as well as the "uptight, hetro, world of white rock n roll" have been quite nasty about Yoko.

Also people forget that because of the corporate backing they had, they could absorb influences into their music, record and release them, before the people who influenced them could release their own records (just ask Donovan).

Playlist May17/2012.....Live In London Ontario

An all live show comprised of various live recordings at various venues from sleepy London Ontario. Some of the sound quality may not be the greatest, as many of this week's tunes will be from the original cassette tapes done many years ago....enjoy and go out and see some live music here in sleepy London Ontario.

1. Dark Carnival....Ain't Nothin' To Do....recorded live at Call The Office 10/12/90 and features Stooges Ron Ashton and Scott 'Rock Action' Ashton along with our fave diva, Niagara on the screeches. It was a great show and we got to hang out with Ron Ashton afterwards...an interview appeared in What Wave zine as well as some major cool pics (see below and drool) of the band. And we got to tell them who originally did 'My Best Bette' (Mr Kenne Highland) as they had found the song on a compilation tape and loved it so much they covered it at the show, yet had no idea who did the song.

2. catl....Church On Sunday....recorded live at Call The Office 3/16/12.

3. Hi-Tones...That's Alright Mama....recorded live at The Spoke 1/13/12 as part of CHRW's Wired Fridays.

4. Lucky 7....Rock'n'Roll Radio....recorded at Call The Office 2/23/89. This combo played at many clubs here in London...The Firehall, Leadbellys and probably Mingles. They came from NYC and featured Barry Ryan on the guitar, presently Robert Gordon's touring guitarist as well as a member of late 70's NYC punk combo, The Victims. Also in the band, on accordion, keys and vocals was Kenny Margolis, famous NYC studio cat who was also a member of Mink DeVille's legendary band...as well as currently being in Cracker.

5. Ronnie Dawson...Rockin' Bones....recorded live at Leadbellys 3/23/89...The Blonde Bomber from Texas did a 2 night stint here in London, I went one night and Rena went the next...and a FUCKING AMAZING show both nights!!! This particular song was a request from yours truly as he cut the original version that The Cramps borrowed. Really cool guy who signed many of my records and had a smile on his face the whole show!!

6. Ronnie Dawson....Congratulations To Me...recorded live at Leadbellys 3/24/89...a double shot of the Blonde Bomber!!!

7. Blood On The Saddle...Let's Have A Party....recorded live at Key West 12/17/86 in front of a small crowd. Singer Annette (original member of The Bangles) wasn't in the best of moods for this show, but MAN can she belt out a tune!!

8. Uranus....Uranium Rock....recorded at The Embassy 3/22/82 and broadcast over CHRW. We had guitarist Jack on a coupla weeks back for the 30th anniversary of this broadcast to talk about those days. And that's Uranus in the pic below.

9. The Fleshtones....Hexbreaker...recorded live at Call The Office 11/22/90 and we started upstairs in the dressing rooms and marched down the stairs with the band as they liked to start the party upstairs and bring it onto the stage. Possibly the most fun band in the entire universe!! You can read all about them in Sweat, by Joe Bonomo as he gives this legendary combo their just tribute in print.

10. Chesterfield Kings...Loose Lip Sync Ship...recorded live at Bullwinkles 5/29/86 and the only time these guys ever came to London.

11. The Fuzztones...Cinderella...recorded live at Key West 4/5/87 to a hot sweaty packed crowd. I was right up front with Psychedelic Pete, mere inches away from Rudi and the boys as they ripped through their set. We didn't find out till many years later, the bass player was none other than John Carlucci (of The Speedies) and presently in The Beat Killers, a killer combo who are in Europe right now. And below is a pic of how close we were to a sweaty Rudi....we won't talk about the underage that Rudi left with that night...

12. The Gruesomes....I'm A Bloodhound...recorded live at Key West 1/11/87. This was the first time we brought these kids into London, and it being a sunday night in January, we were a little concerned that no one would show up. But, the joint was packed and rockin' as Gruesomania had hit London and the boys were well recieved! Think they stayed for several days at our place after this show as we had lots of cartoons, junk food and videos for the boys to enjoy! The first of many many visits by The Gruesomes to this town and our place.

13. Light Bulb Alley....Money....recorded live at Call The Office 5/4/12 and these guys are now labelmates of The Gruesomes on Ricochet Sound from Montreal.

14. Bad Bad Bad....Fucked Up...recorded live at The Black Shire Pub 3/29/12 right after they came to visit us live on Radio What Wave....way cool 2 piece from Halifax!

15. Light Bulb Alley...Pepper Spray...recorded live at Call The Office 5/4/12 and this song is on the latest garagepunk hideout download, We Love Trash.

16. Das Furlines...Boys Are Boys....recorded live at Call The Office 6/5/86. Das Furlines were an all female combo from NYC who were basically a tribute to The Monks, the German band of X-US Army GI's from 1966. One of the wildest shows that involved total crowd participation and the conch!! You hadda be there!! This combo featured Fuzztone keyboard player Deb O'Nair as well as NYC crazy woman, Wendy Wild. And, this was the only time the band was recorded live...right here in sleepy London Ontario!! This was well before their appearance in People magazine and their bogus entry in the 1995 Rolling Stone Record Guide which had them coming from the Black Forest of Germany and releasing many many records. Nope, just a coupla compilation appearances.

17. Link Protrudi and The Jaymen....The Stroll...recorded live at Key West 9/25/86. Essentially The Fuzztones doing all instros ala Link Wray....

18. Boy From Nowhere....Lift Up Your Hood....recorded live at The Brunswick, probably early 90's. With a nice little intro regaling the finer points of The Brunswick Hotel, situated in downtown London, conveniently located across from the bus terminal. A demonic version of DMZ's tune done with sledgehammers to the head! Indeed, The Boy could rock with the best. Bassist Brian Young is currently a member of The Canadian Lyres touring band....they back up Monoman when he hops the border into Canada.

19. UIC....Cropdusting....recorded live at Call The Office 3/16/85. There's also a youtube of this song (as well as others from the same show) which features a bunch of youngsters dancing around like fools, self included! And yes, i still dance like a fool 27 years later! Below is Murray beating the living daylights out of his kit in front of the UIC flag!

20. The Diodes...Time Damage...recorded live at Call The Office 11/18/11. The second time the re-united Diodes have come to London and both times, excellent shows!!

21. The Hook Up....65 Has No Blues....recorded live at The Spoke 11/25/11 as part of CHRW's Wired Fridays.

22. The Fine Print...Remember....recorded live at Brennan's Beer Bistro 11/5/11. A GREAT local combo who don't play out enough.

23. Shadowy Men On A Shadowy Planet....Who's Afraid of Alison Hymer/Having An Average Weekend....recorded live at Call The Office 7/17/86. First ever appearance by this now legendary combo to London....a very typical London crowd...maybe 10 people out to see them. Listen to the lack of applause after Average, that's just me clapping. Luckily for sleepy London, this trio came back many times and packed the house!!

Outta time but only the tip of the iceberg for live recordings from London Ontario...hope you enjoyed the show. Thanx for all the phone-ins, emails, facebook comments etc! This one was a blast to prep, as i went through a ton of tapes, some that i was hoping to use didn't have the greatest sound quality and hence, were nicked from the show.

Back atcha next week with a bunch of new stuff and as always, some surprises!

Here's a link to the podcasts that are up for one week only:

http://chrwradio.com/podcasts/94-9CHRWThu1800.mp3

http://chrwradio.com/podcasts/94-9CHRWThu1830.mp3

http://chrwradio.com/podcasts/94-9CHRWThu1900.mp3

Don , I don't know where "Handjob" came from (Tho' rumor had it "Juju Hand" was  about hand jobs.). Do you mean where he said 'Hattie told Mattie"..... I heard "I wanna Hold Your Hand " as "I get high", or , rather , a clever way to make it SOUND like that. Of course , a year later , "It's Only Love"said "I get High when I see you go by"....

We used to laughour asses off to (sic) "Gie Liebe Dicht" , or "She Loves You" in German. "She Lick Dick , YEAH ! YEAH ! YEAH !".
 
Don said:

The other threads got me thinking Beatles. The sheet music to I Want to Hold Your Hand says "Its such a feeling that my love, I can't hide."  I always hear (to this day) "I get high."

And no band of the sixties would do Wooly Bully without screamin out "hand job."  What Sam really cried out I have no idea.

:)

-Don

Bon has a lot of integrity , tho' I have'nt seen her site in some time.

People sucking money out of people  who don't have it , that's Rock'n'Roll.

You'll find that even some of the biggest names have been raped by shysters in the past (Notice the deafening silence that fell with Allen Klein's demise?).

But , these creeps want to make an example of Bon Von Wheelie and others like her , burn 'em at the stake....Or , just burn them.

Bon , you must NOT be a witch. Yours is the righteous path covered in stones , busted glass , and rare Garage 45s, smashed and shattered into unplayability.  But , we believe you'll win.

Show #374: "Friday & Saturday Songs"

Every 3 weeks I leave an open slot to do random themes and whatnot. This week's theme is "Friday & Saturday Songs". As of May 20th it'll be seven years since The Metaphysical Circus switched from Sunday night to Friday Night, and I'm celebrating by playing all songs about Friday and Saturday (since the show runs til 1am on Saturday morning). I've excluded all songs about Saturday night because; 1. there's too many, and 2. the show has never aired on a Saturday night. So tune in tonight at 10pm for all sorts of great songs about Friday and Saturday of the 60's and 70's, by bands and artists like: Genesis, King Crimson, The Turtles, The Sons Of Adam, Fickle Pickle, Them, Majority One, David Bowie, The Pretty Things, Chicago, Nick Drake, The Second Helping, Van Morrison, Nancy Sinatra, Steely Dan, The Walker Brothers, Funkadelic, Groep 1850, The Monkees, Mott The Hoople, The Outsiders, Atomic Rooster, The Easybeats, The Sandpipers, Keith West, and many others!!!

***To stream The Metaphysical Circus live via the web click this link: http://portsmouthcommunityradio.org/listen ... to listen to past shows, view playlists and more, fan the show on facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Metap ... 50?sk=wall … or check out my website (to be updated someday): http://eggmanrulez.com/
Live every Friday night at 10pm to 1am EST on WSCA-LP 106.1 FM, Portsmouth Community Radio!

Watch my playlist unravel before your eyes LIVE here: http://wscafm.radioactivity.fm/

Egg

Now you're talkin'! You sound like our drummer - case of beer on the deck out back! That's great about Roger's son. The next generation is also 'priceless'. Do you know The Vees? Bobby Vee's sons? An absolutely amazing rockabilly band in their own right, and session players of the first order in any situation. Our drummer's son is also a multi-talented musician, now busy raising his own next generation.  Gerry Gabel from Gonn is Doctor of Music at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, for decades he's been writing everything from Cage-ish performance pieces to classical themed music, previously taught at Dartmouth, USC, has works being performed at universities in Unkraine and elsewhere. Nonetheless he's done the majority of Gonn things since 1996 but finally had to bow out on the latest series with such demanding and diverse other interests & irons in the fire. I've had your album pass through my business a number of times.  Next time, it goes straight to the turntable. I have to hear what you're set's gonna be like on those youtube videos of The Abstracts reunion tour!   

Don said:

No argument with any of the above Craig.

What I'd enjoy most would be to get the guys onto my porch on a summer day with an open tap of cold brew and just wail. That I am hoping we can find time for.

And as regards fans, yup. Would you believe that the President of the Abstracts Fan Club has contacted us. She - about 14 when I first met her and 16 going on 17 when I last saw her - is now a grandmother, retired and living in Florida. But she's still a fan! (and we sent her an autographed copy of our album to show her our ever-lasting gratitude for all she did for and with us back then.)

Of course she has her memories too. Of being a guest on The Cousin Brucie Show -- then the hottest radio show in metropolitan NY -- to talk about the Abs.

Yup, we musicians have quite the life and help create quite the life for others!  Wonderful isn't it? :)))

-don

And this post script - if we do get together, be it for a weekend, a studio session or a tour - we have a bass player lined up. Jordan Ponzi, Roger's son who plays and teaches bass professionally, has offered to step into his dad's size 12 shoes.  So glad Roger's great genes weren't wasted!

CRAIG MOORE said:

Don, so sorry to hear about your bass player. That's tough. It's a sad fact we'll all have to contend with. We have been fortunate so far... knock on wood. I  don't disagree with you in general as to moving into other careers, etc, and leaving the old band behind, but there is a lot of validity to those who regroup. It's about the music, not the money, age irrelevant, and if the spirit moves you, why not? There are countless such examples of careers going in very different directions, including members of my own band. And yet, here we are. I'd bet there is an audience out there who would dearly LOVE to see your band. And I'd bet that after you did it once, you'd be quite pleased to do it again...  You might see something in your music and your band that you hadn't noticed before or forgot about, coming back at you from the audience. It's infectious. Anyway, comment threads can get out of control & get all misconstrued, so I'll bow out here.  All the best !!!

No argument with any of the above Craig.

What I'd enjoy most would be to get the guys onto my porch on a summer day with an open tap of cold brew and just wail. That I am hoping we can find time for.

And as regards fans, yup. Would you believe that the President of the Abstracts Fan Club has contacted us. She - about 14 when I first met her and 16 going on 17 when I last saw her - is now a grandmother, retired and living in Florida. But she's still a fan! (and we sent her an autographed copy of our album to show her our ever-lasting gratitude for all she did for and with us back then.)

Of course she has her memories too. Of being a guest on The Cousin Brucie Show -- then the hottest radio show in metropolitan NY -- to talk about the Abs.

Yup, we musicians have quite the life and help create quite the life for others!  Wonderful isn't it? :)))

-don

And this post script - if we do get together, be it for a weekend, a studio session or a tour - we have a bass player lined up. Jordan Ponzi, Roger's son who plays and teaches bass professionally, has offered to step into his dad's size 12 shoes.  So glad Roger's great genes weren't wasted!

CRAIG MOORE said:

Don, so sorry to hear about your bass player. That's tough. It's a sad fact we'll all have to contend with. We have been fortunate so far... knock on wood. I  don't disagree with you in general as to moving into other careers, etc, and leaving the old band behind, but there is a lot of validity to those who regroup. It's about the music, not the money, age irrelevant, and if the spirit moves you, why not? There are countless such examples of careers going in very different directions, including members of my own band. And yet, here we are. I'd bet there is an audience out there who would dearly LOVE to see your band. And I'd bet that after you did it once, you'd be quite pleased to do it again...  You might see something in your music and your band that you hadn't noticed before or forgot about, coming back at you from the audience. It's infectious. Anyway, comment threads can get out of control & get all misconstrued, so I'll bow out here.  All the best !!!

Don, so sorry to hear about your bass player. That's tough. It's a sad fact we'll all have to contend with. We have been fortunate so far... knock on wood. I  don't disagree with you in general as to moving into other careers, etc, and leaving the old band behind, but there is a lot of validity to those who regroup. It's about the music, not the money, age irrelevant, and if the spirit moves you, why not? There are countless such examples of careers going in very different directions, including members of my own band. And yet, here we are. I'd bet there is an audience out there who would dearly LOVE to see your band. And I'd bet that after you did it once, you'd be quite pleased to do it again...  You might see something in your music and your band that you hadn't noticed before or forgot about, coming back at you from the audience. It's infectious. Anyway, comment threads can get out of control & get all misconstrued, so I'll bow out here.  All the best !!!

matthew rosedon said:

You talk more sense than the rest of us put together, my friend.

 

Don said:

MzA, I think that if a group (or an individual musician for that matter) has stayed with it, growing together, then going back over their older material could be seen as relaying their foundation stones -- a means of keeping creativity alive.

In the case of The Abstracts all the living members (Roger Ponzi, our extraordinary bass player, sadly died at a fairly young age) went on to other careers -- in some cases quite notable ones in fact. Thus the connection to what the band created in the sixties only exists in our memories and in those of our fans.

But in rereading the initial post that started his thread I realize that the focus was much broader. Can an older person still "rock" -- that is keep the qualities that are at the heart of rock and roll. And to that I have to answer "yes!"  Love of life and living. Openness to new ideas and new ways of seeing the world. These are qualities that to my way of thinking are as basic to living as taking breath. 

Indeed, if I have any concerns about the interest being shown in `60s rock it is just that the sixties are over. The experiments that made up the sixties social questions now have been answered. (And some of the answers -- achh! -- are closer to what the old folks said they'd be then what we young people wished and argued for)  So yes, make the music live. Make the spirit behind the music live. But please, please don't get caught up in imitating the style of those times. To do that is akin to high school students doing a science class "experiment" that in fact is no experiment at all. How can it be? The answer is already known. And so too with the "experiments" of the sixties. The anti authority pose while eating the spoils of that society. The communitarian-ism in place of real individuality. Etc. Etc. No! Instead rock on. TRULY rock on! :)

-don

Craig, all the power to you for finding joy in the continuity of your life. You found your space and love it. I have nothing to say to that but "good for you! Go for it!"

But to reach the conclusion you reached about the choices the members of The Abstracts have made while knowing so little about our lives is, well, to put it kindly, unwise. Let me explain...

One of the band members went on to a life that including producing several motion pictures, one of which is already considered a cult classic. He also managed the film and TV career of one of Motown's greatest stars, was Director of MultiMedia Productions for Sony, and today is the CEO of a world music company.  He still writes music and regularly records with big names in both his home city -- L.A. -- and in Nashville.

Another band member went on to compose music for film and then turned his attention to his second major interest - imaging - and spent many fruitful years developing specialized photographic techniques for medicine and science. His name appears on literally hundreds of scientific papers and several books. There are more than a few people walking this earth because of diagnostic tools that he gave the medical profession.

Yet another band member continued on his course as an aviation artist and historian. His works are on display in such places as The Smithsonian Institute. He is the author of several books the latest of which is of interest enough to have landed him a recent guest spot with Jay Leno. And he is currently occupied as a consultant with NASA for the designs for the display of the recently retired Space Shuttles.

Yup, sounds like guys who have gotten "really old inside."  What a shame they "let go" to do this stuff instead of continuing to play their `60s semi-hits.

But for all that I do rejoice for you in the joy your own choices obviously continue to bring you.

-don

CRAIG MOORE said:

Hi ya Don - wellllll different strokes for different folks. "not who you were" misses the point altogether.(snip)... Don bless you but to me it sounds like The Abstracts have gotten truly old on the inside, it's sad to lose touch with your younger self since there is no societal reason to let go of it or be so dismissive of it. God bless the audience and all of the still active groups & perfomers from all eras & all fields - pop, the teen idols, blues, jazz, classical, dixieland, big bands, folk, punk, metal, and ROCK 'N ROLL! Go down swingin', literally.

Agreed!

matthew rosedon said:

You talk more sense than the rest of us put together, my friend.

 

Don said:

MzA, I think that if a group (or an individual musician for that matter) has stayed with it, growing together, then going back over their older material could be seen as relaying their foundation stones -- a means of keeping creativity alive.

In the case of The Abstracts all the living members (Roger Ponzi, our extraordinary bass player, sadly died at a fairly young age) went on to other careers -- in some cases quite notable ones in fact. Thus the connection to what the band created in the sixties only exists in our memories and in those of our fans.

But in rereading the initial post that started his thread I realize that the focus was much broader. Can an older person still "rock" -- that is keep the qualities that are at the heart of rock and roll. And to that I have to answer "yes!"  Love of life and living. Openness to new ideas and new ways of seeing the world. These are qualities that to my way of thinking are as basic to living as taking breath. 

Indeed, if I have any concerns about the interest being shown in `60s rock it is just that the sixties are over. The experiments that made up the sixties social questions now have been answered. (And some of the answers -- achh! -- are closer to what the old folks said they'd be then what we young people wished and argued for)  So yes, make the music live. Make the spirit behind the music live. But please, please don't get caught up in imitating the style of those times. To do that is akin to high school students doing a science class "experiment" that in fact is no experiment at all. How can it be? The answer is already known. And so too with the "experiments" of the sixties. The anti authority pose while eating the spoils of that society. The communitarian-ism in place of real individuality. Etc. Etc. No! Instead rock on. TRULY rock on! :)

-don

You talk more sense than the rest of us put together, my friend.

Don said:

MzA, I think that if a group (or an individual musician for that matter) has stayed with it, growing together, then going back over their older material could be seen as relaying their foundation stones -- a means of keeping creativity alive.

In the case of The Abstracts all the living members (Roger Ponzi, our extraordinary bass player, sadly died at a fairly young age) went on to other careers -- in some cases quite notable ones in fact. Thus the connection to what the band created in the sixties only exists in our memories and in those of our fans.

But in rereading the initial post that started his thread I realize that the focus was much broader. Can an older person still "rock" -- that is keep the qualities that are at the heart of rock and roll. And to that I have to answer "yes!"  Love of life and living. Openness to new ideas and new ways of seeing the world. These are qualities that to my way of thinking are as basic to living as taking breath. 

Indeed, if I have any concerns about the interest being shown in `60s rock it is just that the sixties are over. The experiments that made up the sixties social questions now have been answered. (And some of the answers -- achh! -- are closer to what the old folks said they'd be then what we young people wished and argued for)  So yes, make the music live. Make the spirit behind the music live. But please, please don't get caught up in imitating the style of those times. To do that is akin to high school students doing a science class "experiment" that in fact is no experiment at all. How can it be? The answer is already known. And so too with the "experiments" of the sixties. The anti authority pose while eating the spoils of that society. The communitarian-ism in place of real individuality. Etc. Etc. No! Instead rock on. TRULY rock on! :)

-don

MzA, I think that if a group (or an individual musician for that matter) has stayed with it, growing together, then going back over their older material could be seen as relaying their foundation stones -- a means of keeping creativity alive.

In the case of The Abstracts all the living members (Roger Ponzi, our extraordinary bass player, sadly died at a fairly young age) went on to other careers -- in some cases quite notable ones in fact. Thus the connection to what the band created in the sixties only exists in our memories and in those of our fans.

But in rereading the initial post that started his thread I realize that the focus was much broader. Can an older person still "rock" -- that is keep the qualities that are at the heart of rock and roll. And to that I have to answer "yes!"  Love of life and living. Openness to new ideas and new ways of seeing the world. These are qualities that to my way of thinking are as basic to living as taking breath. 

Indeed, if I have any concerns about the interest being shown in `60s rock it is just that the sixties are over. The experiments that made up the sixties social questions now have been answered. (And some of the answers -- achh! -- are closer to what the old folks said they'd be then what we young people wished and argued for)  So yes, make the music live. Make the spirit behind the music live. But please, please don't get caught up in imitating the style of those times. To do that is akin to high school students doing a science class "experiment" that in fact is no experiment at all. How can it be? The answer is already known. And so too with the "experiments" of the sixties. The anti authority pose while eating the spoils of that society. The communitarian-ism in place of real individuality. Etc. Etc. No! Instead rock on. TRULY rock on! :)

-don

Don said:

I do not think one has to be too old to rock, but one can be.  Rock comes from within.
And by that I do not mean it as condescension. A person can still be a creative musician but no longer be a rock and roller.  Life has simply led them to other things. To me there is nothing wrong with that. Others, however, take their life experience and use it to make better RnR. Nothing wrong with that either! :)

What is to me sad, however, is someone who has grown past their rockin' years who feels the need to pretend that they've not.  And it is especially sad (to me) if they are forced to play the same old song(s) that they played in their younger days if/when they no longer feel them.

When my `60s group The Abstracts recently had an album released of material we had recorded back in the `60s we had some interest shown in out doing a European tour. But in the final analysis we realized that while all of the living members of the band still "rocked" we had individually moved on style-wise.  Me to naked acoustic rock and blues.  To redo our old songs once or twice would be a hoot. But to be forced to do it night after night would not.  No, I'd rather be in the audience then that!

As one member of the band put it. `Can you imagine playing one of out more popular songs for the twelve millionth time, for instance on a cruise ship for wishing-they-were-young retirees?'  Ach! 

But the odd thing is that this person still regularly plays with a band for the pure pleasure of it, doing much of the general `60s repertoire. And I dig back deeper -- often into the Chess catalog from the fifties.

I say: Be who you are, not who you were. And enjoy it! :D

-don

I completely dig what you're saying Don.  Nobody should feel compelled to relive their youth unless you're really feeling it.  It's why nostalgia acts can be so depressing, but people who continue along same path of music into adulthood inspiring.  Certainly nobody can throw stones at recent releases by Mission of Burma or an array of other people who keep putting out new stuff.  I guess you have to get the sense that the music still really means something to the performer.  

I saw Sparks a few years back in London when they were doing their 21 records in 21 nights thing, I was there for "Indiscreet".  That record that came out in 1975 and there were fans around me who obviously had been waiting since then to hear these songs live again.  But the crowd also had kids in their 20's, probably hearing some of these songs live for the first time.  It gave one a warm rock feeling inside seeing all of them in one place, united in loving that record.  

PS Thanks for the kind words URGENT FURY

Don said:

To redo our old songs once or twice would be a hoot. But to be forced to do it night after night would not.  No, I'd rather be in the audience then that!

I say: Be who you are, not who you were. And enjoy it! :D

man ..My bro is 70 and substantially older than me and has played in rock surf punk and cowpunk bands since 1958 ......too old to rock will be the day they nail him in his box

Bass guitars:

1980s Fender P-Bass (Korean)
1970s Cort P-Bass

Bass amp:

1978 Music Man HD 150
Avatar 2x10 bass cabinet (white tolex)

Guitar:

1972 Fender Thinline Telecaster Re-issue (w/ 2 Gibson '57 humbuckers in it)

Pedals:

Electro Harmonix Germanium Over Drive
Electro Harmonix Bass Big Muff
Boss DD-5 Digital Delay
Boss TU-3 Chromatic Tuner