---

Posted by Jevon the Tall on 07-15-2004 at21:24:

 

... one to the leg.

---

Posted by audiori on 07-15-2004 at21:31:

 

quote:

Originally posted by Eleanor quote: Originally posted by audiori Maybe the real key is the timing of the negative comments, if they happen exactly when something is being sold and they go to the exact customer base... thats hurtful. There is no other way to put it. but what if something REALLY sucks? (not that anything has or does or will, it's just a question) The kind of suck where everyone thinks it glows with warmth, even you guys!

You mean like M8's Little Red Riding Hood reissue?

---

Posted by jeffrey k. on 07-15-2004 at21:39:

 

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Pedantic Other than to say (edit) not every one has a DVD player....

Yeah...I call those people luddites!

jeffrey k.

---

Posted by audiori on 07-15-2004 at21:39:

 

quote:

Originally posted by Jevon the Tall I said it was good. How is that negative?.... I promise to make no more comments other than rose coloured glasses comments ....

Again, we weren't making any comments directly about anything
here necessarily. We said that several times in our post... not
everything we said applies to everyone's comments. Most of our
comments weren't even about Mutt...

We're also not saying that no one can ever be negative or post
negative opinions about a release... we're just saying that the fans
should keep in mind that their words may be read by people that
are deciding whether or not to buy a new release... if within days of
something being released, someone feels the urge to post to the
DAmb, the 77smb, the DADL, the DADL-OT, the Lost Dogs list and
the 77s listserv explaining how bad the project is... stop and think
for a moment about how that might affect sales of a project that is
only a few days old. Is the goal to talk someone out of buying the
project? Sometimes, it feels like that is the goal of a few... (again,
not directed to you or anyone else necessarily).

---

Posted by Eleanor on 07-15-2004 at22:07:

 

quote:

Originally posted by audiori quote: Originally posted by Eleanor quote: Originally posted by audiori Maybe the real key is the timing of the negative comments, if they happen exactly when something is being sold and they go to the exact customer base... thats hurtful. There is no other way to put it. but what if something REALLY sucks? (not that anything has or does or will, it's just a question) The kind of suck where everyone thinks it glows with warmth, even you guys! You mean like M8's Little Red Riding Hood reissue?

yeah, like that

---

Posted by audiori on 07-15-2004 at22:48:

 

quote:

Originally posted by Eleanor quote: You mean like M8's Little Red Riding Hood reissue? yeah, like that

Well... hopefully, nothing will ever suck that bad...
If something is unauthorized and unapproved - trash
it all ya want.

---

Posted by jeffrey k. on 07-15-2004 at23:55:

 

quote:

Originally posted by Jevon the Tall I promise to make no more comments other than rose coloured glasses comments in light of being called an idiot like Peter.

Oh jeez....

quote:

Originally posted by Jevon the Tall Who I've only met once, and his comments were about the train more than the dogs. Peter is a reviewer who didn't like the allusion and went off on it. He also has really unruly hair, maybe that's what has him on edge.

No....that isn't what he did. He started by critiquing my liner notes on the Damb because he didn't agree with them. Liner notes. I didn't know who he was, so I thought it was a bit of a joke and responded rather flip to more or less get over it. And then he started in on everything else. The DVD didn't hold his attention, the commentary tracks weren't long enough, the choice of Chicago as a city to film in didn't make sense because it's not a "cowboy town" and the Dogs call themselves a "cowboy band", the train images didn't make sense....and so on. And yeah....at the end of all this he would say he "liked it". Like being overly critical and then adding "but I like it" somehow makes it an actual critique vs. someone just being a prick in a public forum because they can? And the worst part, no matter what I said to explain the film choices I was being "defensive". Hell yeah I was defensive. Who wouldn't be? I had just spent thousands of dollars and countless hours of work to bring this release out, and I was watching ONE guy go on several public forums where the very fans of this band hang out, and he's nitpicking the DVD and people are paying attention.....and at the same time the orders dropped from roughly 40 a day, to 2 total over the 7 day period following his mass posting.

So you tell me Jevon, how was that "discussion" good for business???

And here is the part that I think perhaps you and several others have a problem with, like it or not, overtly negative comments on these message boards/lists DO effect sales. And I'm not talking about the "I'm not a big fan of this song" type comments....it's this stuff: "but what sinks the album is Steve. I mean what was with all of the tacky percussion, and cutesy patterns - e.g. the scandelous version of said night. At least he's buried in the mix, sadly so is Tim...Steve added his highschool marching band glockenspiel to the mix and it was truly horrible...." and "Maybe I'll start a thread where I unload on MUTT - a "nice" album where the word cutesy comes to mind more often than the oohs and ahs. It's like they've decided that in order to be the Dogs their songs have to verge on boring to be considered." Jevon, you said that stuff, and yeah man...you sold me...it really sounds like you like Mutt. Maybe I'm missing something, but how can saying that stuff be interpreted as "I actually like this and it's worth picking up?" You tell me, cause I'm missing it.

And yeah, should people think for themselves....yeah....but sometimes they don't. Plus, the majority of people on these boards don't have the time or money to buy something they might only like a little bit, so they look to others for opinions and strong opinions DO often shape decisions. So while neither myself or the Townsends want to stifle free speech, when you personally are involved with the money, time, and effort that went into bringing even the smallest release to a fanbase, it's very troubling when people start picking at a release right away because you do need every sale to count.....and the negative stuff DOES turn people away.

And here is the thing, and I mean this, if Peter had written an actual review of the DVD and had it published in Christianity Today (or something like that) with all of his gripes intact, I really don't think it would have mattered that much. It would still have been annoying, but I doubt it would have effected sales that much because they don't cater to the fanbase, and if you actually read his gripes it sounds like he has a personal bone to pick, and I think the casual reader would have been able to pick up on that. But instead he went right to the fan-base and that is where the damage was done.

If anything, I think this has been a needed discussion, and I think it's been a longtime coming. I really like the Townsends thoughts here: We're not saying that no one can ever be negative or post negative opinions about a release... we're just saying that the fans should keep in mind that their words may be read by people that are deciding whether or not to buy a new release... if within days (or weeks) of something being released, someone feels the urge to post to the DAmb, the 77smb, the DADL, the DADL-OT, the Lost Dogs list and the 77s listserv explaining how bad the project is...(or just overtly negative stuff) stop and think for a moment about how that might affect sales of a project that is only a few days old.

anyway....

jeffrey k.

---

Posted by dorfsmith on 07-16-2004 at00:54:

 

Since this site is all about supporting the band perhaps it would be wise to take negative comments to the dump. I'm all for that if it keeps sales up. That is the purpose of this site right???

By the way, Did you get my email Jeffery? I got the CD today and love it. Every song is better than the original I think we all agree that even if we don't like a Terry CD as much as another it is better than anything else out there so it's always 5 stars (in my book anyway)

---

Posted by bereal on 07-16-2004 at01:03:

 

quote:

Originally posted by dorfsmith Since this site is all about supporting the band perhaps it would be wise to take negative comments to the dump. I'm all for that if it keeps sales up. That is the purpose of this site right???

Amen brutha!

quote:

Every song is better than the original I think we all agree that even if we don't like a Terry CD as much as another it is better than anything else out there so it's always 5 stars (in my book anyway)

Oh, yeah!

---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 07-16-2004 at08:39:

 

quote:

Originally posted by dorfsmith Since this site is all about supporting the band perhaps it would be wise to take negative comments to the dump. I'm all for that if it keeps sales up. That is the purpose of this site right??? By the way, Did you get my email Jeffery? I got the CD today and love it. Every song is better than the original I think we all agree that even if we don't like a Terry CD as much as another it is better than anything else out there so it's always 5 stars (in my book anyway)

I think maybe audis should consider something like "stuff ALL reviews in the dump for 1 month" or something. Or "if you have posted more than 50 times to the board, put your review in the dump for a month or two". I don't know, but apparently it does cost the band and I sure don't want to mess with their pocketbook, even though I do feel I'm entitled to my opinion, good or bad.

---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 07-16-2004 at08:41:

 

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Pedantic It's all that old business creedo that a happy customer will tell 2 people and an unhappy one will tell 11. I rent with a manager at McDonalds and he made the comment that a customer who walks away never to return is a loss of $NZ25,000 to the company.

I thought about this, too.

The other thing I thought about is this:
This is CCM somewhat and church people are involved. I would say even more than the general public, church people tend to be more easily misled and confused, which further compounds the problem.

---

Posted by DwDunphy on 07-16-2004 at10:02:

  My review - at least the gist of it

I'm currently hammering out a review on MusicTAP for "Mutt", but in light of the brouhaha, I figured I'd step in and say something.

"Mutt" is going to be reviewed alongside two other discs, all featuring (let's be honest) the gimmick of revisting the artist(s)' past: "Mutt", "The Randy Newman Songbook Vol. 1" and Rush's "Feedback". Of the three, "Mutt" works best because of the variety aspect of it. Three voices interchanging across examples of each performer's body of work. I like that and feel it is closer to what the Dogs should be.

Don't get me wrong. I loved "Gift Horse", "Real Men Cry" and "Nazarene Crying Towel", but all three found Terry becoming the leader of the band. That unique soundingboard for all vocalists to try something different was quickly changing because only one vision was guiding the writing. Although hinged in revisitation, "Mutt" is closer to the ideal of "Scenic Routes" than the band has been in a long time, and I welcome it.

As for The Randy Newman Songbook Vol. 1, there are two fatal flaws with it in my eyes. The first is that it's just Randy and the piano, which is fine because he's insanely talented. But a whole disc of just that approach is hard to get comfortable with, especially a bawdy barnburner like "You Can Leave Your Hat On". The second flaw is that his song from Toy Story 2 "When She Loved Me" is here only as instrumental. That's like reciting a poem and cutting out all the nouns.

"Feedback" from Rush finds the prog/hard rock legends revisiting the classic songs from the 60s that caused Lee, Lifeson & Peart to be in music. Some of the songs work very well; "Heart Full Of Soul", "Mr. Soul", even a more-faithful version of "Summertime Blues" works better than the Blue Cheer version of the Eddie Cochran tune. Some tunes don't work at all. The literal-minded, straightforward approach of Buffalo Springfield's "For What It's Worth" is so dated and far away from Neil Peart's sometimes cryptic lyrics, causing the tune to sound less like a tribute and more like karaoke. Their version of "Crossroads" from Robert Johnson is very good but pales in comparison to Cream's cover (the version Rush is paying respect to here).

But yeah, "Mutt" stays truest to the original intent of the Lost Dogs than those other two discs do in theirs', in my opinion.

DwD

---

Posted by sprinklerhead on 07-16-2004 at10:13:

  RE: My review - at least the gist of it

quote:

Originally posted by DwDunphy Don't get me wrong. I loved "Gift Horse", "Real Men Cry" and "Nazarene Crying Towel", but all three found Terry becoming the leader of the band. That unique soundingboard for all vocalists to try something different was quickly changing because only one vision was guiding the writing. Although hinged in revisitation, "Mutt" is closer to the ideal of "Scenic Routes" than the band has been in a long time, and I welcome it. DwD

Right on!! I love Terry to the point that my wife and friends are tired of hearing me talk about him but, I agree. The appeal of the earlier Dogs recordings were that each member was bringing something to the recording sessions. It gave great variety to the CDs. The last few releases have been heavy handed towards Terry's input. Really, I am not complaining because I love the stuff that Terry does. I would just like to see the other guys shine a little more too.

---

Posted by DwDunphy on 07-16-2004 at10:19:

  What bothers me...

There isn't a lot of music out there like The Dogs, in any capacity. Maybe Pinetop Seven, Calexico and (now) Jim White, but the venue for the americana-style of music is getting smaller and smaller. And it also seems that there is still a large sector of the fans that just want the Dogs to rock.

But the band is very different now, more reflective. They lost an integral member, have been in the "industry" for quite some time, all were promised the moon by the big labels at one point or another and alll of them got moldy cheese as their payback. With that in mind, I can see how the Dogs would collectively say, "this is the truest expression of us, where we are, right now."

Now, would I welcome a rockin' Eddies, Sevens or Choir release in the future? Sure. But I understand the crux of what the Dogs are and, actually have always been, and if someone listens to a disc for what they want versus what is there, they will always be disappointed. "What you want" is almost uniformly much more than most are able to give, and it is very much an unfair benchmark to ask for.

But that's me rambling.
DwD

---

Posted by Jevon the Tall on 07-16-2004 at10:20:

 

... ack head shot.


White flag - I give, move this to the dump or delete it.

J.

---

Posted by jeffrey k. on 07-16-2004 at10:41:

  RE: What bothers me...

quote:

Originally posted by DwDunphy There isn't a lot of music out there like The Dogs, in any capacity. Maybe Pinetop Seven, Calexico and (now) Jim White, but the venue for the americana-style of music is getting smaller and smaller. And it also seems that there is still a large sector of the fans that just want the Dogs to rock. But the band is very different now, more reflective. They lost an integral member, have been in the "industry" for quite some time, all were promised the moon by the big labels at one point or another and alll of them got moldy cheese as their payback. With that in mind, I can see how the Dogs would collectively say, "this is the truest expression of us, where we are, right now." Now, would I welcome a rockin' Eddies, Sevens or Choir release in the future? Sure. But I understand the crux of what the Dogs are and, actually have always been, and if someone listens to a disc for what they want versus what is there, they will always be disappointed. "What you want" is almost uniformly much more than most are able to give, and it is very much an unfair benchmark to ask for. But that's me rambling. DwD

Excellent post.

As a side note, do you have the latest Jim White record? I have that "wrong eyed jesus" CD and I like it, but I've sorta lost touch since then. He did a movie recently, a documentary on the underbelly of southern culture that also features 16 Horsepower that I'd really like to see. I think right now it only has Euro distro.

jeffrey k.

---

Posted by jiminy on 07-16-2004 at10:49:

 

"forward..then back
forward..then back


forward..then back..."

Jim Garrisons narrative on the Zapruter film....

---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 07-16-2004 at11:42:

  RE: What bothers me...

quote:

Originally posted by DwDunphy There isn't a lot of music out there like The Dogs, in any capacity. Maybe Pinetop Seven, Calexico and (now) Jim White, but the venue for the americana-style of music is getting smaller and smaller. And it also seems that there is still a large sector of the fans that just want the Dogs to rock. But the band is very different now, more reflective. They lost an integral member, have been in the "industry" for quite some time, all were promised the moon by the big labels at one point or another and alll of them got moldy cheese as their payback. With that in mind, I can see how the Dogs would collectively say, "this is the truest expression of us, where we are, right now." Now, would I welcome a rockin' Eddies, Sevens or Choir release in the future? Sure. But I understand the crux of what the Dogs are and, actually have always been, and if someone listens to a disc for what they want versus what is there, they will always be disappointed. "What you want" is almost uniformly much more than most are able to give, and it is very much an unfair benchmark to ask for. But that's me rambling. DwD

Excellent post.

I don't just want the Dogs to rock.
Just rock a little more than recently.

---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 07-16-2004 at11:46:

  RE: My review - at least the gist of it

quote:

Originally posted by sprinklerhead quote: Originally posted by DwDunphy Don't get me wrong. I loved "Gift Horse", "Real Men Cry" and "Nazarene Crying Towel", but all three found Terry becoming the leader of the band. That unique soundingboard for all vocalists to try something different was quickly changing because only one vision was guiding the writing. Although hinged in revisitation, "Mutt" is closer to the ideal of "Scenic Routes" than the band has been in a long time, and I welcome it. DwD Right on!! I love Terry to the point that my wife and friends are tired of hearing me talk about him but, I agree. The appeal of the earlier Dogs recordings were that each member was bringing something to the recording sessions. It gave great variety to the CDs. The last few releases have been heavy handed towards Terry's input. Really, I am not complaining because I love the stuff that Terry does. I would just like to see the other guys shine a little more too.

I would still take Gift Horse, Real Men Cry, or Nazarene Crying Towel over Mutt most anyday! (But Mutt would be a VERY close 2nd).

To me, the ones with real variety on Mutt are "It's So Sad" and "I'm Setting You Free". Otherwise, I think the musical spread on Mutt is somewhat narrower than previous releases.

BUT BUY THE * THING AND DEVELOP YOU OWN * OPINION, IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY, ALRIGHT?
(that is a general statement directed squarely at the lurking public! - I see you!)

---

Posted by DwDunphy on 07-16-2004 at12:38:

  Jeffrey - On Jim White

I was sent his most recent disc, "Drill A Hole In That Substrate And Tell Me What You See" from his PR people (He's on David Byrne's Luaka Bop label).

I hadn't heard of him before but, man, the disc knocked me out. There are two songs, "The Girl From Brownsville Texas" and "Static On The Radio" (featuring Aimee Mann) that are irresponsibly replayable. Good stuff.

But this is my point about the Lost Dogs that is so important to me: they fill an ever shinking position in music (and let's not get into the whole Christian vs. secular thing. Music is music!). Acoustic-based, Americana-styled pop is a very small genre, getting smaller. Two inches to the left and it is Country. Two inches to the right and it's pop music. The guys keep it level on the level (as Stephen King once put it) and again, it is an expression of who they are now, and I admire them much for it.

__________________________________________________________

Now, for those who dig the recent Dogs stuff, here are some suggestions.

Jim White's "Drill A Hole...". Yeah, there are occasional issues with language, but it's not considerably harsh... More rural than excessively offensive.

Calexico "Feast Of Wire" is exactly how their name suggests. California pop a'la Eagles with a heap of Mexican musicianship and eccentricity added. Good stuff.

Pinetop Seven "Rigging The Toplights" You can't go wrong with Darren Richards & The Seven, but this one is particularly excellent. All fans of heartfelt music will love "Drying Out".

Richard Buckner. If I have to tell you about Richard Buckner, we're never getting on with this conversation - It'll just take too long and mash notes can be tedious reading.

DwD