[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference napalm::commusic_v1

Title:* * Computer Music, MIDI, and Related Topics * *
Notice:Conference has been write-locked. Use new version.
Moderator:DYPSS1::SCHAFER
Created:Thu Feb 20 1986
Last Modified:Mon Aug 29 1994
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2852
Total number of notes:33157

430.0. "COMMUSIC Tape I - Submitter's Goals" by BARNUM::RHODES () Fri Jul 11 1986 12:35

After listening to tape 1 of the commusic compilation tape, I realize that
I needed more information on each submission before I can produce an
accurate/useful review.

The purpose of this topic is to allow each submitter for tape 1 of the
Commusic compilation tape to express his GOALS for each work.  This way,
each work can be reviewed with the submitter's goals in mind.  This will
help give feedback to the submitter relavent to his intended achievements.
This will help alleviate problems with reviewers describing solutions to
"problems" that were never intended to be solved (ie: Keeps a reviewer from
making comments like: "If it were restructured, it would be a better production
piece" when it was never intended to be a production piece in the first
place).

These goals may include:

		o   The intended audience
			- Was the submission intended to be listened to
			  by yourself only?
			- Was it intended for a Top 10 audience?
			- Was it intended for an avant-garde type of
		    	  audience?

		o   Musical goals and nongoals
			- Was it done as a production demo?
			- Was it done as practice for a demo?
			- Was it done as an experiment?
			- Was it done as a learning vehicle?
			- Was it done to display musicianship?
			- Was it done to become familiar with a particular
			  instrument?
			- Was it done to motivate yourself further?
  			- Was it done for $$$?
			- Was it done for the hell of it?
			- Were you trying to capture a theme or introduce
			  some sort of mystique?
			- Was it done for the hell of it?
			- Do you feel you achieved your major goal(s)?

		o   The technical goals 
			- What were you trying to accomplish recordingwise?
			- Was one of the goals to learn to use the recording
			  equipment?
			- Was it a goal to use a particular outboard effect
			  in a certain way?
			- How better could you have achieved your technical
			  goals?

Simple questions and comments will also make the piece easier to review.
These may include:

		o   Known improvements
			- Are there things you don't like about your work
			  that you now know you could improve?
			- Are there things that you would do differently
			  if recording again it tomorrow? (equipmentwise/
			  mixwise/instrumentwise)

		o   What would you like to know from the reviewers?
			- Would it have sounded better if a certain instrument
			  was louder/softer/different?


The first reply contains the intended goals for my submissions...

Todd.
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
430.1"Blend Trend" & "A001-R"BARNUM::RHODESFri Jul 11 1986 12:38117
I submitted two works - "Blend Trend" and "A001-R".  Both were a bit 
experimental, and were done mainly as a learning experiment.

I.  "Blend Trend"

    o	Intended audience:
                    
		The intended audience was primarily myself.  The song was
		composed and recorded in a few hours, and was intended to
		be a learning experience.

    o	Musical goals:

		This song was recorded as a learning vehicle with the 
		following goals:

			1. Investigate "flowing" guitar textures using only
			   an echo box, and introducing no sustain or dis-
			   tortion.  It was also a goal to investigate the
			   stereo "recordingness" of this particular texture.

			2. Motivate myself further through the achievment 
			   of the above goal.

    o	Technical goals:

			1. Acquaint myself with some newly acquired 
			   recording gear consisting of 2 reel-to-reel 
			   decks and a 6->2 mixer.  This is the first
			   piece I had created using somthing other
			   than 2-track cassette bouncing (noisy).

    o	Nongoals:

		This song was NOT recorded as a production piece or income
		generator ($$$).

    o	Known Inprovements:

		1.  The bass line is ineffective as it is just guitar played
		    on the low E string.  It should be noted that the only
		    instrument I owned at the time was a guitar.

		2.  If I were to re-record the song now, I would add 
		    one synth track aside from a new bass track.  I think
		    that this would make the piece more interesting, even
		    though I like its rather simple nature.

    o	What I would like to know from the reviewers:

		1.  Do I succeed in capturing a "flowing" texture?  How
		    better could this have been achieved?  Would a reverb
		    unit have helped the (rather dry) drum track?

		2.  My feeling is that a simple piece should be short and 
		    to the point.  Does the length of the piece complement 
		    its musical content?  

		3.  Would the addition of a third track	(strings?) help
		    the piece any?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


II. "A001-R"

    o	Intended audience:
                    
		Again, the intended audience was myself.  This song was 
		composed and recorded in one day, and like "Blend Trend",
		was intended to	be a learning experience.

    o	Musical goals:

		This song was recorded as a learning vehicle with the 
		following intended musical goal:
                           
			1. Learn to use the "multi-timbral" qualities
			   of a guitar and guitar synthesizer to create 
			   an interesting bass-lead-harmony combination.

    o	Technical goals:

			1.  The main technical goal was to experiment with 
			    a new instrument, the Arp Avatar.  The entire
			    guitar/guitar_synth track was performed in 
			    real time in one take, utilizing a sustain
			    pedal to freeze the synthesizer in a particular
			    state.

			2.  Another goal was to use the Arp sequencer to
			    sequence a drum part for the first time, and
			    keep it from sounding too repetitive by adding
			    a realtime drum track.

    o	Nongoals:

		Same as "Blend Trend"

    o	Known Inprovements:

		1.  All mixing was done through headphones.  I have found
		    this to be a no-no.  Works mixed through headphones
		    sound good on headphones, not speakers.  Listen to this
		    one with headphones, folks.

		2.  If I were to re-record the song now, I would add 
		    some reverb to the drum tracks.

    o	What I would like to know from the reviewers:

		1.  Is the piece boring? (C'mon, be honest.)
		    Would the addition of a track or two spice it up?

    
Todd Rhodes.
    
430.2Here HereERLANG::FEHSKENSFri Jul 11 1986 13:499
    Great idea Todd.  My liner notes (for my stuff which will show
    up on tape 2) contains a "wimpout disclaimer" at the beginning that
    tries to get at just these issues.  It starts with a statement to
    the effect of "many misunderstandings are rooted in mistaken
    assumptions about goals...".  Most people assume other peoples'
    goals are the same as their own.
    
    len.
    
430.3Dave Bottom tries to rememberALAGSH::BOTTOM_DAVIDFri Jul 11 1986 14:0791
    Well I'll try to see if I know what my goals are/were when I recorded
    this stuff....
    
    All of this stuff is demo/experimental as I use the tape deck as
    a sounding board to develop ideas. 
    
    Just for kicks:
    
    This was the second attempt at recording this piece.
    I know the weakest part is the vocals, I'm currently suffering from
    whatever it's called when you can't sing in tune even though it
    sounds to you as if you are (previously discussed in MUSIC.NOTE).
    So don't feel bashful about commenting on it if you feel it's required.
    
    I write for a rock & roll audience, primarily the heavy blues style.
    
    This is a demo attempt I did to teach the song to my last band (now
    defunct) I don't believe that a tascam 234 can be seriously used
    for anything else. But it does a nice job on demos.
    
    I learned alot about how to streach a four track with this song.
    It has drums, rhythm guitar, lead guitar, bass synth, and vocals.
    I mixed the drums and rhythm guitar onto one track to make the room
    for the rest.  I recorded the vocals through my Fender studio lead
    clean channel to get reverb, but the sound became somewhat tinney.
    
    I need reverb!! (heard a midiverb last night envy envy:-)
    
    Sometimes you hurt your friends-
    
    I'd love to sell this (with some lyrical work that I have been toying
    with) to Tina Turner. Comments?
    
    This was written and recorded before noon one saturday and not touched
    since.
    
    I'd replace the synth strings with a Stevie Windwood (a la Gimme
    some lovin') style organ. 
    
    No reverb on the vocals and they are very dry and lifeless...I was
    trying for a gritty rock and roll kind of feel, not sure I have
    that kind of a voice.
    
    The guitar solo needs work..but it's a first take so I don't feel
    bad.
    
    Audience?? the same as always heavy blues rockers.
    
    Bridge to nowhere:
    
    Seriously, I bought my JX3-P to finish this idea, I got the idea
    playing with a JX at EU Wurliters in Newington NH while waiting
    for my friend (the manager) to return from lunch. So this song
    has really cost me :-). 
    
    Audience: Possible movie soundtrack, am working that connection
    now. (got a hot lead into movies..)
    
    This piece is sorta fun to me, an old King Crimsom fan, always wanted
    that Court of the Crimsom King sound.
    
    First piece I ever recorded on my 234, first drum track I ever
    programmed on my TR-707 (both show).
    
    I recorded the guitar solo about 3000 times and saved the one you
    hear on a crude mix, then recorded over it as I was not totally
    satisfied. Unfortuantely it was the best overall that I have done
    to date, except for one other not recorded while warming up in a
    friends studio in Laconia....sigh the tape never runs when it should.
    
    I would clean it up, distortion wise if I redid it, I would probably
    add an acoustic guitar low in the background fingerpicking away.
    I have been toying with the thought of adding words but am very
    shy as this is one of my favorites and am afraid of overdoing it.
    
    
    So that doesn't answer alot of your questions, but may shed some
    light on my basic feelings about the music and where I think I'm
    going.
    
    What I would solicit from all of you is creative comments on
    arrangements and possible technical suggestions for the low budget
    4-track studio man (me). I realize my lyrics are not earth shattering,
    but it's not my intention to use my music as anything other than
    "good time" music, I don't feel that I need to or have the right to
    convert the world to my political or religious philosophy. However, I 
    have one qualification to that, if I could do justice to some of my 
    enviromental concerns I might use my music for those purposes.
                 
    
    dave the demo man......:-}
430.4Here's my story, sad but true...MENTOR::COTEWatch out where the Huskies go...Fri Jul 11 1986 16:2971
    Good idea for a note Todd....
    
    OK, where to begin? "I'm Sorry (That I Fell In Love With You)" started
    out as a "forced" effort. ("I'm gonna write a song tonight, DAMMIT!")
    6 hours later, all I have to show are red eyes and the 2 bar piano
    intro, the muse had split and I went to bed.
    
    Next mornin' I get up and BLAST out the other parts. 1.5 hours later
    the piano track had been composed/sequenced/quantized/cut/pasted.
    I didn't use step mode at all, so that's "really" me on the piano.
    
    Next came the horn part. This was the result of "doodling" on the
    DX until I came up with something I liked. Once I found it, it got
    recorded as the intro. This theme repeats itself during the instru-
    mental break, however the second 8 bars of the break were shit luck,
    the fingers just fell on the right keys. 
    
    The bass part was easy. It just seemed like by this time it was
    the only line that I *could* use, it seemed so natural. 1 take,
    quantize and print. No biggie. There's a bad note in there somewhere.
    You find it, I'm not telling!!!
    
    Finally come the drums. All the patterns were done by me. I learned
    more about drumming during that song than I ever learned previously!
    I'm particularly pleased with how the drum part "builds" during
    the tune. That, to me, is the big difference between drum machines
    and those infernal rythym boxes.
    
    I finally got it all down on the sequencer and recorded it straight
    to cassette via 4-->2 mixer. I, too, learned at this point not to
    mix with headphones. I also got beat up a bit because I have a sonic
    hologram generator (Sound Concepts IR2100) on my stereo which faked
    me out on the stereo soundstage. I don't have pan-pots on the mixer,
    and I missed then not 1 iota! The final tape though shows the effect,
    there's nothing in the middle. (I shoulda recorded *through* the
    IR2100.)
    
    Once that was completed, I went out and bought a new cassette deck
    so I could add the strings. The strings were done in real time.
    Had to. No sync to tape!! But I did get to record them on both
    channels. The tape that came out of the machine was the one that
    went to Brad....
    
    I've been asked more than once "Where's the melody?". What seems
    so obvious to me apparently isn't to some others. My response is
    "Hum the piano part, you can't help but find the melody."
    
    The song also has lyrics. VERY personal lyrics. I tried recording
    them, but without any delays/reverb it sounded horrid. It sounded
    alot like I was singing with a car radio, IN THE CAR!! Since I wasn't
    ready to bare my soul just yet anyhow, I didn't put to much further
    effort into recording them.
    
    This tune has already been performed for it's intended audience,
    lyrics and all. To the extent that it got the message across, I
    have to admit, it was a resounding success!!
    
    What would I do different? Now that I have the Mirage, I'd use that
    for the piano and add little "fills" and such here and there. I'd
    also change the single fluglehorn lines that constitute the break
    and fills (during the last verse) to a fuller horn section. I'd
    also like to add a nice fat jazz guitar. 
    
    If I get more "professional" type recording gear, this tune gets
    done again! I'm pleased with the result as it sits, but only when
    looked at with respect to the equipment used.
    
    Edd
    
    
    all. To the extent that it got
430.5CANYON::MOELLERrecycle your discarded PERSONAL_NAMEsFri Jul 11 1986 16:5825
What are my 'goals' when recording ? I'll try outline form...

A) Music and the studio is/are my main pastime. 
   What else is there to do? Drink beer and watch sports on TV?

B) Making music from an ADULT place for ADULTS. This isn't conscious;
   The music is not separate from my graceful aging process.

C) Continue to assemble material into album format, for sale to people
   with a Post-Rock sensibility. Not that Toccatta is meant for sale..
   ..but Alphaville was/is. Toccatta is my first experiment in getting
   this idiom (NeoBaroque Rock) on tape. I like its intensity; it starts
   out cranked and never lets up. I've since developed a LOT
   more thematic material for it, and am preparing to record a THIRTY
   MINUTE version of it, with massive sampled orchestration overdubs.
   The revised Toccatta won't be as rock-oriented; no drum track except
   for orchestral percussion.

D) I'm NEVER totally satisfied with the recording quality. That's why
   I'm currently pouring my savings into instruments and audio gear.

E) Invent new musical idioms. You'll know what I mean better when Vol 2
   comes out... no two of my recent pieces sound the same.

karl moeller
430.6BARTOK::ARNOLDSmiley faces not included.Thu Jul 17 1986 19:43144
I decided to have a go at the questions posed by Todd in .0.  I hope my
answers provide some information to you, the listeners, in understanding the
purpose of my songs.  If you'd rather enjoy/tolerate/hate them without extra
information, please do and feel free to get on to the next reply/topic.

The intended audience
=====================

The three songs I submitted comprise 75% of a cassette called "Four Songs"
that was distributed as a Christmas present to my friends in 1979.  This
signed and numbered limited edition tape came with a Christmas card (with
the lyrics to "Once A Year" inscribed).  The inside joke with my friends was
that it will be a real collector's item if I ever get famous for anything.
(For real overkill, I even included broken guitar picks used during the
writing and taping with some of thetapes as a "momento".  I've never claimed
to have a normal sense of humor.)

Musical Goals and Non-goals
===========================

I contend that my songs are personal views of my life.  The audience
already knew who I was.  As friends, I felt that they might be interested
in what I had to say (since their part in my life affected the attitude
that the songs attempt to transmit).  Thus, I guess the main goal was to
give my friends something back for all they had given me.

Beyond that initial goal, I've just played the tapes for people who were
interested enough to see what I did for a hobby.  It sure would be nice to
be a singer/songwriter (I think) but the intention of these songs was not to
sell myself to anyone.  Like a painting, the songs are here as a stimulus.
Any response is expected and is welcome.

I tend to write songs as a form of personal therapy.  Sometimes I write
directly about what I'm thinking.  Sometimes I write to distract me from
what I'm thinking.  Self-examination is almost always a big part of it;
Trying to capture a frame-of-mind in 3 or 4 minutes.

I'd consider this work successful in its original context (the Christmas
present idea).  It certainly sparked lots of discussion amongst my friends.
In the bigger context, I'm waiting to see if works or not.  I'll consider it
a success if people understand the frame-of-mind being conveyed.  If people
turn to their own thoughts as a result of hearing my stuff, it would be even
more successful.  Note that changing anyone's mind about politics, religion,
etc. is NOT a goal.


Technical Goals
===============

These songs show me trying to squeeze as much out a 4-track reel-to-reel
(TEAC 2340-SX) home environment as possible.  I decided on the tape idea in 
early/mid-November so the recording was also influenced by the Christmas
deadline (Dec.  25).  This is a bit obvious in some of the recording.  The
songs had already been written so that was not part of the deadline
pressure.

I was pleased with the outcome given my constraints.  Of course, I'm hoping
that my more recent recordings sound better.  (I'm still not real cure how
to properly use compressors and the like for a more even vocal sound,
however.) 

Known Improvements
==================

Better microphones would be a real big help.  A better "room" would help,
too.  (That's the "problem" with acoustic music, you've got worry about all
this extra stuff like not having the dryer BZZZZZZZZZZZ in the middle of a
flute track.)

Of course, more than 4 tracks would be a big help.  (I've got 8 now but
nothing finished to show for it.  Maybe next tape...) Of course, I ignored
all the usual advice about "4 tracks means you do mono" and did stereo
anyway.  When I totalled it up once, I think I figured out that "Once A
Year" took about 10 tracks (a few vocals, guitar, bass, organ, synth, etc.).
With intermediate mixdowns, that means that some of the finished song is 4th
generation or so.  Even with dbx, that's pushing it.

Intermediate mixes were the biggest problem.  By the 3rd or 4th time,
something is bound to need EQ or a volume different from that already in
the mix.  I try to minimize intermediate mixes as much as I can now.

Examples of what I'm talking about...

     - The synth-bass part in "Hostage of Nature" is NOT mixed well.  By
       the time the song was finished, it tends to fade in and out (too
       many generations and wrong EQ).

	- Acoustic guitar parts on all of the songs lost a lot of "shine" since 
       it as the earliest track.

Things that worked out better than I thought...

	- The reading at the end of "Hostage of Nature" was a last minute 
       addition to make the fade different.  Knowing that I was going to 
       copyright the song and performance, I couldn't use a snippet of a 
       newscast for effect.  Instead, I hurriedly looked through some books
       in the public domain and came up with an appropriate section that read
       like a newscast.  It ended up sounding good and highlighted the fact
       that stupid things have gone on for a long time.

	- The bass part of "Once A Year".  I couldn't recreate an earlier, demo
       version of the bass "solo" at the end and was amazingly frustrated.
       The best I could do was get 2 takes in which the beginning of one and
       the end of the other were good.  My brother came up with the idea for
       the fuzz-bass "boing" in the middle of solo and was able to use it to
       provide continuity between the 2 takes.

     - The flutes on "Introduction: From Songs of Innocence".  I never wrote
       down the flute part I'd developed for it.  I did 3 takes of flutes with
       the intention of having a flute-chorus effect.  Having not followed
       a written part, the parts are just different enough to sound better than
       having run one track through a delay or the like.

What I'd Like People to Tell Me
===============================

General impressions are always welcome.  What does it remind you of (moods,
other songs, other groups, etc.)?  In all honesty:  would you listen to this
if you just came across it on the radio?  Would you ever consider paying
real money for stuff like this?  (not these recordings but a more polished
version) 

Most of all, when you comment on something please try to make it clear what
you mean.  If you just don't like it, say "I don't like it." If you think
something doesn't sound good, try explaining why.  If you use adjectives,
please tell me what it means and make it clear whether it's a compliment or
not.  For instance, if you say "The songs were subdued" or "the synth was
glassy" please include whether this added to or detracted from your
enjoyment.  More importantly, was does "subdued" and "glassy" mean to you?

One of my "friends" is a record reviewer for a newspaper and regularly
crucifies records that I like.  My main criticisms of his criticisms are:
(1) it never really explains WHY he did/didn't like it, (2) too much decided
ONLY on the merits of its lyrics , and (3) not much discussion of what would
have made it better.

(Of course, it's much more fun to be a critic when you just sit back and have
poking fun at what you don't like and waxing eloquent about your favorite 
band.)

'nuff said.  "On to Chicago and let's win there."

- John -

430.7Goal Digging U.K.MINDER::KENTThu Jul 24 1986 07:0311
    
    
    Welllll this is all a bit deep and mystifying for a poor English
    chap. When I get upstairs into the studio I never have any technical
    or musical goals in mind. I guess I just want to play, and I enjoy
    it. Liked the idea of the Christmas Card though. 
    
    I hope I get to hear the music soon. Should be any day now thanks
    to John.
    
    				Paul.
430.8Goals and so much more!!CLULES::SPEEDDerek Speed, WS Tech MktgWed Jul 30 1986 13:00135
    I have been quite busy at work recently so I haven't had much of
    a chance to contribute to the notesfile, but this topic seemed
    worthwhile to help put things in perspective.

    First of all, let me say that I appreciate all the feedback I have
    gotten so far.  It has all been constructive, even those of you who
    didn't care for the music or our style. 
        
    My motivation in contributing the songs to the COMMUSIC tape was
    to get some constructive feedback from other musicians.  My band
    has been off the road for over a year working on original material
    and going through various personnel problems.  Because we have been
    off the road, we haven't had a chance to play our material before
    any "real people" to get feedback.  Therefore, I felt using the
    COMMUSIC tape would be an effective medium to get that feedback,
    rather than asking 40 people over to our studio to take a listen
    to our material.
    
    In addition, I have some of my own opinions on where our music is
    strong and where it is weak and wanted to either confirm or deny
    these opinions based on what others said.  It will also be a useful
    tool for the other members of the band who are not priviledged enough
    to be on the Enet to hear what others have to say.
    
    Our musical goals are fairly simple: play dancable rock 'n' roll
    with an eye toward getting radio airplay and possibly a recording contract.
    Obviously, I am not a professional musician nor is anyone else in
    the band, so our dedication to music is a step below that of people
    who depend on music to feed their children.  That means we have
    to try to be a little smarter than the average rock 'n' roll band
    and maximize our rehearsal and writing time.  If our music is not
    sellable, we need to know why and what we can do to improve it.
    
    Let me list some areas where I feel we need improvement:
    
    	o Lead vocals - we desparately need a good lead singer.  Our
    	former singer had an excellent voice but that is history.  Everyone
    	else in the band sings and a couple well enough to sing lead
    	on one or two songs a night, but that's it.
    
    	o Learing that "less is more" - I am a big advocate of a very
    	open sound where there is a lot of space.  This is especially
    	true of the bass/drum interaction, as well as guitar fills.
    	Every guitar player we have had plays too much.  Unfortunately,
    	to compensate for this, I don't play enough.  I hate a cluttered
    	sound and I'm really big on dynamics.  When the lead vocalist
    	is trying to sing, back off, darn it!!  We have a tendency to
    	plow through everything like a freight train.
    
    	o Lyrics (more on this later) - a lot of our lyrics tend to
    	be trite.  A few clever lines, but mostly kinda blah.  This
    	is a real art which none of us have seemed to master yet.
    
    That's it for gripes.  Now onto some of the songs:
    
    Chain Kisser 
    ------------ 
    
    This is the most recent of our songs on the COMMUSIC tape.  The version
    on the tape is a rough mix I had lying around to use before we laid the
    final vocal tracks, but it was recorded in a professional studio with
    the intent of trying to get some radio airplay on "local music" shows. 
    
    The idea of "Chain Kisser" is kinda corny, but the girl in the song
    is the chain kisser, sort of like a chain smoker, only being a chain
    kisser isn't as financially draining as being a chain smoker :-)
    
    You're a Tease
    --------------
    
    This is one of our older songs, written when we were playing at
    the Cape for an entire summer.  The version on the tape was recorded
    at the same time as "Chain Kisser".
    
    I like "You're a Tease" because it has a much more laid back feel
    to it, with more of a groove.  Good to sway, rather than dance,
    to.
    
    Lyrically, the song is a story written by our former lead singer
    about a girl he met that summer who was a tease, plain and simple.
    She'd be flirting with him one minute, then out with someone else
    the next.  Not real deep, but pretty meaningful at the time...
    
    I Met Your Parents
    ------------------
    
    Ever since we wrote this song, it has been controversial.  Most
    people either hate it or love.  Easy to dance to, though.
    
    The song is about what I would call the typical college guy mentality.
    No flames please.  Let me explain.
    
    Often times men put women into compromising positions that they
    would rather not be in.  The reverse is also true.  But this song
    is a put down on the mentality of: "Hey, we know each other, I've
    met your family, I'm handsome, I'm a jock, I'm an engineer and will
    be making big bucks when I get outta here, let's hop in the sack!"
    Going to school at a predominantly male engineering college, I saw
    this arttitude a lot.  Guys using girls as a way to satisfy their
    desires, rather than as people.  This song is a put down on that
    mentality.
    
    That's why the chorus:
    
    	I Like Sex
    	I met your parents
    	I Like sex
    	I'm clean, bright, and athletic!
    
    Also, the last verse talks about feeling compromised, which is
    the way I think a lot of people feel when they've been taken advantage
    of.
    
    Nuf' said.
    
    Fistful of Passion
    ------------------
    
    Another of our older songs.  This song is about jealousy.  It's
    about the type of "love" where rather than really loving, you are
    hit over the head with their love and desire for exclusiveness.
    It's also about how hard it is to try to get out of that kind of
    relationship.
    
    For example:
    
    	You have always tied your rope to me
    	A tight grip when you pull on the line
    	But my reaction is to snap it
    	You know I struggle when you pull down the blinds
    	Etc.

    I apologize to anyone who thought this was about S&M.  I suppose
    it could come across that way.
   
430.9Out of place, but what the heck?DYO780::SCHAFERGet > or get <Wed Jul 30 1986 13:379
Re: .8
    
    Derek - thanks.  That really caused stuff to gel.  RE: the "college boy
    mentality" - I thought that was a midwestern phenomena.  Shows to go ya,
    I guess ...
    
    As for S&M, watch it!  Swaggart will be climbing YOUR frame next. ;-} 

8^)
430.10Goal TendingERLANG::FEHSKENSWed Jul 30 1986 14:009
    re .8 - useful stuff Derek, I thought maybe I was misreading
    "Fistful..." and it turns out I was.  Also, "I Met Your Parents"
    makes sense now.  But I still don't know if you were *trying* to
    sound like the B52s on Chain Kisser or that was an accident.
    Sorry I didn't have more to say about your stuff (which, in case
    I didn't make it clear, I rather enjoyed), but I was getting written
    out by the time caboose rolled through.
    
    len.
430.11the Midi wife speaks...JUNIOR::DREHERMy first personal name...Mon Aug 04 1986 03:2922
    This note is in response to the various comments made about the
    Midiwife's lyrics in Burning Passion.  By the way, thanks for all
    the positive feedback on the vocals.  I don't know if Dave had
    mentioned it, but when the vocal track was recorded, no words had
    been written at that time for the song-to-be.  He had just laid
    down a few basic tracks (enough to get the feel for the melody)
    and we recorded it.  All the lyrics were made up off the top of
    my head while I recorded.  If I had known Dave would be sending
    in a tape, I would have recorded the real lyrics.  I agree, It is
    repetitive but I hadn't sat down and thought about it yet.  So I
    consider it a work tape, not the actual song as it has been written
    recently.  I think you'll like the new lyrics.  Its about infatuation
    with a rich, handsome heartbreaker type.  Nothing political or super
    original, but I like it and most people like that kind of stuff
    to dance to.  That's the kind of market I'm going toward.  I wouldn't
    mind dancing to our tunes out in the clubs over a super revved P.A.
    Way--to--Go!!!!!!!!!!!                                                
    
    By the way, what's this Midiwife stuff?  I've been around alot longer
    than Midi has.
    
    Ellen the not so Midi wife  
430.12All That Money!MINDER::KENTMon Aug 04 1986 07:548
    
    
    Infatuation with a rich handsome heartbreaker ?
    
    This is all from real exeprience is it Ellen ? I wondered how he
    could afford the MC500.
    
    				Paul 
430.13Hey, I did that to the Roland!!JAWS::COTEHow many people in your quartet?Mon Aug 04 1986 12:176
    > "I've been around a lot longer than MIDI has."
    
    
    Dave, you didn't tell us she was an upgrade...
    
    Edd