Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site opus.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!nbires!opus!rcd From: rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn) Newsgroups: net.music Subject: Re: Their Music: Grateful or Dead? Message-ID: <1140@opus.UUCP> Date: Fri, 5-Apr-85 02:29:10 EST Article-I.D.: opus.1140 Posted: Fri Apr 5 02:29:10 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 7-Apr-85 04:29:53 EST References: <284@mhuxr.UUCP> Organization: NBI,Inc, Boulder CO Lines: 85 > [is there room on this net for a Grateful Dead perspective somewhere between > Deadhead adulation and Rich Rosen skepticism?... I hope so...I would enjoy being able to admire their music without being labeled a nutcase druggie. I would equally enjoy being able to criticize their bad moments (which can be REALLY bad) without being labeled anti-Dead. > The band members are all superior musicians,... > ...But those jams! In a word, SLOPPY!!! There is nothing wrong with collective > improvisation, but too often they just mark time while waiting for someone > to have a decent idea that the jam can coalesce around... Let's agree for the moment that (1) Group improvisation is much harder than individual, and even individual improv is tough, but (2) there are some great ones and some really bad ones. You have to be willing to put up with some bad stuff to get the really good jams (which just can't come from a completely rehearsed/planned show). The measure of success is partly how good the good ones are and partly how seldom the bad ones happen. > ...It is admirable of > a rock band to be willing to stretch the arrangement and do some on the spot > creation, but there must be some framework for the improvisation to soar > from. Too often you have the two drummers not in time with each other, > and Garcia soloing on a different key from Lesh... Here we begin to disagree. The framework is often tenuous--not so much for the band as for the audience, and the spacier jams are really played for that part of the audience that's heard them a lot before. [Perhaps the MOST charitable reaction the first time one hears `space' is "It's getting mighty weird in here!"] I'm puzzled about the other statements--I have almost never heard the drummers out of time (except perhaps when Billy inadvertently launched a drumstick about 15' in the air and had to wait for it to get back; he caught the drumstick but spaced a few beats). As for Garcia and Lesh off on different keys: If you're going to weave fabric, you need the warp and the woof, at right angles to one another. So Lesh does the woof(er) and Garcia goes off on something a little warped. They head off in different directions. I feel pretty strongly that it's a matter of taste as to whether they are truly discordant or only creating a strong contrast--I accept your view in the sense that you don't like it, but I'd object to being too absolute about it. Following on from this, it's interesting to notice how much effect Phil has on the direction of the music during the improv/jams/noodling. Obviously some songs just won't go without Phil--you can't start The Other One without him any more than you can kick-start a 747. But there's a lot more influence than is evident at first. Listen to space->Fire on the Mountain on DEAD SET. You can hear the song emerging from the weird, and if you listen to it several times, you can hear it a little earlier each time--but although it seems that the first bars emerge from Jerry, it actually happens earlier in the bass line; that one was Phil's fault. I don't have a vast collection of tapes, but I've got enough that I can go back and listen to the jams to study them. It's surprising how much depth there is, but you have to pay attention and even then you may not find all of the sub-melodies and counterpoints the first time or two. > The other problem with the Dead is their, uh, singing. Tomcats in heat is > more like it. That is far less serious a problem in rock, a medium > famous for insisting that musicality is not a necessary condition for success. Well, there are beautiful voices and there are voices with character. I'd go with "creaking floorboard" over the "tomcats" for one particular band member. Bobby has a good voice. Brent is variable but can be very good. Phil--well, who knows what moves him to sing when he does, let alone what determines the quality. As for Jerry's voice--the one which can be the most objectionable--as you suggest, when you've got voices like Leon Redbone, Richie Havens, Bruce Springsteen, Rod Stewart (not to compare these!), etc., you can't say that much about JG. He can manipulate the effect of his voice--it takes a mournful tone for Stella Blue, a rough edge for Wharf Rat, and a raucous roar for Ramblin' Rose. He's not going to be mellifluous, but that's not his place anyway. > Finally, the Dead have been together some 20 years, and their current style > (blues and boogie with a dash of country) solidified around 1970. They have > thus been playing the same things, and sounding the same for 15 years. They've picked up a little bit of everything--due significantly to Mickey's eclectic approach to rhythm (which gives the distinctive character to some types of music). They've drawn on almost everything--I would have put rock and folk music as the first two forms, followed by blues, boogie, jazz and country, with even a little influence of disco (precious little, let us be thankful). They've been sounding somewhat the same for a while but their repertoire is slowly changing and expanding. -- Dick Dunn {hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd (303)444-5710 x3086 ...At last it's the real thing...or close enough to pretend.