Punters' Corner

[That Was Jonathan E. Then]

Des expertly pointed out that:

Bulbous Polyrhythms are lovely birds found in the jungles of Sumatra.....Oh I've just heard they are now extinct.

That is a shame. But presumably their songs are recorded and can be sampled for all eternity. So it doesn't really matter. And anyway there's plenty of other parrots.

Didn't Captain Beefheart use "bulbous polyrhthyms"? Fast and bulbous ones at that. Difficult to catch, but now with sampling I suppose they're much easier to handle. Too bad about them being extinct though. See what I mean about being coherent?

[Gordon Neill]

Don't get me wrong. Like Jonathen E, I'm addicted to CD reviews. I need my regular hits and guys like Charlie, Con, Howard, Garth, Jamie etc... are my main men.

And having made a few amateur attempts, I'm well aware of how difficult it can be (and I've never had to work within some arbritary word limit). Apart from conveying a sense of enthusiasm (or dismay)* I think the main thing a reviewer can do is to compare to the artist's previous releases, compare to other albums by other people ('if you like that, then you'll like this'), or make some basic references to style (poppy, jazzy, dance etc...) or track length (particularly important to someone with a short attention span like me, anything past 4 minutes and I'm at risk of getting a nosebleed). Beyond that, I'm not sure what else is meaningful (at least to someone like me).

And, even after all that, it still just comes down to subjective opinion. The reviewer can quite correctly praise something to the hilt; and the punter can quite correctly regard it as mince.

* And there's always the worry of overdoing the enthusiasm or dismay. Guilty m'lud.

[Dominic]

I'm still not sure what 'bulbous' polyrhythms' means, but I shall make it my mission to find out.

Fat beats?

[CantSleepClownsWillGetMe]

I just did a quick search, and the album with the 'bulbuous rhythms' was 'East 2 West - Istanbul Strait Up' (and for anyone who's interested in useless statistics, that was the first time the word 'bulbuous' had ever been used on this forum)

Anyway, Howard's review went on to say:- "From then on many boundaries are crossed as breakbeats and pulsing electronics function as ballast for soaring violins, riffing ouds, and incorporeal vocals. So perhaps better suited for lights-out headphone listening than all-out belly boogying."

Now that's what I mean about Howard's writing - a broad and colourful description in only a very few words. No history, no technical jargon, no padding and crucially, for me, it describes the music.

After reading what some reviewers have said about being told what to write, or having their reviews edited down or altered, I do sometimes wonder if they're worth the LCD they're written on. I mean, what percentage of a review can we believe to be true, or the opinion of the writer? At least with 'bulbuous', 'ballast' and 'belly boogying' we can be pretty sure they're the writer's own work!

June

[Des]

I've apologised to Adam for my recent comment which, although meant as a joke, caused him and others offence.

I have also been asked to consider if this thread is ill-advised and discriminatory. I am less happy about this, as to be perfectly honest I feel some threads have been hijacked and ruined by 'professionals'. A thread about world music radio, for instance. started off promisingly - it is a particular concern of mine - but then degenerated into something much less interesting with too many 'well of course I do a lot of research for my own podcast blah blah blah'- type contributions. Likewise, I started a thread about the magnificent Liu Fang CD only to be assailed by some bloody band manager/promoter asking me to put a show on for him in Bristol!

So I think this thread is valid - although we appreciate the thoughts of 'experts' it is nice to have a small corner reserved for us amateurs and ordinary enthusiasts who don't have a radio show or belong to a band . If you disagree let me know either here or by PM and the thread can be closed down.

[Adam Blake]

Thank you, Des.

With regard to this thread, what I asked was how it would look if I, or Garth, or Howard, or Ian A. started a thread called "professionals corner" and requested that Des, Norman, Judith, Clowns, Dayna etc should be barred from contributing to it. I suspect that it would not be very well received.

[CantSleepClownsWillGetMe]

It seems a bit harsh that a thread should be 'closed down' (or censored?) simply because it's for non-professionals. Haven't there been punterly questions asked and punterly comments made in response? That makes it perfectly valid in my eyes.

Also, I'm still waiting to hear what Des and others think about the neutrality of media music reviews.

So I, for one, am keen for this thread to stay.

June

[Gordon Neill]

Des, I recognise what you meant about threads being 'hijacked'. But this gets done by 'professionals' and 'amateurs' alike (guilty m'lud). It's all part of the cut and thrust and fun of the Forum. And there's nothing to stop anyone getting the subject back on thread.

So I'd rather not set up border controls (Checkpoint Charlie?) and just keep with the general free exchange of thoughts, views, opinions, rants, theories, attitudes, experiences, etc....

[Gordon Neill]

And I agree with Adam's points above, as well. I was trying to hint at that in my first post in this thread. And, even if it was desirable, how on Earth would you define 'professional' or 'amateur'?

[CantSleepClownsWillGetMe]

I think it's pretty clear what's meant by 'professionals'. Perhaps it would make it clearer if we said 'non-experts'.

I also wanted to ask what harm one tiny thread for a handful of people, could possibly do? Hm? It would make it very clear where all the overtly stupid questions were being asked, (and could therefore be duly ignored by those 'in the know') and could also be a place where newbies would find their feet.

Not a bad thing I would have said.

June

[Gordon Neill]

OK. How would you define 'expert' then? And I'm quite sure that plenty of the 'experts' would hesitate to be put in that box. And would the 'experts' only be barred from discussing their particular area of expertise, or would it just be a blanket ban?

I do agree about trying to encourage the newbies, though. I can remember my early days on the Forum when it was pretty intimidating finding yourself trying to get involved in a discussion with proper DJs, musicians, writers etc... I think that's why I gravitated towards the Funnies section.

But I don't think you need to create some sort of a creche for newbies. Just continue to promote a tolerant and welcoming attitude.

[Dayna]

I can really understand Des's idea for this. I have kind of experienced being pushed out of some discussions at times, because of not knowing as much. That's why I haven't had as much to say lately.

I really do enjoy learning from someone with more knowledge than me.

[That Was Jonathan E. Then]

It's a big forum. I say live and let live.

I find it fascinating to read what pros say behind the scenes — and I've learnt a lot from reading the comments of punters. Sometimes the combination of the two is fun and sometimes it's embarrassing, but not always to the side I would expect. Hopefully, my contributions are helpful when intended to be that way and whatever else they may be intended to be at other times.

Once upon a time there were a few people who's comments rather annoyed me, and certainly some whom I annoyed. Now, I appreciate the inputs of all — and no one recently has sent me rude pms or outright slagged me off. Oh, wait — the pms are flooding in even before I've finished typing, big brother must be watching — and what is that next response? I think I'll cry now. Whaaah!

[CantSleepClownsWillGetMe]

Gordon Neill said -

But I don't think you need to create some sort of a creche for newbies.

Er, HELLO?

Many websites have a new members section (I don't think any of them have named it a 'Creche' though; that would be quite patronising wouldn't it) and manage quite well.

Gordon Neill continued -

Just continue to promote a tolerant and welcoming attitude.

As far as I can see, if members who have been around on the forum for years can occasionally feel unwelcome, then maybe they do need somewhere where they can freely express their views. I hesitate to say that newcomers aren't made welcome here but, from memory, a few of them have said exactly that. Surely another good reason to have a thread specifically for those who don't make any part of their living, or derive any benefit from, their involvement in the music business.

J

[Gordon Neill]

I do recognise the issue, as I said earlier. By definition, if people such as Des, Dayna and Clowns say that, at times, they feel excluded then there is an issue. I'm just not sure if creating a seperate section for punters is the right solution.

But, if a new members section is a fairly common feature of other websites, then maybe the idea could be tried. I've not seen one before, but I don't get out very often (I just wander across the road to the fRoots forum). Do these new member sections accomodate full discussions about topics, or do they just provide fairly basic information for newcomers on how to register, post messages, web-etiquette etc.... ?