jff

Don't you just love that type of hipster elitism?

Did Reed think Metal Machine Music was foolish? I've never heard it described that way, or heard him speak of it in that way.

Again, that's only true if "sense" and "discretion" are concepts that can be applied in a blanket way.

Yes, everythig I've posted in this thread is based on a hypothetical scenario, as I don't know what the facts are. Foolish is defined by Merriam-Webster as lacking in sense, judgment, or discretion. In my hypothetical version of this horrible, horrible scandal, I'd argue the artist was using his discretion by denying the rights to perform his song. Perhaps he doesn't like televised song and dance game shows, and does like when people sing his songs on their own albums. That's a judgment he's made, and by definition, that is not foolish. If he holds the power over the commercial use of

If by consume, you mean the audience doesn't get to hear a cover version of his song. I could be wrong since I'm not an entertainment lawyer, but I don't believe "consume" is synonymous with "perform a cover version on a game show." Is the AT&T ad the original version of the song? Maybe he only wants his version out there, and not a remake. I think it should be up to the individual to decide what is and isn't foolish when it comes to the licensing of their work. I don't think you can apply a concept such as foolishness in a blanket way. Last years Justin Guarini.

But that isn't even close to what is going on here. There is a world of difference between consuming/enjoying a song, and performing a song on a for-profit television show.

I don't trust Piers Morgan, the celebrity media or Lou Reed's PR department, or anyone else involved in this horrible, horrible scandal so I don't know what the facts are. Having said that, I can see how Lou Reed (or ANY artist) would be hesitant to allow one of his songs to be sung by a high profle game show singer, because once that happens, all the other game show singers will want to sing that song, and likely look for other songs by him to sing. If that's not what he wants for his song(s), more power to him. And in other artists cases, if that IS what they want for their songs, more

David Axelrod...is this the Obama guy, or someone else?

I used to have this book, and Live: Bootleg is in there:

Last night I was watching a little of VH1's GREATEST ARTISTS EVER!!!! and Aerosmith was one of them. You can really tell a difference production-wise between the earlier tracks they played and the Permanent Vacation track (Love in an Elevator, I think it was). I had never considered production as a reason why those songs were a little goofy. I just assumed they were goofy songs. But hearing snippets of various songs from different eras in a VH1 style montage really made the tragic production of Permanent Vacation obvious, while highlighting how utterly badass Walk This Way is.

Times New Viking is opening a string of dates, including the Atlanta date at the end of this month, which I am attending. Here's a listing of Pavement's NYC shows and the opening acts: http://www.brooklynvegan.com/archives/2010/07/who_is_opening.html

It's official: Robert Plant is a failure at album covers. Despite some good songs and some major league head-banging moments, I don't think I've ever made it more than 1/3 of the way through this album. I even tried to listen to a handful of songs per day, and today (day 3) I gave up with three songs to go. Too many songs, and they're all way too long, except for, oddly enough, the bass solo.

Thanks for the link. $45. Same price as Jeff Dunham. Perhaps Rush needs a new manager.

No problem. I don't know the details of the NY State Fair. Is Aeromith doing a headline show and Rush doing a shorter show than they normally do? Or are they both doing headline shows?

Those look really nice. I'll probably do it that way next time I have a poster I want to frame. My most recent framing job (of the poster below...a 19x25, $10 print) cost $200 AFTER my 50% off coupon was applied!

I liked where they were going with the ending (even though they didn't really get there), but overall that was an unsatisfying arrangement of that tune.

Pretty sure I layed out my reasoning. Thanks for the insult, though, friend. That was a nice touch.

Nels Cline's finest hour.

I don't think $1,000,000 is unreasonable for one performance by Aerosmith. I just don't see why it's so much higher than Rush, who have been riding the biggest wave of their career for the past few years (12th highest grossing tour of 2008 according to Pollstar, new documentary, huge selling new releases on cd and dvd). Contrast that with Aerosmith, who have had to resort to co-headline gigs in recent years.

So far, nothings been posted that's put me in the mood. Uh, wait...what do you mean?

Excellent point. I think Aerosmith would be more appealing than Rush to the the people who attend state fairs. I don't mean that in any sort of judgmental way...just that Aerosmith indisputably appeals more to the general public, as does any band that has hits and videos featuring attractive young women. Rush would probably be more likely to pull in folks who otherwise would not attend the state fair, and for that reason, I feel they would be justified in negotiating a higher guarantee than they're getting.

It's interesting that Aerosmith gets more than double what Rush gets. I've never seen an Aerosmith show, but I've seen Rush several times, and I'm fairly certain it costs more to put on a Rush show from a production standpoint. Those bands probably have a similar drawing power. Rush definitely has a more die hard, never miss a show/follow them like the Dead fans. I can see how Aerosmith would want more since they have more band members to pay, but other than that, I fail to understand the justification for $1,000,000 vs. $450,000 guarantees. I could maybe understand $650,000 vs $450,0