Jump to content

Groo

Member
  • Content Count

    439
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Groo

  • Rank
    Grasshopper Greensnake
  1. Inspired by this great video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvwJSiyPG1s I set out to try to meticulously tab out everything that's going on in this song. Needless to say, it's quite difficult to pick everything out, but I think I have a pretty good stab at it. There's a few "key" licks to learn, and then you interweave them with improvisational riffs. Jeff doesn't really play the song the same way twice from what I can see from live videos. Learning the licks below should give you a good basis to somewhat imitate what he's doing. Mainly from what I can see it's a lot of very cool variation
  2. Groo

    Monday

    This solo has always looked easy to play to me, but has always sounded great. It looks easy, but there's a lot of subtle stuff going on, I recommend listening closely. He never seems to play the same solo twice, but they're all similar. This is a transcription of the performance from the I Am Trying to Break Your Heart DVD, because the mix is nice and loud, and the solo sounds good to me. Here's a YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAchM1rqiOg b = half step bend v = vibrato ~ = hold br = bend and return
  3. Sorry for the late reply, but I know a little bit more about this subject now, and can better explain what I was saying. Overall, the reason for using Blu Ray is pretty simple. Blu Ray lets you have higher resolution video than DVD. With DVD, the best you're going to see is 480p. With Blu Ray, you can easily have 1080p, and soon 4K. I Am Trying to Break Your Heart was filmed on B&W 16mm. If you can it in digitally, that's about 2K resolution. Of course, the more documentary nature of the film means you won't get quite as much clarity as you would something that's deliberately filmed fo
  4. I was a bit of a jackass, I apologize. But I still think I'm right .
  5. Again...you guys are missing the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is not whether Wilco SHOULD release it on Blu Ray. Whether or not it makes fiscal sense is entirely up to the band/management/record company. They're probably using some formula like $X put into transferring to HD - (number of predicted copies sold x profit per copy) that will determine whether or not they actually release it. But, it seems like someone made thought this was a good idea, because there was, at some point, an effort to release it on Blu Ray. Personally, I don't care whether it comes out or no
  6. Obviously, you are (by your own admission in earlier threads) missing some of the basic knowledge required to understand the kind of benefits a Blu Ray transfer could bring. Just because there have been shitty Blu Ray transfers in the past does not mean that IATTBYH would have a shitty transfer. Also, Wilco is a group of musicians, not movie makers, they don't necessarily understand the benefits of Blu Ray either. Either way, they were speaking out about the PRICE of the disc and not the quality of the transfer (even though they did make the "grainy black and white comment," there is some misu
  7. That's fine...but that's not the point. The point is that the movie WOULD benefit from a Blu Ray transfer.
  8. I apologize for digging up an old topic, but I just wanted to toss in my two cents. I'm not a cinema geek, but I do have an eye for art. I much prefer Sam Jone's work on IATTBYH to anything I've seen the Burn to Shine guys do. In fact, I'd venture to say that the whole look of IATTBYH is one of my favorite ones (for any other project, it would likely be completely unsuitable, but it fits perfectly here). I'm sure that the BTS stuff is shot a lot more cleanly and properly, but the vibe of IATTBYH is just through the roof. It might be a combination of the music, the story, etc., but IATTBYH
  9. Apparently, I must not. What exactly is your opposition to a Blu Ray transfer of older movies? It sounds like you're saying that movies shot on film will see little or no benefit from a transfer to Blu Ray (which is 100% false). I'm not some sort of Sony hired Blu Ray shill - I don't even own a Blu Ray player. But it's completely 100% wrong to think that older movies cannot benefit from a Blu Ray release. One thing I forgot to mention earlier: aside from a higher resolution transfer, HD video on Blu Ray can also be much less compressed than DVD, so less chance of seeing compression artifa
  10. This is what I mean by quality of transfer - the film grain itself is part of the nature of the film and pretty much inevitable. However, dust, scratches, etc. (other physical defects) can either be physically cleaned off the print, or removed via software. Really high quality transfers involve going over each frame. A movie like Caddyshack probably has a really poor transfer (most comedies are not known for their visual splendor), but I can guarantee you that more visually stunning movies have much higher quality transfers (couldn't tell you off hand which ones, but I'm sure there are various
  11. DVD and even Blu Ray are a long ways off from film. The resolution, even in 1080p HD, isn't nearly as high as that of film. I don't remember offhand the exact numbers, but it's significant. I'm not sure what you have been watching, but just about any movie would benefit from a transfer to Blu Ray. There have been some bad Blu Ray transfers, of course, and not every movie gets a careful transfer. But, the potential is definitely there. That being said, I'm not sure how IATTBYH was shot, but it looks like it was on film and (despite being in grainy black and white), it should still benefit fro
  12. That's very rude. What's wrong with starting new topics instead of digging up old ones? This is a discussion board, not an archive. If it annoys you, don't reply to the topic.
  13. The Flaming Lips. Transmissions from the Satellite Heart, Zaireeka, Clouds Taste Metallic, Hit to Death in the Future Head and THE SOFT BULLETIN. Nothing else even comes close to a run like that. Uncle Tupelo's best stuff was from the 80s, and Wilco's best stuff is 2000+.
  14. It's nothing like the Soft Bulletin, Clouds Taste Metallic, Transmissions, At War With the Mystics, or Yoshimi. If you are only a fan of those albums, you will likely not "get it." The songs are not structured at all like the songs on those albums. There is very little similarity in arrangement, feel, etc. The Flaming Lips have, once again, reinvented themselves, and some people are not going to like it, some are going to think it's trash, and that's OK, because I fucking love what they've done. The songs here are much more organic, spacey, and jam based. What it reminds me most of is earlie
  15. I think the best way to put it is that this album is a return to the dark/weird Flaming Lips stuff of yester-year. If you dig this album, check out some of their older stuff (Hit to Death in the Future Head, In a Priest Driven Ambulance, etc.).
×
×
  • Create New...