Re: [bomp] Re: hives, vines, lee ann rimes, whoever, whatever...

["Rocky Serkowney" <rocky.serkowney@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hey Rob,

Well said.  It's all about personal taste.  And I also agree with something
you mentioned quite a while ago about generally speaking, modern records
just not sounding quite as good or exciting as sixties recordings.  Guess
it's all down to what you're ears are tuned into most.

Squirrely.

----- Original Message -----
From: <Euphorik6@aol.com>
> this is a totally personal thing of mine, i don't pretend to speak for
> anybody else....that being said, the fact that i listen to 95% (more like
99,
> really) 60s rock doesn't have anything to do with nostalgia, simply the
fact
> that i don't think anything that is coming out today is even CLOSE to
being
> as exciting as, say, the who or the stooges or whoever. not by a fucking
> mile. as far as rock & roll being for today, i totally agree, and i the
fact
> that "fun house" or whatever is 30+ years doesn't even figure into the
> equation for me. it works for me, right this instant. i don't play that
> record and think "gee, wouldn't it be great if it was 1970 again??" i just
> play it and rock out - if something comes out nowadays thats as good as
that,
> fuckin a, great. i'll be the first in line to buy it.
>
> seems to me, though, that people listening to a band because they're NEW
is
> exactly the same thing as listening to a band because they're OLD. the
point
> is to listen to something because you dig it, and cuz you think it's good.
&
> everybody seems to dig the spines and the drives, and the white vines, and
> the vine stripes. that's great!! i have totally no problem with that - all
i
> am posting this for is to clarify the fact that i, personally, don't
listen
> listen to something because it's old OR new. just cuz i like whatever it
is.
> nostalgia has nothing to do with it.
>

===> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe bomp" to majordomo@xnet2.com <===