The OFFICIAL Unofficial Achewood Message Board

Trivial Pursuits => Wild Card => Topic started by: miles on January 24, 2006, 01:24:24 am

Title: Pat Sighting!
Post by: miles on January 24, 2006, 01:24:24 am: TOUAMB NEWS ALERT: PAT SIGHTING

Maybe there should be a Pat sighting thread.

Someone wrote my Univerisity's newspaper (http://www.dailyutahchronicle.com/media/paper244/news/2006/01/23/LettersToTheEditor/Hogan.Was.Wrong.About.AllAmerican.Rejects-1493385.shtml?norewrite&sourcedomain=www.dailyutahchronicle.com) in response to a review of an All-American Rejects (AAR) album. I pasted the text below because you'll probably have to register if you click the link.

It's not exactly Pat, but, well, it's close, I think:

Hogan was wrong about All-American Rejects
Issue date: 1/23/06 Section: Letters to the Editor

Editor:

I read the review of The All-American Rejects by Marshal Hogan ("All-American refuse belongs in landfill" Jan. 18), and was thoroughly appalled at how far off in right field his review was.

I don't know Hogan well enough to know if he actually listens to the music or just hits the scan button on his CD player. If he had taken the time to listen to the album, he would have found that the first 10 seconds of the album have a catchy guitar riff that ensnares the listener to keep listening.

I consider myself to be an avid music lover who knows music like the back of my hand. I don't know if you, Hogan, have ever heard of a little band called Weezer.

Weezer uses a "recipe" when it creates its songs, and they turn out to be fantastic. A vast majority of Weezer's songs deal with love, being in love, women, girls-just as Hogan states about AAR, "The album is full of formulaic predictability-dual vocal choruses about breakups, makeups or just plain being in love."?

Just about any Weezer song fits his criteria for what he calls a "pile of wreckage."

Here is a tip for Hogan: sit in your car, turn on the title track, "Move Along," (that is track No. 3, if you actually bothered to look at the album cover) and turn it up as loud as your deaf ears can stand, and play it over and over till you can hear just how good the drums and bass are.

How popular was Weezer's second album Pinkerton when it first came out? Not very. But every Weezer fan I know thinks that Pinkerton is its best album. It is also their second album, just like Move?Along is AAR's second album-so pull your head out of your butt so you can hear just how good of an album it is.

Drew Williamsen
Senior, Mass Communication
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: V-Adore on January 24, 2006, 02:19:33 am: "a little band called Weezer" swayed me over. It's Pat, but about totally mainstream stuff! Holy crap!
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Thee on January 24, 2006, 04:05:33 am: That made me dumber.

Dumber
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Doc on January 24, 2006, 07:46:45 am: That's something else, a wonderfully supercillious defense of mainstream music.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: JorgeFabregas on January 24, 2006, 09:44:18 am: Every band's second album is awesome.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Hobo Frenzy on January 24, 2006, 02:32:07 pm: Don't you mean sophomore album?
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: jough on January 24, 2006, 05:59:44 pm: Oh wow. That's so not the case.

I mean, it's a cliche that sophmore albums tend to suck. Weezer is an exception, sure, but for the most part it's accurate.

The band has umpteen years to put together their first album. They've hashed out songs in shitty bars and bat mitzvahs up and down the coast, and honed them to a science. It may take ten years to put together a great album's worth of songs, but the proof is in the listening.

Then they make it big, go on tour playing the same songs, and enjoy being rock stars.

Then they go into the studio for two weeks and crank out a second album as fast as they can.

It almost has to suck. It's science.

Then they either get their shit together and put out a really great third album, or never rise above their mediocrity every again and they become "one hit wonders."

Artists whose second albums did not suck:

The Beatles
The Rolling Stones
Jimi Hendrix
Weezer
Nirvana (regardless of whether you consider Bleach or Nevermind their first big album)

I'm drawing a blank after that.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Thee on January 24, 2006, 07:01:35 pm: The Stooges
Beck
Pixies
Cake
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: V-Adore on January 24, 2006, 07:31:45 pm: I will argue that R.E.M.'s sophomore effort (I'm gonna say it's Murmur here and count Chronic Town as a real album) didn't suck, but about the first three CDs R.E.M. put out were all from the same "ten years fiddling" back-catalog, so it's hard to say.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: JorgeFabregas on January 24, 2006, 07:58:56 pm: Upwardly mobile slinkies, people. I was demonstrating the ridiculousness of his comparison of albums based on the ORDER THEY CAME OUT. William Hung's second album will get a lukewarm reception, but people will eventually come to agree that it's his best--JUST LIKE WEEZER.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Limmo on January 24, 2006, 10:05:44 pm: Beastie Boys – Paul’s Boutique

Smashing Pumpkins – siamese dream

Jimi Hendrix – Axis: Bold As Love

Nirvana – Nevermind

Frank Black – Teenager of the Year

Public Enemy – It Takes A Nation of Millions To Hold Us Back

Beck – Odelay!

My Bloody Valentine – Loveless

Captain Beefheart and the Magic Band: Trout Mask Replica

Jefferson Airplane: Surrealistic Pillow

Jane’s Addiction: Nothing’s Shocking

Neil Young – Everybody Knows This is Nowhere

Black Sabbath – Paranoid

The Stooges – Fun House

Radiohead: The Bends

Elvis Costello and the Attractions: This Year’s Model

The Pixies: Doolittle

Queen II

The Velvet Underground: White Light/White Heat

PJ Harvey: Rid of Me
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: jough on January 24, 2006, 11:19:23 pm: Well, some of those you mentioned are among those bands' worst albums, but I just want to correct that "Odelay" was not Beck's second album, but his third.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: CortJstr on January 24, 2006, 11:28:49 pm: Quote from: jough on January 24, 2006, 11:19:23 pm
I just want to correct that "Odelay" was not Beck's second album, but his third.

I thought we were defining "sophomore album" as the the album released after a band attains commercial success not necessarily as their 2nd album ever.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: theinevitable on January 24, 2006, 11:46:35 pm: shit shit shit

did this boy seriously say that Weezer wrote their songs by formula on the 2nd album???

The whole reason Rivers had a complete mental breakdown and took like 6 years off is that pinkerton had no songs written by pop-music formula. it did horribly, and he thought he had essentially failed at life.
the famous "songs written by analyzing the chord progressions of Nirvana songs" didn't come until later. You know, when they started mostly sucking.

That first album is, as far as I care, their best. The second, perhaps just as good, but not my favorite.

internet pat, who is not the real pat, you are not my friend.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: miles on January 25, 2006, 12:36:35 am: Quote from: jough on January 24, 2006, 11:19:23 pm
Well, some of those you mentioned are among those bands' worst albums, but I just want to correct that "Odelay" was not Beck's second album, but his third.

Which ones? I don't much like The Bends, but I don't much like Radiohead, so I can't really judge. Same with PJ Harvey, Beck, and Elvis Costello. But I think every other album listed is a really good one, and in some cases, my favorite of the band's (Pixies, for example).
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on January 25, 2006, 01:42:08 am: I just wanted to point out that The Beatles Second Album isn't a real album, it's just a collection of songs thrown together by Capital records. Their actual second album is With the Beatles, which is a great album.

~Paul
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: wombat on January 25, 2006, 01:48:37 am: It is clear that there definitely should be a Pat sighting thread.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on January 25, 2006, 02:09:12 am: Quote from: wombat on January 25, 2006, 01:48:37 am
It is clear that there definitely should be a Pat sighting thread.

Who is going to start it?

~Paul
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: misterqueue on January 25, 2006, 02:11:26 am: Don't start none, there won't be none.

Word.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on January 25, 2006, 02:15:41 am: There's always this (http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/news/06-01/24.shtml). They do have that softmore slump in common.

~Paul
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Roger on January 25, 2006, 03:21:22 am: Man now I feel like going and listening me to some Black Sabbath.
But I couldn't possibly point out Paranoid as their best album, or any other, because for me their first 6 records comprise one big slab of goodness.

It was all downhill from then on, though.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Limmo on January 25, 2006, 04:22:56 am: Quote from: Roger on January 25, 2006, 03:21:22 am
Man now I feel like going and listening me to some Black Sabbath.
But I couldn't possibly point out Paranoid as their best album, or any other, because for me their first 6 records comprise one big slab of goodness.

It was all downhill from then on, though.

I never said Paranoid was their best album. I just said it was their second album. Though it is their best album. Well, except for Master of Reality. And Sabbath Bloody Sabbath. Well, there's a lot of good stuff on the first album too. And on Sabotage.

Um...what you said!

Except for the "downhill" part. The Dio-era stuff kicked large quantities of ass.

It was all downhill from then on, though.

Now someone's gonna write in to defend The Headless Cross and it's just gonna get stupid.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on January 25, 2006, 04:34:57 am: Quote from: Limmo on January 25, 2006, 04:22:56 am
Now someone's gonna write in to defend The Headless Cross and it's just gonna get stupid.

No, but Born Again is f'n great. Digital Bitch, c'mon, what's not to love?

~Paul
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Thee on January 25, 2006, 07:48:45 am: Whoever said it, you're right, it's not the 2nd album ever released, but rather the one they release after the "popular" album. What a fuck*ng amateur mistake.

So, revising my own list, Beck is off, because mutations isn't a good album. And I wouldn't really say Teenager of the Year didn't suck either. Anyone else think that there's a whole era of Frank Black solo stuff sounds like Bowie's bad songs? Just shitty synths and bad soundscapes. I only really like Black Letter Days, with The Catholics.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: jough on January 25, 2006, 08:04:13 am: First of all, Mutations is a good album.

But Beck's first album, Mellow Gold, was a pretty decent hit maker. You youngsters don't remember how popular "Loser" was. It was a hit.

No, Beck's second album (released) is "Stereopathetic Soulmanure" (the manure in the title should give an indication).

He also released "One Foot in the Grave" after that, which was also awful.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Limmo on January 25, 2006, 03:51:51 pm: Quote from: Thee on January 25, 2006, 07:48:45 am
Whoever said it, you're right, it's not the 2nd album ever released, but rather the one they release after the "popular" album. What a fuck*ng amateur mistake.

So, revising my own list, Beck is off, because mutations isn't a good album. And I wouldn't really say Teenager of the Year didn't suck either. Anyone else think that there's a whole era of Frank Black solo stuff sounds like Bowie's bad songs? Just shitty synths and bad soundscapes. I only really like Black Letter Days, with The Catholics.

Ohhhh, so the album Santana put out after Supernatural is their second album? My mistake. ::)

Mutations is a terrific album. Teenager of the Year is about half of a terrific album.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Biz Markizzle on January 25, 2006, 06:00:28 pm: I think I've sighted about 20 Pats within this thread! Ziii-iiing.

Just kidding you guys I agree with all of you individually about which albums are good and also which albums are 2nd or 3rd; all of you are right.

Love
Biz
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Thee on January 25, 2006, 07:23:33 pm: Quote from: Limmo on January 25, 2006, 03:51:51 pm
Ohhhh, so the album Santana put out after Supernatural is their second album? My mistake. ::)

Hey, we both know when an artist releases so much music over the last thousand years, this model goes out the window.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Mr. Gary on February 23, 2006, 02:25:53 am: Well, the cliche usually applies for major label artists, who go with the gross major label approach of writing and recording.

Pavement's second album may have been their best, out of a solid discography.
Tin Hat Trio's second album is amaaaazing.
Eric's Trip's second album was totally amazing.
John Fahey's second album was no slouch.
Os Mutantes' second album was great.
The Boredoms' second album was insane.

And so on.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: hungoverdrawn on March 07, 2006, 02:28:51 pm: Quote from: jough on January 24, 2006, 05:59:44 pm
Artists whose second albums did not suck:

Dexys Midnight Runners - Too-Rye-Ay
Kevin Rowland - My Beauty
The Darkness - One Way Ticket To Hell ...And Back
Kenickie - Get In
Mogwai - Come On Die Young
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Nabubrush on March 07, 2006, 07:24:21 pm: Quote from: Limmo on January 25, 2006, 04:22:56 am
I never said Paranoid was their best album. I just said it was their second album. Though it is their best album. Well, except for Master of Reality. And Sabbath Bloody Sabbath. Well, there's a lot of good stuff on the first album too. And on Sabotage.

Um...what you said!

Except for the "downhill" part. The Dio-era stuff kicked large quantities of ass.

It was all downhill from then on, though.

Now someone's gonna write in to defend The Headless Cross and it's just gonna get stupid.

No, but Vol. 4!
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: miles on March 09, 2006, 01:18:46 pm: Quote from: hungoverdrawn on March 07, 2006, 02:28:51 pm
The Darkness - One Way Ticket To Hell ...And Back

I thought that the band did pretty well in convincing everyone with their first album that, yes, they are serious, and that they have lived in a cave since 1987. But the recent album title is too much of a Spinal Tap-ism.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Nabubrush on March 09, 2006, 04:50:37 pm: My BIL got the second Darkness album, and he said it was terrible. And he got all behind the first one. Like, annoyingly behind it.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on March 09, 2006, 05:19:17 pm: Quote from: Nabubrush drinks (a lot) on March 09, 2006, 04:50:37 pm
BIL

???

~Paul

Edit: Brother in Law, Doh!!
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: hungoverdrawn on March 10, 2006, 12:32:32 pm: Quote from: miles on March 09, 2006, 01:18:46 pm
too much of a Spinal Tap-ism

You'd be surprised by how many people just don't get that it is a joke though. They're all "but how can you have a one-way ticket and come back?"

Anyway, the record is amazing, just different from the first. I like that more than what, for instance, Franz Ferdinand did which is just make the same album all over again, exactly the same. Boooring.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Nabubrush on March 10, 2006, 04:22:32 pm: Quote from: hungoverdrawn on March 10, 2006, 12:32:32 pm
Anyway, the record is amazing, just different from the first. I like that more than what, for instance, Franz Ferdinand did which is just make the same album all over again, exactly the same. Boooring.

I'm guessing you aren't much of an AC/DC fan, then?
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: jough on March 10, 2006, 04:28:55 pm: Or Led Zeppelin. Or The Beatles, whose music changed only gradually over the course of many albums. Or the Beach Boys. Or Frank Sinatra. Or Frank Zappa. Or any other artist who pretty much made the same album many times. Like The Who!
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on March 10, 2006, 04:37:14 pm: Quote from: jough on March 10, 2006, 04:28:55 pm
Or Led Zeppelin. Or The Beatles, whose music changed only gradually over the course of many albums. Or the Beach Boys. Or Frank Sinatra. Or Frank Zappa. Or any other artist who pretty much made the same album many times. Like The Who!

The key is to incorporate many different elements into the music from the start. That way the fans aren't shocked when a band goes in a new direction.

Quote from: Nabubrush drinks (a lot) on March 10, 2006, 04:22:32 pm
I'm guessing you aren't much of an AC/DC fan, then?

The difference between Franz Ferdinand and AC/DC is that AC/DC's riffs never seems to get stale.

~Paul
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Nabubrush on March 10, 2006, 04:57:51 pm: Quote from: jough on March 10, 2006, 04:28:55 pm
Or Led Zeppelin. Or The Beatles, whose music changed only gradually over the course of many albums. Or the Beach Boys. Or Frank Sinatra. Or Frank Zappa. Or any other artist who pretty much made the same album many times. Like The Who!

I would say that the difference between "It's a Long Way to the Top" and "Flick of the Switch" is maybe not as marked as the difference between songs by some of the othe artists you named. ALthough with Frank it's sort of tough - other people wrote the songs for him, and they were maybe a bit constrained by what worked for him, and what he was willing to record. At least with a band like Led Zeppelin, there were periodic departures such as "D'yer Mak'er". The Who did the same thing with songs like "Boris the Spider" and maybe "My Wife". As for Zappa, I guess there's a common thread there, but I think it encompasses more variety. AC/DC basically recorded the exact same, bar-band-boogie track over and over, and sometime around the release of For Those About to Rock, everyone said the hell with it.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: AugustWest on March 10, 2006, 05:59:49 pm: Zappa? I won't argue that much with the others you listed, but Zappa?

Three albums:

Hot Rats
Just Another Band From LA
Apostrophe

Those are the same? Nuh uh.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Limmo on March 10, 2006, 09:15:37 pm: Quote from: Nabubrush drinks (a lot) on March 07, 2006, 07:24:21 pm
No, but Vol. 4!

I've...never...really, y'know....liked Volume 4. You could lose half of that album and be better off.

[/sacrilege]
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on March 10, 2006, 09:19:04 pm: Quote from: Limmo on March 10, 2006, 09:15:37 pm
I've...never...really, y'know....liked Volume 4. You could lose half of that album and be better off.

[/sacrilege]

Vol. 4 is my least favorite Original Sabbath Album.

~Paul
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: jough on March 10, 2006, 10:03:08 pm: Quote from: AugustWest on March 10, 2006, 05:59:49 pm
Zappa? I won't argue that much with the others you listed, but Zappa?

Three albums:

Hot Rats
Just Another Band From LA
Apostrophe

Those are the same? Nuh uh.

No, of course not. But the dude did make a number of albums where you can't tell which song was from which album (other than just knowing each album like I do).

Zappa made 70+ albums, but he only made 7 different albums.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: AugustWest on March 11, 2006, 03:14:36 am: Quote from: jough on March 10, 2006, 10:03:08 pm
Zappa made 70+ albums, but he only made 7 different albums.

Which is six more than virtually everybody else.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: hungoverdrawn on March 11, 2006, 11:24:39 am: Quote from: pmcd9 on March 10, 2006, 04:37:14 pm
The difference between Franz Ferdinand and AC/DC is that AC/DC's riffs never seems to get stale.

Ding! Which is why I have about 10 hours of AC/DC in my collection, and only 45 minutes of Franzizzle Ferdinizzle.

And I'm totally not buying there only being a gradual change in the music of say, The Beatles or The Beach Boys, that's total hossshit. The difference between Yesterday and Helter Skelter is not gradual, it is radical. The difference between singing about surfing over Chuck Berry riffs and making music that was at the vanguard of American psychedelia at the time is not gradual. I get the point you're trying to make, but those aren't good examples.

There is a lot on The Darkness' second album that sounds like the first, they were just unafraid to experiment with different instrumentation, which is how you develop as an artist. Like when Pete Townshend programmed Meher Baba and Terry Riley's vital statistics into an ARP synthesizer to create Baba O'Riley. Although of course there's no difference between that and, say, Substitute.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Nabubrush on March 11, 2006, 08:48:32 pm: Quote from: Limmo on March 10, 2006, 09:15:37 pm
I've...never...really, y'know....liked Volume 4. You could lose half of that album and be better off.

[/sacrilege]

Quote from: pmcd9 on March 10, 2006, 09:19:04 pm
Vol. 4 is my least favorite Original Sabbath Album.

~Paul

I'll admit I'm probably a little overenthusiastic about Black Sabbath, what with the boxed set and the videos and the alternate label albums and shit, but remember, when you are bagging on Vol. 4, that this was the same lineup that A: allowed Geezer to basically write a full album-worth of misogynistic rants directed at his ex-wife (Technical Ecstasy) and B: begged Ozzy to rejoin the band to record another album (Never say Die) that should probably have been called something like Why Won't You Fuckers Let This Band Die. Both Heaven and Hell and The Mob Rules are light-years better than those two, and Born Again is at least as good - and it's fucking awful.

Now obviously, "Changes" is horsehit. "FX" is basically a throwaway space-filler. "Laguna Sunrise" is atmospheric claptrap. But "Supernaut" may be Sabbath at their most metal, and "Snowblind" is a much stronger and more mature song than "Sweet Leaf" - indeed, it's sort of surprising that it's such an indictement of drugs, given the latter's idyllic description of drugs and Ozzy's eventual self-destruction.

To be fair, Sabbath always had a habit of putting one or two songs on each album that just don't make any sense, and are pretty much instant skips. On the first album, the whole "Bit of Finger" suite is tough to take, and the cover of "Evil Woman" is pretty weak. Paranoid's "Planet Caravan" is nice - after about 15 bong hits. Seriously,the jazz-noodling mixed with Ozzy's effect-laden vocals make for an interminable 4 1/2 minutes. On Master of Reality, there's "Sweet Leaf". It's a gimmick, and doesn't stand up well. "Embryo" and "Orchid" are Tony perhaps indulging himself overmuch. "Solitude" is every bit as bad as "Changes".

Sabbath Bloody Sabbath introduced the band's first foray into synthesizers. This album boasts "Fluff" - Black Sabbath's (perhaps ironically named) worst song. The last three songs on the album all have their moments, but the fucking keyboards just overwhelm anything enjoyable about them. And then there's the final valid Ozzy album - Sabotage. "Don't Start (Too Late)", is often recorded by other bands, but titled "Intro". If the other bands are really nice, they just make it part of the other, better song. Hmm, "Supertzar". It's another intro, or "Unititled", if you're Oasis - only this time it's nearly four minutes long. I know that Sabbath didn't anticipate the invention of random, but it's no kind of deal when you sit through "Don't Start (Too Late)" and you don't then get to listen to "Symptom of the Universe". At least "Supertzar" is followed up by the wretched "Am I Going Insane (Radio)", which we weren't going to listen to anyway. Hey guys? The laughing thing seemed cool when you recorded it, I'm sure, but it's the kind of thing that's only interesting the first time through.

I think the main problem with Vol. 4, if it has one, is that it's so unrelentingly bleak. The songs are about the assured destruction of everything from individuals to society to the planet itself. And the music, from Tony's downright evil riffs to the crunching, juggernaut of Sabbath's rhythm section, simply reinforces the "negative vibe". Though the album wraps up with Ozzy stating "just believe in yourself . . . live your life and leave them all behind" it's not enough to make up for lines like "try your hardest, you'll still be a loser", "take a life it's going cheap, kill someone no one will weep, freedom's yours just pay your dues, we just want your soul to use", "I don't even believe in peace", and "let them have their little toys, matchbox cars and mortgaged joys".

Well, I'm sorry we all had to go through that. It didn't start out all that bloated, but it sort of got away from me. I would like to point out that another reason we all have 10 hours of AC/DC and only 45 minutes of Frizzle Ferdinizzle is because that's all there is of either band. Plus, AC/DC is quite frankly more fun. I also though of another band that sort of records the same songs over and over, and oddly enough it's another FF band: Foo Fighters. I like 'em, but it all seems to run together.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Limmo on March 11, 2006, 10:40:48 pm: I agree with almost all of your Volume 4 points, but I have no use for "St. Vitus Dance" or "Under the Sun" either. Which makes it a short album for me.

I'd agree with your assessments of Paranoid and Master of Reality if you weren't so totally wrong.

SBS is my favorite Sabbath album. Even though "Who Are You" would have been better with guitars instead of synths, and they should have repeated the chorus of "Looking For Today" earlier and way more often.

I agree with your take on the rest of the catalog, with the exception of Mob Rules. I think that album is as good anything the original line-up ever did. Live Evil is pretty nifty if you overlook the muddy sound and occasional instance of Dio mistaking the lyrics for the end of Richard III.

Yay Sabbath!

ETA: Boy, this post just takes it right back to Pat, doesn't it?
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Nabubrush on March 11, 2006, 10:54:41 pm: A: I'm Pat,
B: I have lots more of this,
C: I like Mob Rules and Heaven and Hell just fine - I think maybe that wasn't clear from my post.

My favorite is probably Master of Reality - but I think they're all pretty good. It's just disheartening to be listening away and have "Fluff" or "Changes" show up. Funny, though - what started with a discussion of bands recording the same songs over and over again ends up with me calling out Sabbath for recording these two songs that are so completely out of place.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: hungoverdrawn on March 12, 2006, 09:59:15 pm: Quote from: Nabubrush drinks (a lot) on March 11, 2006, 08:48:32 pm
Plus, AC/DC is quite frankly more fun.

Well, this is it. If Alex Kapranos sang about having big balls, sinking the pink and putting his love into Eleanor Friedberger (who, judging by my quick Google search is a kind of an indie-rock Frances McDormand) then they'd be a different proposition altogether.

As for Sabbath, sacrilege I know but the two-disc retrospective is plenty enough for me. Two Scottish post-rock covers of songs you didn't like in their original incarnation - Arab Strap's take on 'Changes' and Mogwai's of 'Sweet Leaf' - are well worth checking out. On the former in particular Aidan Moffat's vocal delivery strips away any trace of saccharine.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on March 13, 2006, 03:10:36 pm: Quote from: hungoverdrawn on March 11, 2006, 11:24:39 am
And I'm totally not buying there only being a gradual change in the music of say, The Beatles or The Beach Boys, that's total hossshit. The difference between Yesterday and Helter Skelter is not gradual, it is radical. The difference between singing about surfing over Chuck Berry riffs and making music that was at the vanguard of American psychedelia at the time is not gradual. I get the point you're trying to make, but those aren't good examples.

In the case of the Beatles, they could shift from mind bending psychodical, breezy pop, folk, and rockabilly over the course of an album side.

~Paul
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: side_show on March 13, 2006, 06:35:32 pm: So, uh, back on topic...

Human Pat just came to my office.

For those who do not know, I work at the largest children's theatre in Canada. Which means we have casting agents coming to us all the time. In response to this we have created what we call our "Secret Agency" - meaning, with parental consent, we collect casting information on all of our students and offer it to accredited casting agents in exchange for a donation to the school. Casting children normally costs an agency loads of money, so we are making thier lives very, very easy.

In comes this guy to the front desk, which is within ear shot of my office. He asks if the school director is here. The answer is no. He sounds very agitate and upset because he says he has made an apointment to see the theatre school director. I get up from my desk at this point because I know for a fact that the theatre school director teaches evenings on Mondays and is never in in the morning, and would therefore never make and apointment for today.

Me: You have an apointment to meet with the theatre school director?
Pat: Yes, I emailed him an hour ago that I would be coming in to look through your casting books.
Me: Well, he doesn't come in until 1:00.
Pat: Yes, but I made and apointment with him.
Me: Did you speak to him, or are you talking about the email you sent? (he just looks at me)
Pat: (turns to teenage box office attendant and starts to describe the type of child he is looking for) I'm looking for a young Asian girl between nine and twelve and I need her right away...

I go back to my desk.

From my office, I hear him repeating the description to the box office girl and again asking if she's sure he can't look at the books. She apologizes to him and suggests that he come back when the theatre school directo is in. He continues to be quite agitated and restates that he needs the girl today, and that the theatre school director told him he could look through the books. She again tells him to come back later, and he says "I may come back later, but maybe not. I may not come back." His tone sounds like a threat, which is odd, because really, it would be ideal if he didn't come back.

I can't help but assume that he could be a peodophile. Our casting books have our student's names and phone numbers in them, so a stranger off the street can't walk in and just help him self to what he needs, but he is cleary very displeased. He again stammers that he "may not be back," and leaves.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: Nabubrush on March 13, 2006, 06:38:18 pm: I feel sick. I can't imagine - actually, that's not true. I can perfectly imagine what I would have done in this situation, and that is fly off the handle on the basis of limited information and do somethin that would have resulted in me getting fired. But jeez, that just doesn't sound right at all.
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: pmcd9 on March 13, 2006, 06:55:45 pm: My first thought wasn't 'pedophile.' My assumption is he is a casting director (or lackey) who overlooked the casting of a 12 year old asian child and presumed that his emergency was your problem.

Totally Pat

~Paul
Title: Re: Pat Sighting!
Post by: V-Adore on March 14, 2006, 01:32:04 am: Good God. That's classic.

What is up with these honky-tonk blowjobs and always threatening not to come back or "shop there again?" Do they not understand the basic human-social-interaction idea that if people hate you or are obviously pained by your presence, your leaving and not returning is a consummation devoutly to be wished? Do they really believe that their five bucks will break a business? (Especially if they're shoplifters. Hint to morons: stores are very, very happy when shoplifters don't come back.)