Change in Policy
For the next little while - perhaps the next few months - the Rambler will go from a seven day schedule to six days, with five weekdays and one weekend post. The trade-off (if it could be considered such) is that the weekend post will now be an in-depth dissection of a song from the Kopperman (and, yes, Copper Man) archives.
I'd always planned to have this be a part of the the Rambler, and the eventual site archives, but seeing as how it's already April and there's no site in sight (gah), this will at least give the Rambler a little more chewy content and allow me to simultaneously develop content for the eventual site. When/wherever that may be.
I'd be remiss if I didn't point you to Karl, Shaun and Christian's blogs, all of whom have had regular music/archives posts, and while it's not an original concept with them, their example is the one that has spurred me into action.
The probably won't be any rhyme or reason to the order in which the songs are presented - if anything, I think it would be better to consider the songs outside of whatever minimal album or historical context they may have originally been burdened with, except in extreme cases. So they'll now be allowed to stand or fall on their own merits - which, frankly, is enough of a burden as it is.
In the meantime, I direct you to a page from the original Subway Rambler that might as well serve as an example of everything potentially good and bad about this upcoming feature: http://www.copper-man.net/pages/blog_62405.html.
A little information about that recording that, suprisingly, isn't in that already lengthy post:
1) the four-chord structure that supplies the first half of the 'verse' is originally by then Copper Man guitarist Eric Santaniello, with a pretty substantial reworking from me in terms of both harmonization and feel.
2) since the song never ended up with lyrics or an official title, I'll just call it what I named the MP3: Rhodes-Mitchell
3) Between the recording of the demo (entirely me, as noted in the post) and the posting just a few days later, Eric was out of the band, mostly in reaction to (it must be said) some pretty lousy behavior on my part - but that's a story for another time. If 'never' could be considered a time, that is.
D.
I'd always planned to have this be a part of the the Rambler, and the eventual site archives, but seeing as how it's already April and there's no site in sight (gah), this will at least give the Rambler a little more chewy content and allow me to simultaneously develop content for the eventual site. When/wherever that may be.
I'd be remiss if I didn't point you to Karl, Shaun and Christian's blogs, all of whom have had regular music/archives posts, and while it's not an original concept with them, their example is the one that has spurred me into action.
The probably won't be any rhyme or reason to the order in which the songs are presented - if anything, I think it would be better to consider the songs outside of whatever minimal album or historical context they may have originally been burdened with, except in extreme cases. So they'll now be allowed to stand or fall on their own merits - which, frankly, is enough of a burden as it is.
In the meantime, I direct you to a page from the original Subway Rambler that might as well serve as an example of everything potentially good and bad about this upcoming feature: http://www.copper-man.net/pages/blog_62405.html.
A little information about that recording that, suprisingly, isn't in that already lengthy post:
1) the four-chord structure that supplies the first half of the 'verse' is originally by then Copper Man guitarist Eric Santaniello, with a pretty substantial reworking from me in terms of both harmonization and feel.
2) since the song never ended up with lyrics or an official title, I'll just call it what I named the MP3: Rhodes-Mitchell
3) Between the recording of the demo (entirely me, as noted in the post) and the posting just a few days later, Eric was out of the band, mostly in reaction to (it must be said) some pretty lousy behavior on my part - but that's a story for another time. If 'never' could be considered a time, that is.
D.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home