Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Basses that changed history
Re: Basses that changed history
RichL wrote:
> Jim Carr <newsgroups@azwebpages,com > wrote:
>> RichL wrote:
>>> Jim Carr <newsgroups@azwebpages,com > wrote:
>>>> RichL wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> " By the 1960s, Commodore acts included Cream, B.B. King and Johnny
>>>>> Winter, Rod Stewart, the Byrds, the Kingsmen, Grand Funk Railroad
>>>>> and The Turtles. Even in the 60s, the average cover charge was
>>>>> only $2. It never surpassed $3.50, even for the biggest names."
>>>> According to the inflation calculator:
>>>> What cost $3.50 in 1965 would cost $23.17 in 2007.
>>> Yup....just goes to show, the relative perceived values of things
>>> change over time.
>>> That $2 admission to the Commodore would now be $13.24. Can you
>>> imagine paying that much to see a first-rate act live these days?
>>> Also, that $4 album would now be $26.48.
>> Yeh, it's pretty wild. I just looked up a picture of a ticket to see
>> The Beatles at The Hollywood Bowl. They were $4 to $6.
>
> And now that we've gone through this little dance, it seems apparent
> that Derek's original point is valid. In *those* days, it made sense
> for the major labels to regard a tour as a marketing mechanism to sell
> albums.
It's pretty clear now that it wasn't a stupid idea, but having some
marketing experience myself, it doesn't sound very smart. The basic
premise is that you heavily market a low-margin concert that requires
lots of infrastructure in the hopes that people buy the higher-margin
album already in the pipeline. It's probably not the approach I would
take, but so what?
It's at least plausible, but neither you nor Derek has produced anything
beyond conjecture that it actually worked that way. If you read it
somewhere, just point me in the right direction. I'm not saying it
didn't work that way - I'm just skeptical.
--
Write a wise saying and your name will live forever.
- Anonymous
RichL wrote:
> Jim Carr <newsgroups@azwebpages,com > wrote:
>> RichL wrote:
>>> Jim Carr <newsgroups@azwebpages,com > wrote:
>>>> RichL wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> " By the 1960s, Commodore acts included Cream, B.B. King and Johnny
>>>>> Winter, Rod Stewart, the Byrds, the Kingsmen, Grand Funk Railroad
>>>>> and The Turtles. Even in the 60s, the average cover charge was
>>>>> only $2. It never surpassed $3.50, even for the biggest names."
>>>> According to the inflation calculator:
>>>> What cost $3.50 in 1965 would cost $23.17 in 2007.
>>> Yup....just goes to show, the relative perceived values of things
>>> change over time.
>>> That $2 admission to the Commodore would now be $13.24. Can you
>>> imagine paying that much to see a first-rate act live these days?
>>> Also, that $4 album would now be $26.48.
>> Yeh, it's pretty wild. I just looked up a picture of a ticket to see
>> The Beatles at The Hollywood Bowl. They were $4 to $6.
>
> And now that we've gone through this little dance, it seems apparent
> that Derek's original point is valid. In *those* days, it made sense
> for the major labels to regard a tour as a marketing mechanism to sell
> albums.
It's pretty clear now that it wasn't a stupid idea, but having some
marketing experience myself, it doesn't sound very smart. The basic
premise is that you heavily market a low-margin concert that requires
lots of infrastructure in the hopes that people buy the higher-margin
album already in the pipeline. It's probably not the approach I would
take, but so what?
It's at least plausible, but neither you nor Derek has produced anything
beyond conjecture that it actually worked that way. If you read it
somewhere, just point me in the right direction. I'm not saying it
didn't work that way - I'm just skeptical.
--
Write a wise saying and your name will live forever.
- Anonymous
Re: Basses that changed history
Jim Carr wrote:
> According to the inflation calculator:
> What cost $3.50 in 1965 would cost $23.17 in 2007.
Are you kidding? What "calculator" is this? The one used by the Bush
administration to figure social security increases?
I recall taking a total fit back in '63-64 when gasoline went to $
0.25 a gallon! (I was commuting to school at the time) Golds was $30
an oz.
So by the calculator gas costs us $1.65 a gallon today and one Oz. of
Gold is $198 (Hint gold was recently topping out at $1000 an ounce!)
I was sort of looking into this and according to my calculations
gasoline today at $4.00 is a terrific bargain! It really should be up
around $9.00 like it is in Europe!
Jim Carr wrote:
> According to the inflation calculator:
> What cost $3.50 in 1965 would cost $23.17 in 2007.
Are you kidding? What "calculator" is this? The one used by the Bush
administration to figure social security increases?
I recall taking a total fit back in '63-64 when gasoline went to $
0.25 a gallon! (I was commuting to school at the time) Golds was $30
an oz.
So by the calculator gas costs us $1.65 a gallon today and one Oz. of
Gold is $198 (Hint gold was recently topping out at $1000 an ounce!)
I was sort of looking into this and according to my calculations
gasoline today at $4.00 is a terrific bargain! It really should be up
around $9.00 like it is in Europe!
Re: Basses that changed history
Benj wrote:
>
> Jim Carr wrote:
>
>> According to the inflation calculator:
>> What cost $3.50 in 1965 would cost $23.17 in 2007.
>
> Are you kidding? What "calculator" is this? The one used by the Bush
> administration to figure social security increases?
>
> I recall taking a total fit back in '63-64 when gasoline went to $
> 0.25 a gallon! (I was commuting to school at the time) Golds was $30
> an oz.
>
> So by the calculator gas costs us $1.65 a gallon today and one Oz. of
> Gold is $198 (Hint gold was recently topping out at $1000 an ounce!)
> I was sort of looking into this and according to my calculations
> gasoline today at $4.00 is a terrific bargain! It really should be up
> around $9.00 like it is in Europe!
>
http :// www .westegg,com /inflation/
--
Write a wise saying and your name will live forever.
- Anonymous
Benj wrote:
>
> Jim Carr wrote:
>
>> According to the inflation calculator:
>> What cost $3.50 in 1965 would cost $23.17 in 2007.
>
> Are you kidding? What "calculator" is this? The one used by the Bush
> administration to figure social security increases?
>
> I recall taking a total fit back in '63-64 when gasoline went to $
> 0.25 a gallon! (I was commuting to school at the time) Golds was $30
> an oz.
>
> So by the calculator gas costs us $1.65 a gallon today and one Oz. of
> Gold is $198 (Hint gold was recently topping out at $1000 an ounce!)
> I was sort of looking into this and according to my calculations
> gasoline today at $4.00 is a terrific bargain! It really should be up
> around $9.00 like it is in Europe!
>
http :// www .westegg,com /inflation/
--
Write a wise saying and your name will live forever.
- Anonymous
Re: Basses that changed history
Jim Carr <newsgroups@azwebpages,com > wrote:
> Derek Tearne wrote:
>
> > Most bands, or at least their management companies, at that time
> > considered touring to be a marketing tool to sell records and
> > merchandise. Some bands would 'lose' whopping amounts of money on
> > touring - but hopefully recoup that on record sales and merchandise.
>
> I would like to see this documented. On the surface it makes no sense. A
> ticket to a show usually costs several times as much as an album.
That wasn't always the case. In the 70's and 80's when I started seeing
bands, there were very very few concerts that exceeded the price of an
album. In fact we were quite shocked when they started to climb to that
level.
Concert ticket revenue gets split quite differently to the album
revenue. Once the recording and mastering is paid for on an album the
rest is all profit for the record company minus a tiny amount of freight
and a margin for the vendor. Not all albums reach that break even
point, but for the kind of major acts we're talking about here it used
to be fairly easy to achieve.
Compare this with touring. For every single concert there is a venue
hire cost, a transport cost for fragile and difficult to ship items
(this includes the band and entourage), equipment hire costs for things
that can't be transported, set up and breakdown costs - costs all the
way. There will usually be some money paid to a local promotor and
other local interests. Add in the cost of reparations for the
occasional trashed hotel room and other sundry expenses you get a
whopping opportunity cost for touring.
Putting on any kind of live show is an expensive proposition, and many
of those costs are incurred at each venue - there's no point at which
all those costs have been paid and the tour becomes all profit.
The situation now is quite different, a full price CD (as if anyone pays
that) is (in NZ dollars) ~$30 - concert tickets for, say, Westlife, are
$89.90-$150 or Elton John $150.00 - $392.00 - I picked those two
examples as they're currently touring - not as any kind of artistic
comparison to the grateful dead or anything.
This is a totally different situation to touring in the 60's to 80's and
reflects - which is essentially my point. In the 60's onwards most of
the profit - and a vast margin it was for the record companies - was on
the cheap to produce plastic disks. So the expensive proposition of
touring could be run at a loss - which is great for tax purposes - or
without being profitable per se.
Now the profit on music sales other than at a concert venue (which is
where people still buy CD's) is almost zero. With royalties down to a
negligible amount artists are not only having to tour, they're having to
make the tours profitable.
So you have ticket prices that are not only more than the price of an
'album' - almost unheard of in the 70's - the prices are now more than
the retail value of the entire Elton John back catalogue.
> What was different back then?
Just about everything.
--- Derek
--
Derek Tearne - derek@url.co.nz
Many Hands - Trans Cultural Music from Aotearoa/New Zealand
http :// www .manyhands.co.nz/
Jim Carr <newsgroups@azwebpages,com > wrote:
> Derek Tearne wrote:
>
> > Most bands, or at least their management companies, at that time
> > considered touring to be a marketing tool to sell records and
> > merchandise. Some bands would 'lose' whopping amounts of money on
> > touring - but hopefully recoup that on record sales and merchandise.
>
> I would like to see this documented. On the surface it makes no sense. A
> ticket to a show usually costs several times as much as an album.
That wasn't always the case. In the 70's and 80's when I started seeing
bands, there were very very few concerts that exceeded the price of an
album. In fact we were quite shocked when they started to climb to that
level.
Concert ticket revenue gets split quite differently to the album
revenue. Once the recording and mastering is paid for on an album the
rest is all profit for the record company minus a tiny amount of freight
and a margin for the vendor. Not all albums reach that break even
point, but for the kind of major acts we're talking about here it used
to be fairly easy to achieve.
Compare this with touring. For every single concert there is a venue
hire cost, a transport cost for fragile and difficult to ship items
(this includes the band and entourage), equipment hire costs for things
that can't be transported, set up and breakdown costs - costs all the
way. There will usually be some money paid to a local promotor and
other local interests. Add in the cost of reparations for the
occasional trashed hotel room and other sundry expenses you get a
whopping opportunity cost for touring.
Putting on any kind of live show is an expensive proposition, and many
of those costs are incurred at each venue - there's no point at which
all those costs have been paid and the tour becomes all profit.
The situation now is quite different, a full price CD (as if anyone pays
that) is (in NZ dollars) ~$30 - concert tickets for, say, Westlife, are
$89.90-$150 or Elton John $150.00 - $392.00 - I picked those two
examples as they're currently touring - not as any kind of artistic
comparison to the grateful dead or anything.
This is a totally different situation to touring in the 60's to 80's and
reflects - which is essentially my point. In the 60's onwards most of
the profit - and a vast margin it was for the record companies - was on
the cheap to produce plastic disks. So the expensive proposition of
touring could be run at a loss - which is great for tax purposes - or
without being profitable per se.
Now the profit on music sales other than at a concert venue (which is
where people still buy CD's) is almost zero. With royalties down to a
negligible amount artists are not only having to tour, they're having to
make the tours profitable.
So you have ticket prices that are not only more than the price of an
'album' - almost unheard of in the 70's - the prices are now more than
the retail value of the entire Elton John back catalogue.
> What was different back then?
Just about everything.
--- Derek
--
Derek Tearne - derek@url.co.nz
Many Hands - Trans Cultural Music from Aotearoa/New Zealand
http :// www .manyhands.co.nz/
Re: Basses that changed history
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
news:1_MVj.38087$gB5.29384@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
> news:UuCdnWQjs6Xr5LrVnZ2dnUVZ_oHinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>
>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>> news:f4JVj.38058$gB5.20615@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>> news:SoydnYhw7uOtwbrVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>
>>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>>> news:CfHVj.38043$gB5.15891@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>>> news:J4KdnUrLdu7ZorrVnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>>>>> news:DjBVj.87241$oQ4.84751@fe113.usenetserver,com ...
>>>>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:UeKdnSkjFNv-AbvVnZ2dnUVZ_t7inZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Derek Homsberg" <dhoms@gmail,com > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:hNudncy1IK_zCLvVnZ2dnUVZ_h_inZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>>>>>>>>>> I believe you are completely wrong about this. It's true that
>>>>>>>>>> the SF bands especially the Jefferson Airplane and the
>>>>>>>>>> Grateful Dead had a lot to do with Alembic's early days.
>>>>>>>>>> But at that time, the early '70s, Crosby was a *way*
>>>>>>>>>> bigger star than the Dead.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Crosby was very good friends with several members of the Airplane,
>>>>>>>>> so they might have come up with ideas together.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
>>>>>>>> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
>>>>>>>> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
>>>>>>>> 1969. Airplane bassist Jack Casady also had one of
>>>>>>>> the first Alembic basses. In any case, both the Airplane
>>>>>>>> and Crosby were selling tons more of records than the
>>>>>>>> Dead at that time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right, but according to Lesh (in his book), selling records was
>>>>>>> never their primary goal. So, we're comparing apples & oysters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was responding to the following statement you made:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Crosby's visibility & income were peanuts compared to
>>>>>> the Dead's."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> which was simply wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Different income stream, especially a decade or two later. Crosby:
>>>>> Royalties. Dead: Concerts.
>>>>
>>>> "a decade or two later"
>>>>
>>>> Precisely. We're tallking about the time frame when Alembic
>>>> got started. At that time Crosby was at least equal, probably
>>>> ahead, on concerts and way ahead on royalties and notoriety.
>>>> Again, I agree that the Dead had a lot to do with getting
>>>> Alembic going, and I don't think anyone else cares about
>>>> this argument. But it just bugs me when people make
>>>> plain assertions that are flat-out wrong.
>>>>
>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Me too. I thought you had access to accountants' records for both
>>> artists. No? Me neither. Your guess is as good as mine.
>>
>> 1. Then why did you say "Crosby's visibility and income
>> were peanuts compared to the Dead's"?
>>
>> 2. I have no access to the accountants' records for the
>> Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin but I will go out on
>> a limb and say they were making more money than the Dead.
>> Not as clearcut with Crosby of course, but I am quite
>> confident that if you researched e. g. Billboard charts
>> (for record sales) and records of concerts being played
>> *at the time* (by CSN&Y vs. GD) it would support my point.
>>
>> - Gary Rosen
>>
>> - Gary Rosen
>>
>
>
> My guess came from comments read in an interview with Bill Graham. I
> suspect his comments were based on the fact that when the Dead toured, it
> tended to go on for much longer than tours by other bands. I suppose he
> should know a little something about this sort of thing, being one of the
> biggest promoters on the planet for so many years. Maybe not. Maybe a wish
> and a prayer hold more accuracy.
WHEN was this interview with Graham, and at what point
in time was he referring to wrt the Dead being the "biggest"
touring act? There is no question that later on they became
huge. But not at the time in question in the late '60s and
early '70s when Alembic was getting started.
- Gary Rosen
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
news:1_MVj.38087$gB5.29384@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
> news:UuCdnWQjs6Xr5LrVnZ2dnUVZ_oHinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>
>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>> news:f4JVj.38058$gB5.20615@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>> news:SoydnYhw7uOtwbrVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>
>>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>>> news:CfHVj.38043$gB5.15891@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>>> news:J4KdnUrLdu7ZorrVnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>>>>> news:DjBVj.87241$oQ4.84751@fe113.usenetserver,com ...
>>>>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:UeKdnSkjFNv-AbvVnZ2dnUVZ_t7inZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Derek Homsberg" <dhoms@gmail,com > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:hNudncy1IK_zCLvVnZ2dnUVZ_h_inZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>>>>>>>>>> I believe you are completely wrong about this. It's true that
>>>>>>>>>> the SF bands especially the Jefferson Airplane and the
>>>>>>>>>> Grateful Dead had a lot to do with Alembic's early days.
>>>>>>>>>> But at that time, the early '70s, Crosby was a *way*
>>>>>>>>>> bigger star than the Dead.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Crosby was very good friends with several members of the Airplane,
>>>>>>>>> so they might have come up with ideas together.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
>>>>>>>> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
>>>>>>>> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
>>>>>>>> 1969. Airplane bassist Jack Casady also had one of
>>>>>>>> the first Alembic basses. In any case, both the Airplane
>>>>>>>> and Crosby were selling tons more of records than the
>>>>>>>> Dead at that time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right, but according to Lesh (in his book), selling records was
>>>>>>> never their primary goal. So, we're comparing apples & oysters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was responding to the following statement you made:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Crosby's visibility & income were peanuts compared to
>>>>>> the Dead's."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> which was simply wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Different income stream, especially a decade or two later. Crosby:
>>>>> Royalties. Dead: Concerts.
>>>>
>>>> "a decade or two later"
>>>>
>>>> Precisely. We're tallking about the time frame when Alembic
>>>> got started. At that time Crosby was at least equal, probably
>>>> ahead, on concerts and way ahead on royalties and notoriety.
>>>> Again, I agree that the Dead had a lot to do with getting
>>>> Alembic going, and I don't think anyone else cares about
>>>> this argument. But it just bugs me when people make
>>>> plain assertions that are flat-out wrong.
>>>>
>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Me too. I thought you had access to accountants' records for both
>>> artists. No? Me neither. Your guess is as good as mine.
>>
>> 1. Then why did you say "Crosby's visibility and income
>> were peanuts compared to the Dead's"?
>>
>> 2. I have no access to the accountants' records for the
>> Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin but I will go out on
>> a limb and say they were making more money than the Dead.
>> Not as clearcut with Crosby of course, but I am quite
>> confident that if you researched e. g. Billboard charts
>> (for record sales) and records of concerts being played
>> *at the time* (by CSN&Y vs. GD) it would support my point.
>>
>> - Gary Rosen
>>
>> - Gary Rosen
>>
>
>
> My guess came from comments read in an interview with Bill Graham. I
> suspect his comments were based on the fact that when the Dead toured, it
> tended to go on for much longer than tours by other bands. I suppose he
> should know a little something about this sort of thing, being one of the
> biggest promoters on the planet for so many years. Maybe not. Maybe a wish
> and a prayer hold more accuracy.
WHEN was this interview with Graham, and at what point
in time was he referring to wrt the Dead being the "biggest"
touring act? There is no question that later on they became
huge. But not at the time in question in the late '60s and
early '70s when Alembic was getting started.
- Gary Rosen
Re: Basses that changed history
"Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
news:H--dnbRACfcaK7rVnZ2dnUVZ_trinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>
> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
> news:1_MVj.38087$gB5.29384@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>> news:UuCdnWQjs6Xr5LrVnZ2dnUVZ_oHinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>
>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>> news:f4JVj.38058$gB5.20615@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>> news:SoydnYhw7uOtwbrVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>
>>>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>>>> news:CfHVj.38043$gB5.15891@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>>>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>>>> news:J4KdnUrLdu7ZorrVnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:DjBVj.87241$oQ4.84751@fe113.usenetserver,com ...
>>>>>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:UeKdnSkjFNv-AbvVnZ2dnUVZ_t7inZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Derek Homsberg" <dhoms@gmail,com > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:hNudncy1IK_zCLvVnZ2dnUVZ_h_inZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>>>>>>>>>>> I believe you are completely wrong about this. It's true that
>>>>>>>>>>> the SF bands especially the Jefferson Airplane and the
>>>>>>>>>>> Grateful Dead had a lot to do with Alembic's early days.
>>>>>>>>>>> But at that time, the early '70s, Crosby was a *way*
>>>>>>>>>>> bigger star than the Dead.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Crosby was very good friends with several members of the
>>>>>>>>>> Airplane, so they might have come up with ideas together.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
>>>>>>>>> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
>>>>>>>>> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
>>>>>>>>> 1969. Airplane bassist Jack Casady also had one of
>>>>>>>>> the first Alembic basses. In any case, both the Airplane
>>>>>>>>> and Crosby were selling tons more of records than the
>>>>>>>>> Dead at that time.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right, but according to Lesh (in his book), selling records was
>>>>>>>> never their primary goal. So, we're comparing apples & oysters.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was responding to the following statement you made:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Crosby's visibility & income were peanuts compared to
>>>>>>> the Dead's."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which was simply wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Different income stream, especially a decade or two later. Crosby:
>>>>>> Royalties. Dead: Concerts.
>>>>>
>>>>> "a decade or two later"
>>>>>
>>>>> Precisely. We're tallking about the time frame when Alembic
>>>>> got started. At that time Crosby was at least equal, probably
>>>>> ahead, on concerts and way ahead on royalties and notoriety.
>>>>> Again, I agree that the Dead had a lot to do with getting
>>>>> Alembic going, and I don't think anyone else cares about
>>>>> this argument. But it just bugs me when people make
>>>>> plain assertions that are flat-out wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Me too. I thought you had access to accountants' records for both
>>>> artists. No? Me neither. Your guess is as good as mine.
>>>
>>> 1. Then why did you say "Crosby's visibility and income
>>> were peanuts compared to the Dead's"?
>>>
>>> 2. I have no access to the accountants' records for the
>>> Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin but I will go out on
>>> a limb and say they were making more money than the Dead.
>>> Not as clearcut with Crosby of course, but I am quite
>>> confident that if you researched e. g. Billboard charts
>>> (for record sales) and records of concerts being played
>>> *at the time* (by CSN&Y vs. GD) it would support my point.
>>>
>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>
>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>
>>
>>
>> My guess came from comments read in an interview with Bill Graham. I
>> suspect his comments were based on the fact that when the Dead toured, it
>> tended to go on for much longer than tours by other bands. I suppose he
>> should know a little something about this sort of thing, being one of the
>> biggest promoters on the planet for so many years. Maybe not. Maybe a
>> wish and a prayer hold more accuracy.
>
> WHEN was this interview with Graham, and at what point
> in time was he referring to wrt the Dead being the "biggest"
> touring act? There is no question that later on they became
> huge. But not at the time in question in the late '60s and
> early '70s when Alembic was getting started.
>
> - Gary Rosen
>
Interview: 1989
"Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
news:H--dnbRACfcaK7rVnZ2dnUVZ_trinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>
> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
> news:1_MVj.38087$gB5.29384@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>> news:UuCdnWQjs6Xr5LrVnZ2dnUVZ_oHinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>
>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>> news:f4JVj.38058$gB5.20615@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>> news:SoydnYhw7uOtwbrVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>
>>>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>>>> news:CfHVj.38043$gB5.15891@fe105.usenetserver,com ...
>>>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>>>> news:J4KdnUrLdu7ZorrVnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:DjBVj.87241$oQ4.84751@fe113.usenetserver,com ...
>>>>>>>> "Gary Rosen" <garymrosen@comcast,net > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:UeKdnSkjFNv-AbvVnZ2dnUVZ_t7inZ2d@comcast,com ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Derek Homsberg" <dhoms@gmail,com > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:hNudncy1IK_zCLvVnZ2dnUVZ_h_inZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>>>>>>>>>>> I believe you are completely wrong about this. It's true that
>>>>>>>>>>> the SF bands especially the Jefferson Airplane and the
>>>>>>>>>>> Grateful Dead had a lot to do with Alembic's early days.
>>>>>>>>>>> But at that time, the early '70s, Crosby was a *way*
>>>>>>>>>>> bigger star than the Dead.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Crosby was very good friends with several members of the
>>>>>>>>>> Airplane, so they might have come up with ideas together.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
>>>>>>>>> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
>>>>>>>>> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
>>>>>>>>> 1969. Airplane bassist Jack Casady also had one of
>>>>>>>>> the first Alembic basses. In any case, both the Airplane
>>>>>>>>> and Crosby were selling tons more of records than the
>>>>>>>>> Dead at that time.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right, but according to Lesh (in his book), selling records was
>>>>>>>> never their primary goal. So, we're comparing apples & oysters.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was responding to the following statement you made:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Crosby's visibility & income were peanuts compared to
>>>>>>> the Dead's."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which was simply wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Different income stream, especially a decade or two later. Crosby:
>>>>>> Royalties. Dead: Concerts.
>>>>>
>>>>> "a decade or two later"
>>>>>
>>>>> Precisely. We're tallking about the time frame when Alembic
>>>>> got started. At that time Crosby was at least equal, probably
>>>>> ahead, on concerts and way ahead on royalties and notoriety.
>>>>> Again, I agree that the Dead had a lot to do with getting
>>>>> Alembic going, and I don't think anyone else cares about
>>>>> this argument. But it just bugs me when people make
>>>>> plain assertions that are flat-out wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Me too. I thought you had access to accountants' records for both
>>>> artists. No? Me neither. Your guess is as good as mine.
>>>
>>> 1. Then why did you say "Crosby's visibility and income
>>> were peanuts compared to the Dead's"?
>>>
>>> 2. I have no access to the accountants' records for the
>>> Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin but I will go out on
>>> a limb and say they were making more money than the Dead.
>>> Not as clearcut with Crosby of course, but I am quite
>>> confident that if you researched e. g. Billboard charts
>>> (for record sales) and records of concerts being played
>>> *at the time* (by CSN&Y vs. GD) it would support my point.
>>>
>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>
>>> - Gary Rosen
>>>
>>
>>
>> My guess came from comments read in an interview with Bill Graham. I
>> suspect his comments were based on the fact that when the Dead toured, it
>> tended to go on for much longer than tours by other bands. I suppose he
>> should know a little something about this sort of thing, being one of the
>> biggest promoters on the planet for so many years. Maybe not. Maybe a
>> wish and a prayer hold more accuracy.
>
> WHEN was this interview with Graham, and at what point
> in time was he referring to wrt the Dead being the "biggest"
> touring act? There is no question that later on they became
> huge. But not at the time in question in the late '60s and
> early '70s when Alembic was getting started.
>
> - Gary Rosen
>
Interview: 1989
Re: Basses that changed history
> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
> 1969.
Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
Airplane.
> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
> 1969.
Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
Airplane.
Re: Basses that changed history
"Derek Homsberg" <dhoms@gmail,com > wrote in message
news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
>> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
>> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
>> 1969.
>
> Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
> Airplane.
>
If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a disappointment,
compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song. It's like what Robben Ford
did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love & Understanding".
"Derek Homsberg" <dhoms@gmail,com > wrote in message
news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
>> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
>> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
>> 1969.
>
> Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
> Airplane.
>
If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a disappointment,
compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song. It's like what Robben Ford
did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love & Understanding".
Re: Basses that changed history
JoeSpareBedroom <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote:
> "Derek Homsberg" <dhoms@gmail,com > wrote in message
> news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>>> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
>>> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
>>> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
>>> 1969.
>>
>> Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
>> Airplane.
>>
>
>
> If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
> allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a
> disappointment, compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song.
> It's like what Robben Ford did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love &
> Understanding".
I agree about CS&N's studio version. I found their Woodstock
performance of the song much more compelling.
JoeSpareBedroom <dishborealis@yahoo,com > wrote:
> "Derek Homsberg" <dhoms@gmail,com > wrote in message
> news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>>> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
>>> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
>>> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
>>> 1969.
>>
>> Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
>> Airplane.
>>
>
>
> If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
> allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a
> disappointment, compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song.
> It's like what Robben Ford did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love &
> Understanding".
I agree about CS&N's studio version. I found their Woodstock
performance of the song much more compelling.
Re: Basses that changed history
On May 11, 9:39=EF=BF=BDpm, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo,com > wrote=
:
> "Derek Homsberg" <dh...@gmail,com > wrote in message
>
> news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>
> >> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
> >> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
> >> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
> >> 1969.
>
> > Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
> > Airplane.
>
> If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
> allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a disappointment,=
> compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song. It's like what Robben Fo=
rd
> did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love & Understanding".
On May 11, 9:39=EF=BF=BDpm, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo,com > wrote=
:
> "Derek Homsberg" <dh...@gmail,com > wrote in message
>
> news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>
> >> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
> >> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
> >> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
> >> 1969.
>
> > Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
> > Airplane.
>
> If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
> allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a disappointment,=
> compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song. It's like what Robben Fo=
rd
> did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love & Understanding".
Re: Basses that changed history
On May 11, 9:39=EF=BF=BDpm, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo,com > wrote=
:
> "Derek Homsberg" <dh...@gmail,com > wrote in message
>
> news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>
> >> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
> >> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
> >> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
> >> 1969.
>
> > Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
> > Airplane.
>
> If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
> allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a disappointment,=
> compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song. It's like what Robben Fo=
rd
> did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love & Understanding".
Elvis didn't write that - Nick Lowe did.
On May 11, 9:39=EF=BF=BDpm, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo,com > wrote=
:
> "Derek Homsberg" <dh...@gmail,com > wrote in message
>
> news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>
> >> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
> >> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
> >> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
> >> 1969.
>
> > Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
> > Airplane.
>
> If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
> allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a disappointment,=
> compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song. It's like what Robben Fo=
rd
> did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love & Understanding".
Elvis didn't write that - Nick Lowe did.
Re: Basses that changed history
"John (Eryn Shewell Band)" <skokiaan@aol,com > wrote in message
news:bede96a6-7581-4c50-b8d3-72578cae6c0e@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups,com ...
On May 11, 9:39?pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo,com > wrote:
> "Derek Homsberg" <dh...@gmail,com > wrote in message
>
> news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>
> >> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
> >> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
> >> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
> >> 1969.
>
> > Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
> > Airplane.
>
> If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
> allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a disappointment,
> compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song. It's like what Robben
> Ford
> did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love & Understanding".
Elvis didn't write that - Nick Lowe did.
=========
OK, but still....Ford drained all the life out of that song.
"John (Eryn Shewell Band)" <skokiaan@aol,com > wrote in message
news:bede96a6-7581-4c50-b8d3-72578cae6c0e@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups,com ...
On May 11, 9:39?pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo,com > wrote:
> "Derek Homsberg" <dh...@gmail,com > wrote in message
>
> news:YeCdndxzCr7bA7rVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@earthlink,com ...
>
> >> Actually, they were all pretty buddy-buddy (Airplane, Dead
> >> and Crosby); the Airplane recorded the CSN song
> >> "Wooden Ships" on their "Volunteers" album around
> >> 1969.
>
> > Wooden Ships was co-written by Crosby, Stills and Paul Kantner of the
> > Airplane.
>
> If there was a contract involved, it should stated that CS&N were not
> allowed to record their pussified version. Cripes - what a disappointment,
> compared to what Jorma & Jack did with that song. It's like what Robben
> Ford
> did to Elvis Costello's "Peace Love & Understanding".
Elvis didn't write that - Nick Lowe did.
=========
OK, but still....Ford drained all the life out of that song.
Re: Basses that changed history
Derek Homsberg wrote:
>> I believe you are completely wrong about this. It's true that
>> the SF bands especially the Jefferson Airplane and the
>> Grateful Dead had a lot to do with Alembic's early days.
>> But at that time, the early '70s, Crosby was a *way*
>> bigger star than the Dead.
>
> Crosby was very good friends with several members of the Airplane, so they
> might have come up with ideas together.
>
>
He sorta invented the whole "rock start with liver failure" thing, too.
--
Les Cargill
Derek Homsberg wrote:
>> I believe you are completely wrong about this. It's true that
>> the SF bands especially the Jefferson Airplane and the
>> Grateful Dead had a lot to do with Alembic's early days.
>> But at that time, the early '70s, Crosby was a *way*
>> bigger star than the Dead.
>
> Crosby was very good friends with several members of the Airplane, so they
> might have come up with ideas together.
>
>
He sorta invented the whole "rock start with liver failure" thing, too.
--
Les Cargill
Re: Basses that changed history
Les Cargill <lcargill@cfl.rr,com > wrote:
> He sorta invented the whole "rock start with liver failure" thing, too.
I think you'll find he learned that from an earlier generation of jazz
musicians, who learned it from an earlier generation of blues
musicians...
--- Derek
--
Derek Tearne - derek@url.co.nz
Many Hands - Trans Cultural Music from Aotearoa/New Zealand
http :// www .manyhands.co.nz/
Les Cargill <lcargill@cfl.rr,com > wrote:
> He sorta invented the whole "rock start with liver failure" thing, too.
I think you'll find he learned that from an earlier generation of jazz
musicians, who learned it from an earlier generation of blues
musicians...
--- Derek
--
Derek Tearne - derek@url.co.nz
Many Hands - Trans Cultural Music from Aotearoa/New Zealand
http :// www .manyhands.co.nz/
Re: Basses that changed history
Derek Tearne wrote:
> Les Cargill <lcargill@cfl.rr,com > wrote:
>
>> He sorta invented the whole "rock start with liver failure" thing, too.
>
> I think you'll find he learned that from an earlier generation of jazz
> musicians, who learned it from an earlier generation of blues
> musicians...
>
> --- Derek
>
That's sadly very true. Ad in David's defense, some of that was
hepatitis. Some of it.
--
Les Cargill
Derek Tearne wrote:
> Les Cargill <lcargill@cfl.rr,com > wrote:
>
>> He sorta invented the whole "rock start with liver failure" thing, too.
>
> I think you'll find he learned that from an earlier generation of jazz
> musicians, who learned it from an earlier generation of blues
> musicians...
>
> --- Derek
>
That's sadly very true. Ad in David's defense, some of that was
hepatitis. Some of it.
--
Les Cargill
