PDA

View Full Version : Another New Olson Interview


J. Chamberlain
09-04-2014, 10:17 PM
http://glasswerk.co.uk/magazine/article/20666/Glasswerk+meets++Mark+Olson/

POSTED THURSDAY 4TH OF SEP 2014 BY JAMIE OTSA IN INTERVIEW

We had the honour of catching up with Mark Olson, founding member of The Jayhawks and now striking out again with another solo release in the form of forthcoming record 'Good-bye Lizelle' released 26th September on Glitterhouse Records. Here, he tells us about the inspirations behind the new record and few secrets from his personal life...

When I first started playing music...

I started playing music in Minnesota when I was 12. I played the flute in the school band and ran to school pretending the flute was a peace pipe. I also went to French camp at that age because the counties in Minnesota have French names because the voyageurs came there first with their canoes and I always imagined music as some type of poetic, foreign language venture with a flute floating on top.

I lived for many years in the desert then after my start in touring music and, here in the heat and isolation, I found a way to catalog themes and points of view and word ideas and to focus on making an album with an overall sense of time and out of time atmosphere; the mood and atmosphere being more lyrically driven than effects box driven. Ingunn is my wife and a very talented, natural musician - she ran across the street and into the woods when she bought her first guitar, she was so excited to write her own songs. She rode with a djembe on her back to high school everyday and when I found out she played the djembe, that was the exact hour and beginning of our band.

If I had to choose a new name for the band it would be...

Cincinnati Zoo 1914, because the last passenger pigeon Martha died on September 1st 1914 at the Cincinnati Zoo. There were billions of them and they killed them off in 100 years. Every late August in Joshua Tree I always tell people that soon, on September 1st, you will hear gunfire at dawn. You will awaken and it will sound like someone is going to hit your bedroom window with pellet shot. Each year September 1st is the start of dove hunting season in the California desert. On the morning of the 100 year anniversary of the extinction of the passenger pigeons I sat on the porch at dawn and listened to the sound of shotguns blasting sleek, beautiful, historically and religiously significant small birds out of the sky.

I knew I was onto something when...

I found a Nagra for sale. I am into recording in various locations. Moving the studio every few hours around the porch, the yard, the county, the nation. I can hike with the studio and run it on batteries. I can record on a boat while I am fishing and drinking Kool aid. The method to all this madness is the edge of the mind, just outside the reach of the rational is the floating music, the anti-jingle music, the music that Komitas put together. He is the best example of supreme music picked up on a muddy farmers alley and taken to the mountain top!

My biggest non-musical influences are...

Memories of the way I imagined life was for my family and repeated kickings of myself for not being able to hear anymore the tone of my Grandmothers' voices calling me. I remember my Grandmothers, I spent an inordinate amount of time with them. I lived with them from age 15 - 25 with travel breaks. I remember them, They were so incredible. I see them still when I breathe.

I’m most proud of...

In the album department, the new record Good-bye Lizelle. The building of it on the Nagra, the stops, starts and breakthroughs of the recording and writing process and Ingunn and I staying in Armenia for a while. Writing songs and walking through the parks in Vanadzor and always believing we could mix beautiful Armenian instruments into our songs.

My ideal support slot would be...

Incredible String Band circa Woodstock era when it was a 4 piece. Oh the joy, people floating on music and singing poetry, what songs!

Something I haven’t achieved yet which I’d like to is…

I have not achieved on my solo and Creek Dipper records a fan base that knows very much of the material. I have been writing towards the mountain and the wind. I have made 10 full albums on my own and with the Creek Dippers. I have out run any audience that would be trying to follow me. I mostly play my songs to people that are hearing them for the first time and that is a challenge. If you see me running along a highway in the evening that's me working up another album! So I would like Good-bye Lizelle to get known.

My favourite place to hang out is…

After the temperature is 110 day in day out in Joshua Tree, I like to sit on a chair in the yard just when the sun goes down and let the first cooling get a hold of me. It is the general feeling of the pain is over, the danger is past, all quiet now, peace at last, it is a overpowering feeling and I stay out there until I am cooled down!

I can't stop listening to...

Here is a short list: Rachid Taha and Gigi Ejigayehu Shibabaware are my listening and faves the past years. Jacques Bertin is a musical poet I listen to. Comes a Time by Neal Young, early Joni Mitchell and early rock Beatles, Byrds etc.. also Silvio Rodriguez from Cuba. He could be the greatest songwriter. That guy can crank out the songs!

I'm not ashamed to admit that...

I can`t keep up with all the great music in the world. The past years brought to our home Sayat Nova, Gigi, Komitas. Youtube videos of folk guitar from Africa. Once i find something I am not searching for awhile I just go over it and get to know each track.

If I could wave a magic wand and make anything in the world happen it would be…

No more guns, everybody trying to make their life better for their family.

Catch us next...

On tour starting in Finland, Italy, Norway then hopefully The UK!

'Good-bye Lizelle' released 26th September on Glitterhouse Records

JoMama
09-05-2014, 10:35 PM
Nice...
I once dreamed of speaking in poetics...
that dream has passed
surreal, evasive humorism has replaced it
there are flocks of jokes always in the air
one need not shoot them down
just reach out and pluck one
let it ring
let it vibrate
guffaw guffaw guffaw

J. Chamberlain
09-05-2014, 11:20 PM
https://soundcloud.com/glitterhouse/mark-olson-cherry-thieves

JoMama
09-06-2014, 05:04 AM
https://soundcloud.com/glitterhouse/mark-olson-cherry-thieves

Wow, what a great song. You can hear the birds in the background too...:)

Brown Jenkin
09-06-2014, 12:29 PM
Not a fan of Ingrid's backing vocals, but it's great to hear new studio material from a Jayhawk.

NY Fan
09-06-2014, 02:30 PM
Former Jayhawk.

Brown Jenkin
09-06-2014, 03:00 PM
Nah. You create the band, that's you, forever.

jcarlile
09-06-2014, 03:27 PM
I guess he forgot about the Jayhawks records he made and which have given him name recognition...

J. Chamberlain
09-06-2014, 04:39 PM
Maybe you have to be from Minnesota to get all the drama surrounding the Jayhawks. I don't care who's in the band! I really don't. What I do have is respect, for all of the various members, as artists, there's a lot to be admired within that revolving group of people.

I admire Olson for being the ultimate outsider. Which is a double entendre, because he does love nature. Hey, the "studio" where "Cherry Thieves" was recorded is off an old road - outdoors - in South Africa. His new album was recorded at various outdoor locales across the globe. I like his field recordings. Nobody else takes the same approach to recording music. Mark is truly one of a kind, in a lot of ways. I dig his music. Listen to the birds chirping in the background. Nice touch.

J. Chamberlain
09-06-2014, 04:42 PM
Not a fan of Ingrid's backing vocals, but it's great to hear new studio material from a Jayhawk.


I met Mark's wife once and she's a really cool person. They have a good life together, traveling the globe, doing their thing. I can't begrudge either of them for that. More power to both of them.

JoMama
09-06-2014, 05:51 PM
Maybe you have to be from Minnesota, to get all the drama surrounding the Jayhawks. I don't care who's in the band! I really don't. What I do have is respect, for all of the various members, as artists, there's a lot to be admired within that revolving group of people.

I admire Olson for being the ultimate outsider. Which is a double entendre, because he does love nature, too. Hey, the "studio" where "Cherry Thieves" was recorded is off an old road - outdoors - in South Africa. His whole new album was recorded at various outdoor locales across the globe. I like his field recordings. Nobody else takes the same approach to recording music. Mark is truly one of a kind, in a lot of ways. Listen to the birds chirping in the background. Nice touch.

Pay not attention to the man behind the Jenkin, he doesn't know what's best for you.
As for all the sour grapes folks toss at him, well, that's just sour grapes. Wine-ing them will only make sour wine, which will make sour whine. You just can't get over it when you're counting your tabs, but face it, the weather isn't always going to cooperate when you're farming. :D

sacred roots
09-06-2014, 11:44 PM
Nah. You create the band, that's you, forever.

Not legally. Just saying...

Brown Jenkin
09-07-2014, 12:23 AM
The guy founded and named the band. To imply he's not a Jayhwk just doesn't make any sense. In the court of public perception, Olson is a Jayhawk.

And to be quite honest, this version of the Jayhawks is sad, and Olson's music with Ingird is less than optimal.

Such a waste of talent. Olson and Louris are proving similar to Pink Floyd....the sum much greater than the parts.

bryguy
09-07-2014, 12:58 AM
Wash, rinse, repeat.

bryguy
09-07-2014, 01:00 AM
I admire Olson for being the ultimate outsider. Which is a double entendre, because he does love nature, too. Hey, the "studio" where "Cherry Thieves" was recorded is off an old road - outdoors - in South Africa. His whole new album was recorded at various outdoor locales across the globe. I like his field recordings. Nobody else takes the same approach to recording music. Mark is truly one of a kind, in a lot of ways. Listen to the birds chirping in the background. Nice touch.

I'm not always a fan of Mark's music, but I love the fact that he is not cookie cutter in anyway. There is something kind of refreshing in his approach.

NY Fan
09-07-2014, 06:15 PM
The guy founded and named the band. To imply he's not a Jayhwk just doesn't make any sense. In the court of public perception, Olson is a Jayhawk.

And to be quite honest, this version of the Jayhawks is sad, and Olson's music with Ingird is less than optimal.

Such a waste of talent. Olson and Louris are proving similar to Pink Floyd....the sum much greater than the parts.



This guy is so funny, and getting funnier.


Now he's trying to tell us that Mark is still in the band!


Hahahahaha!

Brown Jenkin
09-07-2014, 06:17 PM
Is Paul McCartney a Beatle?

axeeugene
09-07-2014, 06:22 PM
Is Paul McCartney a Beatle?

EX-Beatle.

sacred roots
09-07-2014, 06:24 PM
Is Paul McCartney a Beatle?

Dumb. The Beatles don't exist as an active band anymore and they didn't make 3 albums without Macca.

axeeugene
09-07-2014, 06:28 PM
Dumb. The Beatles don't exist as an active band anymore and they didn't make 3 albums without Macca.

But if they DID, they'd still have been The Beatles, and McCartney still would have been an EX-Beatle.

You'd think that people would've had enough of silly trolling, but I look around me and I see it isn't so...oh no.

Brown Jenkin
09-07-2014, 06:37 PM
No one cares about the legal aspects.

This is the court of public opinion. McCartney will always be known as a Beatle.

You're labeled as whatever your most popular achievement was. McCartney even went back and put John Lennon in a new Beatles song.

Mark Olson founded and named The Jayhawks. He will always be known for that. He's more of a Jayhawk than Tim Oregon is, because the Jayhawks simply don't exist without Mark Olson.

lukpac
09-07-2014, 06:45 PM
Mark Olson founded and named The Jayhawks. He will always be known for that. He's more of a Jayhawk than Tim Oregon is, because the Jayhawks simply don't exist without Mark Olson.

Who is Tim Oregon?

The Jayhawks currently exist without Mark Olson. They're on tour now, if you haven't noticed.

patrickhayes
09-07-2014, 06:50 PM
If you count the Women's Club records Tim has been on more Jayhawks albums than Mark!

Hey Brown.. I've gone back and forth on defending you here (since I think dissent is good but sometimes you push it) despite being a SOL guy myself but can you go easy on Tim? He's pretty fantastic.

Me I like 'em all.

sacred roots
09-07-2014, 09:56 PM
Mark Olson...named The Jayhawks..

That's the 4th time you've made this incorrect statement and this is the 4th time I've called you on that. FYI: I will continue to do so each and every time you continue to make this error.

Brown Jenkin
09-07-2014, 10:21 PM
Feel free to use specifics, SR. Who named The Jayhawks?

lukpac
09-07-2014, 10:50 PM
Feel free to use specifics, SR. Who named The Jayhawks?

Try and keep up:

Olson was not the sole namer of the band (hint: the one guy in the band who's been there every second of its existence and is the biggest fan of The Band/The Hawks in the world, and who also is one of the legal owners of the name, might have had something to do with it)

bryguy
09-07-2014, 11:45 PM
For what it's worth, when McCartney is referred to, his is referred to as "former Beatle, Paul McCartney." His isn't a Beatle any longer, because there are no Beatles.

And for the record: I named the Jayhawks. On that note, when my oldest son was 5 and saw my guitar, he asked me if I was in the Jayhawks. Shoulda said yes :-)

jacieb
09-08-2014, 12:00 AM
On that note, when my oldest son was 5 and saw my guitar, he asked me if I was in the Jayhawks. Shoulda said yes :-)

Winston Zeddemore: Ray, when someone asks you if you're a god, you say "YES"!

axeeugene
09-08-2014, 12:02 AM
For what it's worth, when McCartney is referred to, his is referred to as "former Beatle, Paul McCartney." His isn't a Beatle any longer, because there are no Beatles.

THE HELL YOU SAY! IT'S STILL REAL TO ME, DAMN IT!

I dunno...when McCartney was here in MN this summer, I heard a lot of "He's...A BEATLE!"

Not like I disagree with you - I'm 100% in your camp. But you know, I am forced to wonder whether the Beatles might have made a solid go of it for a record or two without McCartney.

In the late 90s, I made a compilation I called "SonCo" of the best songs off Trace and AM, pretending Uncle Tupelo had made a fifth album. It was pretty good. I'm sure such a compilation exists of "McCartney", "All Things Must Pass" and "Plastic Ono Band" (would "Sentimental Journey" have made the cut?). I feel like "Maybe I'm Amazed" would have fought very hard with "All Things Must Pass" as a closing track, and "Mother", "Working Class Hero" and "God" would have been KILLER album tracks for a post-Abbey Road Beatles record.

JoMama
09-08-2014, 02:53 AM
https://soundcloud.com/glitterhouse/mark-olson-cherry-thieves

This is so cool. Thanks! :) When the song is done, you can leave the site up and hear all kinds of great stuff.

fortuleo
09-08-2014, 05:22 AM
Once again, I don't get what's going on here. Mark Olson used to be in the Jayhawks. Then he was not in the Jayhawks. Then he was. And he is not anymore. Sometimes, when it's only him and Gary Louris, it's still called "the Jayhawks" by everybody around here (remember the mystery demos ?). But sometimes, not. In those cases, they are called a duo (RFTF), but sometimes they are a duo "formerly of the jayhawks" (the "reunion tour"). Who cares ?

When Gary is alone, he is "formerly of the Jayhawks" as well. But sometimes, he is "from the Jayhawks". He can even be "The Jayhawks" all by himself (the song "I'm a Man", in some movie). Does that make Gary the winner ? Of course Gary is the winner : he was in every Jayhawks album, wrote or co-wrote 80% of the whole Jayhawks catalogue, who could argue ?
On the other hand, Mark Olson has never been the Jayhawks by himself. I'm sure he doesn't care being called a Jayhawks, a former Jayhawks, an ex- Jayhawk or whatever. This month he releases his 10th solo (or Creekdipper) album, most of them superb in their poetic explorations and musical searching, and this first song is wonderful. It is a Mark Olson song, from a Mark Olson album. You know, that guy who used to be in the Jayhawks.

Brown Jenkin
09-08-2014, 11:10 AM
Lukpac - Still looking for specifics.

lukpac
09-08-2014, 11:58 AM
Lukpac - Still looking for specifics.

Marc Perlman.

Brown Jenkin
09-08-2014, 12:00 PM
how did the name specifically come to be? I'd love to hear the story.

bryguy
09-08-2014, 12:43 PM
Here is a quote from the Wiki entry on The Beatles:

1970s
Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr all released solo albums in 1970. Their solo records sometimes involved one or more of the others;[246] Starr's Ringo (1973) was the only album to include compositions and performances by all four ex-Beatles, albeit on separate songs.

theweekend
09-08-2014, 12:43 PM
how did the name specifically come to be? I'd love to hear the story.

You tell us. After all, you already unequivocally stated that Mark named the band. Tell us how it happened.

Brown Jenkin
09-08-2014, 01:39 PM
Wikipedia? hehe.

Calexico
09-08-2014, 02:23 PM
The court of public opinion? The court of public opinion doesn't give a fuck about The Jayhawks. Sadly, there it is.

Very few people except those here and a few others care about the band. That is a fact. That is a sad fact but it is what it is.

You know what else people don't give a fuck about now? The fucking name of the band, who created it or who owns it. I mean, talk about flogging a dead horse. Go get laid will you?

lukpac
09-08-2014, 03:00 PM
The court of public opinion? The court of public opinion doesn't give a fuck about The Jayhawks. Sadly, there it is.

Very few people except those here and a few others care about the band. That is a fact. That is a sad fact but it is what it is.

I think a fair number of people care about the band. But probably only a small subset of those people know much, if anything, about the lineup shifts (and resulting politics) over the years.

I still remember seeing a friend at the Summerfest gig in 2011 asking something like "What, they didn't play Angelyne or Save It For A Rainy Day? What's up with that?"

bryguy
09-08-2014, 03:13 PM
Some news headlines from various sites:

-Former Beatle George Harrison Dead At 58 - MTV

-A tree planted in Los Angeles to honor former Beatle George Harrison has been killed — by beetles

-Former Beatle Ringo Starr amongst winners at GQ awards

-Former Beatle Puts His Life on Display in Grammy Museum ...

-Former Beatle Paul McCartney has canceled his Japanese Out There tour due to a worsening viral infection and requires ...

-Paul McCartney: The former Beatle spent 10 days in a Japanese jail in 1980 after he arrived in the country with his band Wings ...

There are millions more.

axeeugene
09-08-2014, 03:27 PM
Here is a quote from the Wiki entry on The Beatles:

1970s
Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr all released solo albums in 1970. Their solo records sometimes involved one or more of the others;[246] Starr's Ringo (1973) was the only album to include compositions and performances by all four ex-Beatles, albeit on separate songs.

File that under things I once knew but had forgotten.

I've been lucky enough to see the two still living Beatles, but sadly missed any opportunity to see George before he quit playing. A trip to Japan in the early 90s wasn't exactly in the cards.

We did, I suppose, get to hear what a reunited Beatles would have been like thanks to the Anthology and "Free As A Bird." Acrimony is a great evil.

Brown Jenkin
09-08-2014, 03:29 PM
Very few people except those here and a few others care about the band. That is a fact. That is a sad fact but it is what it is.

The Jayhawks have a lot of Facebook Likes, and not fake likes, either. Those are real, organic fans. So yes, people do care.

Brown Jenkin
09-08-2014, 03:30 PM
Some news headlines from various sites:

-Former Beatle George Harrison Dead At 58 - MTV

-A tree planted in Los Angeles to honor former Beatle George Harrison has been killed — by beetles

-Former Beatle Ringo Starr amongst winners at GQ awards

-Former Beatle Puts His Life on Display in Grammy Museum ...

-Former Beatle Paul McCartney has canceled his Japanese Out There tour due to a worsening viral infection and requires ...

-Paul McCartney: The former Beatle spent 10 days in a Japanese jail in 1980 after he arrived in the country with his band Wings ...

There are millions more.



Tell me if you see any patterns, Bry.

sacred roots
09-08-2014, 03:38 PM
Stop the presses, but BJ is absolutely right. The Jayhawks, sadly, aren't nearly as popular as they should be but a quick look at their FB page indicates almost 50000 "fans" and a significant amount of recent activity and engagement from real live people. A closer examination of the metrics (likes, shares, etc) reveals a substantial number of people who at least care enough to take a few seconds to think about the band. Say what you will about the social media but, for better or worse, a lot of online fan activity has migrated there from forums like this and it often serves as an (admittedly unscientific) barometer of interest in a band.

bryguy
09-08-2014, 03:40 PM
Tell me if you see any patterns, Bry.

The use of former Beatle- which was the point of including these. They are not called "Beatles" any longer, but former Beatles. There are other patterns no doubt, but the one that was the cause of the headline inclusions was the "former" in the member references.

JoMama
09-08-2014, 03:55 PM
The thread is "another Olson Interview" but we're debating the use of the word "Beatles" and it's proper usage. What a world.

bryguy
09-08-2014, 03:57 PM
The thread is "another Olson Interview" but we're debating the use of the word "Beatles" and it's proper usage. What a world.

haha... somewhere in the madness the discussion turned to whether Olson was a Jayhawk or a FORMER Jayhawk. The Beatles analogy was used to make the point.

axeeugene
09-08-2014, 04:08 PM
haha... somewhere in the madness the discussion turned to whether Olson was a Jayhawk or a FORMER Jayhawk. The Beatles analogy was used to make the point.

It's a more fun subject anyway.

JoMama
09-08-2014, 04:23 PM
haha... somewhere in the madness the discussion turned to whether Olson was a Jayhawk or a FORMER Jayhawk. The Beatles analogy was used to make the point.

For sure... But just remember who you were discussing such things with. :)

sacred roots
09-08-2014, 08:29 PM
how did the name specifically come to be? I'd love to hear the story.

The Jayhawks posted a note after the passing of Levon Helm in 2012 that gives some insight as to the naming of the band. Obviously not all of the dirty details are provided here but it should be enough to give people a general idea of where the name came from, especially since Perlman was the biggest fan in town of The Band in 1984, something that still applies to this day.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/the-jayhawks/a-note-from-the-jayhawks-on-the-passing-of-levon-helm/406664509357556

axeeugene
09-08-2014, 09:04 PM
The Jayhawks posted a note after the passing of Levon Helm in 2012 that gives some insight as to the naming of the band. Obviously not all of the dirty details are provided here but it should be enough to give people a general idea of where the name came from, especially since Perlman was the biggest fan in town of The Band in 1984, something that still applies to this day.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/the-jayhawks/a-note-from-the-jayhawks-on-the-passing-of-levon-helm/406664509357556

Would The Jayhawks ever consider covering "Tears of Rage" or "The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down"? If they truly do love The Band, their live covers wouldn't seem to suggest it - have they ever covered them at all? I honestly can't recall them doing that. Jayhawks covers of The Band are something I would pay serious money to hear. Just imagining O'Reagan singing Levon gives me the chills.

J. Chamberlain
09-08-2014, 09:15 PM
They used to play "You Ain't Goin' Nowhere" quite a bit. I'm not even from Mpls and I know that.

LildeviladyK
09-08-2014, 09:15 PM
Once again, I don't get what's going on here. Mark Olson used to be in the Jayhawks. Then he was not in the Jayhawks. Then he was. And he is not anymore. Sometimes, when it's only him and Gary Louris, it's still called "the Jayhawks" by everybody around here (remember the mystery demos ?). But sometimes, not. In those cases, they are called a duo (RFTF), but sometimes they are a duo "formerly of the jayhawks" (the "reunion tour"). Who cares ?

When Gary is alone, he is "formerly of the Jayhawks" as well. But sometimes, he is "from the Jayhawks". He can even be "The Jayhawks" all by himself (the song "I'm a Man", in some movie). Does that make Gary the winner ? Of course Gary is the winner : he was in every Jayhawks album, wrote or co-wrote 80% of the whole Jayhawks catalogue, who could argue ?
On the other hand, Mark Olson has never been the Jayhawks by himself. I'm sure he doesn't care being called a Jayhawks, a former Jayhawks, an ex- Jayhawk or whatever. This month he releases his 10th solo (or Creekdipper) album, most of them superb in their poetic explorations and musical searching, and this first song is wonderful. It is a Mark Olson song, from a Mark Olson album. You know, that guy who used to be in the Jayhawks.

Here is how Olson defines himself now in his exact words:

"Original Creator of The Jayhawks and architect of The Creekdippers"

Would the other band members have become so well known by any venue other than The Jayhawks? Perhaps they would. They are certainly all talented enough. In the end though, no matter who gets called what, anyone who has ever been a Jayhawk is a Jayhawk only because of the fact that Olson created the band to begin with. His role was vital to bringing the band to where it landed in 1995 when he felt the need to leave

I think he has already defined himself perfectly.....

J. Chamberlain
09-08-2014, 09:19 PM
Is there any recorded interview in existence where one member takes specific credit for naming the band? Has any Jayhawk ever said "yeah," they named the band themselves alone?

LildeviladyK
09-08-2014, 09:34 PM
From the history section of this fanpage:

"The Jayhawks were formed in February 1985, at Minneapolis, Minnesota. Mark Olson, standup bass player for the local rockabilly band, Stagger Lee, and sometime solo acoustic performer, invited former Neglecters guitarist Marc Perlman and drummer Norm Rogers to form a band. Soon after, Olson convinced Perlman to switch to bass. Olson, Perlman and Rogers were joined at their first gig by temporary guitarist Steve Retzler. Only a handful of people attended that gig, but most importantly, Gary Louris was among that handful. Louris had formerly played guitar in Schnauzer and the rockabilly band Safety Last. Olson was still looking for a permanant guitarist and asked Louris if he had any recommendations. Louris suggested himself"

Regardless of any one person coming up with the literal name, Olson is the one responsible for creating and molding the original line up that morphed into other line ups. Essentially Olson was the one that set Louris and Perlman's current career in motion.

Brown Jenkin
09-08-2014, 09:46 PM
Here is how Olson defines himself now in his exact words:

"Original Creator of The Jayhawks and architect of The Creekdippers"

Would the other band members have become so well known by any venue other than The Jayhawks? Perhaps they would. They are certainly all talented enough. In the end though, no matter who gets called what, anyone who has ever been a Jayhawk is a Jayhawk only because of the fact that Olson created the band to begin with. His role was vital to bringing the band to where it landed in 1995 when he felt the need to leave

I think he has already defined himself perfectly.....


Yep.

sacred roots
09-08-2014, 10:40 PM
Nobody - at least no rational person - should be denying Olson's role and importance in the founding of the band; that is beyond dispute. What I, and many others, have a problem with is attempts by some to dismiss, if not delegitimize, records made by The Jayhawks without Olson, even to the point where some feel that the legal owners of the band name shouldn't be entitled to earn a living promoting records they made during the decade after Olson had quit the band by his own volition in 1995.

As for how "vital" Olson was in the band's success from 1985-1995 - again, no rational person should be disputing that. It's ludicrous to argue that Olson's contributions to albums like HTH and TTGG aren't crucial. But while it's key to note Olson's importance, especially during the first few years, it shouldn't be done at the expense of the rest of the band. The evolution of the band in that first decade encompasses a dynamic that went from Olson being the undisputed primary creative element in the band to a situation where Olson and Louris were equal partners, with the rest of the band making significant contributions as well. My personal opinion? It was a group effort that got the band to where they were in 1995, not a one man show and it's silly to argue who was more important than who. Indeed, there are many who feel that the band would've never achieved the success it did without the presence of a strong group chemistry - the proverbial "sum is greater than the parts" situation. I think most would also agree that the band wouldn't have been nearly as successful as it was without Gary's contributions, something at least partially borne out by his role with many of the band's most commercially successful songs from that era.

Ultimately, where a band ends up and how they got there is almost always more interesting than how it started. Look at Uncle Tupelo circa 1987, where Tweedy was very much a "junior partner," compared to the situation in 1994 when he and Farrar were essentially equal. Coincidentally, it was at this point at which Tupelo broke up, which gives some possible insight at how difficult band chemistry can be when the internal creative process changes so significantly.

JoMama
09-08-2014, 10:51 PM
Some people? Plural? I know of just one with multiple fanpage names who has ridden that horse hard and put it away wet...
Many of us have tactfully discussed our "opinions" but I think most folks accept the fact that the band plays on and does so quite well. Only one person goes after anything anyone says and, you nailed it Sacred Roots--no "rational" person is going to deny the obvious.
We're all so crazy about this band that we all feel defensive and let this turd keep getting us riled up...

Brown Jenkin
09-09-2014, 12:18 AM
JoMama is just hurt that I stopped responding to his PM's.

J. Chamberlain
09-09-2014, 12:19 AM
Lord knows, we've had our own moments of trollery on this board, Jomama. We probably still owe each other amends. Do we? Maybe it would ruin the amend itself, if you thought you had one coming to you.

And I guess there's no known interview about the band name...Btw Perlman used to sing "You Ain't Goin' Nowhere." They sounded like they had a lot of fun in those days.

Brown Jenkin
09-09-2014, 12:23 AM
What I, and many others, have a problem with is attempts by some to dismiss, if not delegitimize, records made by The Jayhawks without Olson, even to the point where some feel that the legal owners of the band name shouldn't be entitled to earn a living promoting records they made during the decade after Olson had quit the band by his own volition in 1995.

The Jayhawks did that to themselves with yet more lineup melodrama. It's not my fault they seem hesitant and rudderless. Furthermore, the recent shows didn't come off well in light of Olson's alleged wishes to not have his songs used. No forum poster created that bitter, De-legitimizing contrast.


I think most would also agree that the band wouldn't have been nearly as successful as it was without Gary's contributions, something at least partially borne out by his role with many of the band's most commercially successful songs from that era.

I don't think anyone would dispute that.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 03:07 AM
the recent shows didn't come off well in light of Olson's alleged wishes to not have his songs used.

Can someone enlighten me on that ? Have some of his songs been played in the current tour ?

I love this "Original Creator of The Jayhawks and architect of The Creekdippers" quote. Seems pretty accurate to me. After all, Mark sang lead on every single song during the first years and was the leader on stage all the way through to 1995.

Now this, for the sake of the controversy : after TTGG, if things had been the other way around (Gary going solo and Mark carrying on with the band), nobody would have had any second thoughts about the band's name. Mark would have been 100% legitimate carrying on as "the Jayhawks", no matter who was or was not in the lineup.

20 years later, the same can be said about Gary, even if he shares the legal ownership of the band's name with Perlman or someone else (I don't know anything about this). To me, he IS the Jayhawks now, and it's only a testament to his graciousness and elegance (and musical coherence) that he wouldn't even consider performing under the band's name with other musicians backing him. To be honest, if he did, I would be disappointed, because I love what the other members bring musically (especially Karen). But I would buy my tickets in a heartbeat.

Now PLEASE, new music, Gary. You pick the name you like.

JoMama
09-09-2014, 05:25 AM
This message is hidden because Brown Jenkin is on your ignore list.

JPM
09-09-2014, 05:26 AM
[QUOTE=fortuleo;231226]Can someone enlighten me on that ? Have some of his songs been played in the current tour ?

Real Light?

Ain't No End and Blue, I assume were co written?

JoMama
09-09-2014, 05:31 AM
[QUOTE=fortuleo;231226]Can someone enlighten me on that ? Have some of his songs been played in the current tour ?

Real Light?

Ain't No End and Blue, I assume were co written?

Two Hearts, Waiting For The Sun... I'm sure some were started by one and co-write is a loose term... who really cares, this band's legacy belongs to every one of them.

JoMama
09-09-2014, 05:48 AM
Someone ask Jenkin when was the last time I sent him a PM. Hell, tell that loser to post every word I ever said in a PM to him. I don't care. I don't have as much to lose as he does.

Lord knows, we've had our own moments of trollery on this board, Jomama. We probably still owe each other amends. Do we? Maybe it would ruin the amend itself, if you thought you had one coming to you.
The wish to move on is sufficient, there is only joy in my memories (and perhaps a chuckle at the surly fella I was on occasion).

And I guess there's no known interview about the band name...Btw Perlman used to sing "You Ain't Goin' Nowhere." They sounded like they had a lot of fun in those days.

It was a bunch of guys having fun playing in Minneapolis clubs. When it became a career for these men, then all that sentiment for the origins became only a PART of the band. It is admirable that Gary didn't disband it entirely after Mark left, and for sure, he carried so much more on his shoulders that continues to benefit Mark to this day.
I think the newspaper piece is a load of trash in the way it was presented--so one-sided, so tabloid-like.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 05:58 AM
None of these songs are 'olson songs'. They are all mainly louris's, as we all know. Mark has perhaps had a hand to finishing them, but who knows for sure?

lukpac
09-09-2014, 08:48 AM
The Jayhawks did that to themselves with yet more lineup melodrama.

Mark Olson leaving in a huff = "more lineup melodrama"?

It's not my fault they seem hesitant and rudderless.

Considering they only seem that way to you and not anyone else, yeah, that would be your fault.

Furthermore, the recent shows didn't come off well in light of Olson's alleged wishes to not have his songs used.

It seems that most agree that the recent shows came off great.

No forum poster created that bitter, De-legitimizing contrast.

What's that? You're referring to yourself as "No forum poster" these days? Good to know.

greekguy
09-09-2014, 10:02 AM
Essentially Olson was the one that set Louris and Perlman's current career in motion.

Wow. I am seriously wondering if this poster got married to Brown Jenkin.

axeeugene
09-09-2014, 10:29 AM
Wow. I am seriously wondering if this poster got married to Brown Jenkin.

Also: who gives a fuck?

It's like when Adele's ex tried to sue her for a percentage of royalties on her songs from "21": "But baby, you never could've written those songs without me."

Some people gotta stop living in a fantasy version of the past.

sacred roots
09-09-2014, 11:19 AM
The Jayhawks did that to themselves with yet more lineup melodrama.

The only "melodrama" recently has come courtesy of one Mark Olson who chose to air dirty laundry in the press. The rest of the band has resolutely taken the high road and refused to participate in this sordid affair, other than a 2 sentence statement made by Louris in February 2014. Of course the Star Tribune is complicit in this but it's absolutely insane to accuse the current Jayhawks of fueling the fire since they absolutely have not done so, and will continue not to do so. They are way too occupied with promoting the reissues of 3 records they recorded and released under the Jayhawks name. If anyone has a problem with that, it says more about the person pointing the finger than The Jayhawks.

sacred roots
09-09-2014, 11:23 AM
in light of Olson's alleged wishes to not have his songs used.


His songs. Yeah, right. Talk about not giving credit where credit is due. It's a miracle the band survived until 1995 with that kind of whiny, bitter attitude.

Shug
09-09-2014, 11:37 AM
The evolution of the band in that first decade encompasses a dynamic that went from Olson being the undisputed primary creative element in the band to a situation where Olson and Louris were equal partners, with the rest of the band making significant contributions as well. My personal opinion? It was a group effort that got the band to where they were in 1995, not a one man show and it's silly to argue who was more important than who. Indeed, there are many who feel that the band would've never achieved the success it did without the presence of a strong group chemistry - the proverbial "sum is greater than the parts" situation. I think most would also agree that the band wouldn't have been nearly as successful as it was without Gary's contributions, something at least partially borne out by his role with many of the band's most commercially successful songs from that era.


Well said, sacred roots. I think, in the Olson years, the Jayhawks were best when there was a more equal contribution from Olson and Louris (for me that is Hollywood Town Hall and Tomorrow The Green Grass). When the chemistry of creative forces in the band was balanced, amazingly great music was the result. I don't like the early records that much because for my tastes, there was too much Olson and not enough Louris. And that is exactly why I never liked very much the Olson/Louris reunion tours, Ready For The Flood or the reunited Olson/Louris Jayhawks and Mockingbird Time. Its just my tastes, not trying to slight anyone elses.

Brown Jenkin
09-09-2014, 11:38 AM
The only "melodrama" recently has come courtesy of one Mark Olson who chose to air dirty laundry in the press.


So you're on record that all fault lies with Olson, and that Gary's issues (which he's talked about bravely for a while now) had nothing to do with it?



The rest of the band has resolutely taken the high road and refused to participate in this sordid affair,


I'd do exactly what they are doing. I'd worry about the De-legitimizing aspects of the Jayhawk's creator's comments and try to sweep them under the rug. Smart business.



Of course the Star Tribune is complicit in this

So the messenger is to blame for lineup instability, and not the actual band members?

Brown Jenkin
09-09-2014, 11:47 AM
His songs. Yeah, right. Talk about not giving credit where credit is due. It's a miracle the band survived until 1995 with that kind of whiny, bitter attitude.

Was this an artistic endeavor, full of fire and passion, SR, or were the Jayhawks the Partridge Family?

Because I can tell you which era has fire, and which does not....

The credits for Blue Earth:

All songs written by Mark Olson except as noted.

"Two Angels" – 4:07
"She's Not Alone Anymore" – 3:23
"Will I Be Married" – 3:53
"Dead End Angel" – 3:40
"Commonplace Streets" – 5:21
"Ain't No End" (Olson, Louris, Marc Perlman) – 3:45
"Five Cups of Coffee" (Olson, Louris) – 3:52
"The Baltimore Sun" (Olson, Louris) – 3:10
"Red Firecracker" (Louris, Olson) – 3:08
"Sioux City" – 3:11
"I'm Still Dreaming, Now I'm Yours" – 3:45
"Martin's Song" – 3:31


One gets the feeling that Olson picked up the slack early on, in the crucial forming of the Jayhawks sound, and Gary came into his own on HTH. So it's understandable to be protective of the work, like a mother to her child.

"Martin's Song" and "Two Angels" are freaking amazing songs, some of the Jayhawks best. Two Angels might just be their best song, period. I'd love to see Olson get back with a tough producer again.

sacred roots
09-09-2014, 11:49 AM
So you're on record that all fault lies with Olson, and that Gary's issues (which he's talked about bravely for a while now) had nothing to do with it?

Absolutely not. I'm not on record saying anything. These issues should be of no concern to anyone outside of the band.


I'd do exactly what they are doing. I'd worry about the De-legitimizing aspects of the Jayhawk's creator's comments and try to sweep them under the rug. Smart business.

Don't really understand this, but you're free to discern whatever you want from Olson's comments and/or the article. The Jayhawks aren't trying to sweep anything under the rug. Olson is free to do whatever he wants.


So the messenger is to blame for lineup instability, and not the actual band members?

If that's what you're reading into my comments you're wrong. I'm partially blaming the Strib for the melodrama - nothing more, nothing less. They feel there's a story here and reasonable people can disagree about that. I've made it clear where I stand on the issue. As far as "instability" in the lineup goes, well, there is none at the moment. The current members are happy as clams and have been so since late 2012, and there's no reason I'm aware of to believe they won't remain that way for the foreseeable future.

Brown Jenkin
09-09-2014, 11:58 AM
Absolutely not. I'm not on record saying anything. These issues should be of no concern to anyone outside of the band.


That's not how the world works, though. People love the Jayhawks.They want to hear about the news.

This entire forum was completely revived, Frankenstein-like, because of the tussle.




Don't really understand this, but you're free to discern whatever you want from Olson's comments and/or the article. The Jayhawks aren't trying to sweep anything under the rug. Olson is free to do whatever he wants.

I'd certainly classify not acknowledging the band's creator's words as sweeping it under the rug.



If that's what you're reading into my comments you're wrong. I'm partially blaming the Strib for the melodrama - nothing more, nothing less. They feel there's a story here and reasonable people can disagree about that. I've made it clear where I stand on the issue. As far as "instability" in the lineup goes, well, there is none at the moment. The current members are happy as clams and have been so since late 2012, and there's no reason I'm aware of to believe they won't remain that way for the foreseeable future.

What about all those guest musicians? Kraig?

Since 2005 or so, Olson and Louris have been sort of a team. They toured a lot, made a couple records. It was an awesome eight years or so. Then, poof. Maybe the band should air it out in the media. Maybe that's what needs to happen. "Taking the high road" can also be seen as meekish Irish denial.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 11:58 AM
The only "melodrama" recently has come courtesy of one Mark Olson who chose to air dirty laundry in the press.

Saying that MT was a "stinker" is not exactly nice…

Was there ever a "promise" by Gary not to tour again as the Jayhawks without Mark, as stated in the star tribune article ?
I mean, to me, Gary is morally entitled to perform as the Jayhawks. From what I understand, he is also legally entitled to do so. As a fan, I don't see why he shouldn't either. I'm happy he does, and I'd be even happier if he'd record a new album with the current lineup !
But if Mark's claim of a "promise" is true, I understand why he feels bad about it and decided to say so publicly. Again, my point is not to say that Gary and the others shouldn't tour and promote the reissues of their three wonderful records. But it's only logical that Mark would feel really bad about it.

Oh, and just a thing, BJ : thanks for the unnecessary trouble typing the BE songwriting credits. It reminds all of us that the only BE song that the current lineup has played is indeed credited to Olson/Louris/Perlman, thus making it unfair to consider it an "olson song".

JoMama
09-09-2014, 12:05 PM
If the Jayhawks hired Morrissey to sing lead vocals, would they be able to call themselves the Smiths?

axeeugene
09-09-2014, 12:07 PM
Saying that MT was a "stinker" is not exactly nice…


That may be true, but as Louris was a principal artist on that record, it would seem he has every right to slag on it. If you're not proud of a certain sample of your output, there's no reason to pretend otherwise. He doesn't say, "I hate that record because Olson's contributions were crap," or anything of the sort. He just says he doesn't like it and it doesn't stand up to the rest of the band's body of work. I think that's fair. I also happen to agree with it. But even if I didn't, I wouldn't say it's out of his realm to say so. It's just an observation of his opinion on something his name is attached to.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 12:08 PM
If the Jayhawks hired Morrissey to sing lead vocals, would they be able to call themselves the Smiths?

Hmm. When the Nirvana guys performed with McCartney, it was labelled a Nirvana reunion, not a Beatles reunion. Does it help answer your question ?

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 12:09 PM
That may be true, but as Louris was a principal artist on that record, it would seem he has every right to slag on it. If you're not proud of a certain sample of your output, there's no reason to pretend otherwise. He doesn't say, "I hate that record because Olson's contributions were crap," or anything of the sort. He just says he doesn't like it and it doesn't stand up to the rest of the band's body of work. I think that's fair. I also happen to agree with it. But even if I didn't, I wouldn't say it's out of his realm to say so. It's just an observation of his opinion on something his name is attached to.

You may be vile, but you're right on this.

JoMama
09-09-2014, 12:11 PM
Hmm. When the Nirvana guys performed with McCartney, it was labelled a Nirvana reunion, not a Beatles reunion. Does it help answer your question ?

Well, it sort of does, but then, that was the absurdity of this entire debate, no? We love all the lineups, MOST of us do anyway. Even the one who endlessly scrambles to focus a point he has no intent of making has admitted to buying their post-Olson records and even attending the shows. It seems there is something more interesting to talk about with this band.
Morrissey probably wouldn't be a good fit anyway.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 12:19 PM
but then, that was the absurdity of this entire debate, no ?

my point, exactly.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 12:20 PM
Morrissey probably wouldn't be a good fit anyway.

Dave Gahan, maybe ?

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 12:23 PM
My hundredth post. Ten years down the line. I'm so proud.

sacred roots
09-09-2014, 12:24 PM
That's not how the world works, though. People love the Jayhawks.They want to hear about the news.


People want to know about all kinds of things, which is why sites like TMZ thrive. These are internal, private affairs and should be kept that way. Do people have the right to know about the band's personal lives as well? There has to be boundaries.


I'd certainly classify not acknowledging the band's creator's words as sweeping it under the rug.

Again, you're free to read into this whatever you want. The band is refusing to conduct an online war of words over private affairs and they should be applauded for doing so. 99.9% of the people who read that article know who comes off well and who doesn't.


What about all those guest musicians? Kraig?


What about them? Guest musicians=instability? Good to know. The core Jayhawks lineup for 2014 is the Jayhawks lineup in 1997 minus Jessy. Kraig wasn't a "guest" in 1997 and he's not one now; he's played every single show but one in 2014 and will continue to do so the rest of the year. The show he did miss in August was because his brother had just gone into hospice care; I hope that meets your approval. It was decided to bring in Jessy last week to help celebrate the hometown shows for obvious reasons. Just guessing, but I'm pretty sure nobody saw that as a sign of "instability." John Jackson is a friend of the band and co-produced all 5 of the major label reissues. He's also a talented musician and is free to sit in whenever he wants to. There is a 5 person core band in 2014, just like the MT era. If this is all "unstable," you and I have differing opinions on the meaning of the word.

Since 2005 or so, Olson and Louris have been sort of a team. They toured a lot, made a couple records. It was an awesome eight years or so. Then, poof. Maybe the band should air it out in the media. Maybe that's what needs to happen. "Taking the high road" can also be seen as meekish Irish denial.

"Sort of a team," is a very apt description. Some of those 8 years were indeed awesome. Some not so much. People need to understand, there's nothing for the band to "air" out. The recent hubbub is perhaps titillating for the fans but the Strib has sat on this story since February 2014 and the incidents it touches on are 2-4 years old. In other words, ancient history. The Jayhawks almost never think about any of this and have absolutely moved on. It's high time the rest of the world did the same.

Brown Jenkin
09-09-2014, 12:25 PM
That may be true, but as Louris was a principal artist on that record, it would seem he has every right to slag on it. If you're not proud of a certain sample of your output, there's no reason to pretend otherwise. He doesn't say, "I hate that record because Olson's contributions were crap," or anything of the sort. He just says he doesn't like it and it doesn't stand up to the rest of the band's body of work. I think that's fair. I also happen to agree with it. But even if I didn't, I wouldn't say it's out of his realm to say so. It's just an observation of his opinion on something his name is attached to.

The timing just seems odd. Looking back, it's clear the worst things to come out of Jayhawks Land were Smile, Mystic Theater, and Vagabonds. Those are the records Gary should be slagging.

lukpac
09-09-2014, 12:26 PM
What about all those guest musicians? Kraig?

What about them?

lukpac
09-09-2014, 12:27 PM
The timing just seems odd.

No, it doesn't.

Looking back, it's clear the worst things to come out of Jayhawks Land were Smile, Mystic Theater, and Vagabonds. Those are the records Gary should be slagging.

No, it isn't.

Brown Jenkin
09-09-2014, 12:28 PM
Mark, Gary, Tim, Marc, and Karen sound like a freaking symphony. This eight piece sounds clumsy.

sacred roots
09-09-2014, 12:37 PM
Saying that MT was a "stinker" is not exactly nice…

No, it's not nice. But as a producer and songwriter of the record Gary absolutely has a right to say it. I guess this does reek a little of "dirty laundry," but it may have been a subconscious reaction to a statement by your former partner that you essentially didn't have anything to do with MT. Of course, there are many fans who would agree with Olson's assessment of who was most responsible for MT, and not in a way he'd probably care for.

Was there ever a "promise" by Gary not to tour again as the Jayhawks without Mark, as stated in the star tribune article ?
I mean, to me, Gary is morally entitled to perform as the Jayhawks. From what I understand, he is also legally entitled to do so. As a fan, I don't see why he shouldn't either. I'm happy he does, and I'd be even happier if he'd record a new album with the current lineup !
But if Mark's claim of a "promise" is true, I understand why he feels bad about it and decided to say so publicly. Again, my point is not to say that Gary and the others shouldn't tour and promote the reissues of their three wonderful records. But it's only logical that Mark would feel really bad about it.


Verbal promises are almost never legally binding. Whether they are morally binding is something best left for the parties involved to sort out. People, of course, are free to have their own opinions and judge accordingly. I'm confident history will judge The Jayhawks fairly for reissuing and supporting albums made under that name by the parties involved in their creation.

JoMama
09-09-2014, 12:38 PM
Dave Gahan, maybe ?

Hah, why not? Bring along Alison Moyet while you're at it.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 12:54 PM
Verbal promises are almost never legally binding.

Of course they're not. I'm just saying that if they did occur, it's understandable Mark would be upset about Gary's change of heart. Then your point about him being the bad guy for taking "dirty laundry" out in the press is to be reconsidered, at least partially.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 01:00 PM
Hah, why not? Bring along Alison Moyet while you're at it.

Deal. Can somebody take this out to Gary ?

sacred roots
09-09-2014, 01:11 PM
Of course they're not. I'm just saying that if they did occur, it's understandable Mark would be upset about Gary's change of heart. Then your point about him being the bad guy for taking "dirty laundry" out in the press is to be reconsidered, at least partially.

Fair enough.

Calexico
09-09-2014, 01:12 PM
Hmm. When the Nirvana guys performed with McCartney, it was labelled a Nirvana reunion, not a Beatles reunion. Does it help answer your question ?


Did you see that performance on the Sound City documentary? Highly recommended film by the way.

McCartney just turned up, they started jamming...he suggested a few things and in minutes they had the bones of a rocker set up. Grohl said "I wish it was always this easy" to which Macca replied "it is!".

:)

axeeugene
09-09-2014, 01:17 PM
Grohl said "I wish it was always this easy" to which Macca replied "it is!".
:)

And THAT'S why McCartney is a Beatle!

Heh heh...

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 01:19 PM
Did you see that performance on the Sound City documentary? Highly recommended film by the way.

McCartney just turned up, they started jamming...he suggested a few things and in minutes they had the bones of a rocker set up. Grohl said "I wish it was always this easy" to which Macca replied "it is!".

:)

I love the film. And Macca is fantastically cool in it. He can be so "uncool" at times, but when he's comfortable and not too self conscious, he's just great.

Calexico
09-09-2014, 01:20 PM
I love Grohl's enthusiasm for music and people. His music I can mostly live without but he seems like a guy who would be excellent company over a few beers.

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 01:34 PM
And THAT'S why McCartney is a Beatle!

Heh heh...

you surely mean a… former Beatle ?

axeeugene
09-09-2014, 01:39 PM
you surely mean a… former Beatle ?

OF COURSE NOT, MAN!

MCCARTNEY *IS* THE BEATLES, MAN!

Did The Beatles ever record another album without McCartney? No? I REST MY CASE!

I mean, get with the TIMES!

fortuleo
09-09-2014, 01:40 PM
OF COURSE NOT, MAN!

MCCARTNEY *IS* THE BEATLES, MAN!

Did The Beatles ever record another album without McCartney? No? I REST MY CASE!

I mean, get with the TIMES!

But he didn't name them !!!!

axeeugene
09-09-2014, 01:45 PM
But he didn't name them !!!!

Well, first they were The Originals. But then they discovered there was already a band called The Originals, so they became The New Originals. Then they changed their name to The Regulars...

greekguy
09-09-2014, 01:53 PM
Shit Sandwich

axeeugene
09-09-2014, 02:13 PM
Shit Sandwich

Nobody wants to hear about your lunch.

sacred roots
09-09-2014, 02:22 PM
That may be true, but as Louris was a principal artist on that record, it would seem he has every right to slag on it. If you're not proud of a certain sample of your output, there's no reason to pretend otherwise. He doesn't say, "I hate that record because Olson's contributions were crap," or anything of the sort. He just says he doesn't like it and it doesn't stand up to the rest of the band's body of work. I think that's fair. I also happen to agree with it. But even if I didn't, I wouldn't say it's out of his realm to say so. It's just an observation of his opinion on something his name is attached to.

Good god Ax, the logic and clarity of this hits me like a ray of light! ;)

Since, like most artists, Gary is his own harshest critic, it could be argued that his recent statements slagging MT are also an admission of his own failure, especially since he is the listed producer. If true, that's a rather magnanimous gesture since, according to Olson, Gary only wrote 5% of the material on the record.

bryguy
09-09-2014, 02:24 PM
trying to put someone one block. need to tinker to figure that out.

axeeugene
09-09-2014, 02:26 PM
trying to put someone one block. need to tinker to figure that out.

Don't block me! I'M SPECIAL, DAMN IT! :)

bryguy
09-09-2014, 02:28 PM
Don't block me! I'M SPECIAL, DAMN IT! :)

Oh so sorry. I can't see this :-)

Brown Jenkin
09-09-2014, 02:30 PM
trying to put someone one block. need to tinker to figure that out.

Maybe you should figure out English, first.

sacred roots
09-09-2014, 02:54 PM
Maybe you should figure out English, first.

Yeah, no shit. Are you guys day drinking?

axeeugene
09-09-2014, 02:57 PM
Yeah, no shit. Are you guys day drinking?

Why should today be different? Beer is good food.

bryguy
09-09-2014, 03:21 PM
In honor of all this fan-created drama I am rolling MT from top to bottom, an album I really enjoy.

If Mark truly did do 95% of the writing, Gary had to do less than 5%.

Yoda wrote this:

You, my heart I can give it to
You, my soul
I can make it with you
It's all I can do, my soul

That leaves Gary with 94% and some change.

JoMama
09-09-2014, 06:34 PM
Mockingbird Time is a wonderful record.
When you listen to these albums the band is currently touring, you understand one very clear thing:
With Olson, the Jayhawks were great.
Without Olson, the Jayhawks were great.
Mark's vision is so very clear that it's understandable that Gary is not excited by the fact that MT was a huge seller.
The personal conflicts in the group did not help anyone, including the musicians trying to honor a touring schedule, and for sure, Mark's attitude seems to have been very challenging during that time. SEEMS. I don't know the whole picture, so I'm not interested in taking sides. As a matter of fact, if I had ALL the facts, I still could care less.
So you throw out a ton of shows on your list because Mark was involved? This is impossible for us to be arguing about.
I'm excited for the East Coast tour of the current lineup, and sure, a little disappointed that MT won't be respected for the band's considerable involvement, but I really don't care, because the Jayhawks catalog is huge enough that a tour focusing on 3 particular albums doesn't bother me in the least. I'm happy for them all, current members or disgruntled former members. In the bigger picture, it's all good.

bryguy
09-09-2014, 07:38 PM
The timing of all of this dust up and dirty laundry airing seems quite intentional with Olson's new album coming out. They say there's no such thing as bad press. It makes me curious about what the net outcome will be for his record sales. I could see it souring some people and bringing greater attention and possibly sales for others.

JoMama
09-09-2014, 07:53 PM
you have a website dominated by a point of view... Well, dominated by a "discussion" over a point of view: Whether Olson is worthy of our respect, or worthy of derision since he is not currently in the band.
Well, he's not in the band by his own choices, and his own reluctance to see any possibility in becoming part of the post-Olson material that for sure was going to be ReMastered and marketed, regardless.
He chose not to, and for sure, chose to be opposed to his band name being applied to anything.
Ironically, someone comments about unmitigated free speech, and censorship and fascism---all directed at one poster who called them on their own stupid postings...
Okay, so the same posters have also put certain Fanpagers on ignore, while talking about censorship...
I dunno, but that's the height of irony... This board has not ceased to amuse...

lukpac
09-09-2014, 08:19 PM
Well, he's not in the band by his own choices, and his own reluctance to see any possibility in becoming part of the post-Olson material that for sure was going to be ReMastered and marketed, regardless.

I realize this is somewhat gossip-y, but do we know why the later material was mostly MIA during the 2008-12 shows? I *thought* I saw either Mark or Gary say it wasn't an issue at some point, but whether it was or not, the end result was pretty much the same. Possibly an "easier if we just don't think about it" situation?

LildeviladyK
09-10-2014, 12:26 AM
Nobody - at least no rational person - should be denying Olson's role and importance in the founding of the band; that is beyond dispute. What I, and many others, have a problem with is attempts by some to dismiss, if not delegitimize, records made by The Jayhawks without Olson, even to the point where some feel that the legal owners of the band name shouldn't be entitled to earn a living promoting records they made during the decade after Olson had quit the band by his own volition in 1995.

As for how "vital" Olson was in the band's success from 1985-1995 - again, no rational person should be disputing that. It's ludicrous to argue that Olson's contributions to albums like HTH and TTGG aren't crucial. But while it's key to note Olson's importance, especially during the first few years, it shouldn't be done at the expense of the rest of the band. The evolution of the band in that first decade encompasses a dynamic that went from Olson being the undisputed primary creative element in the band to a situation where Olson and Louris were equal partners, with the rest of the band making significant contributions as well. My personal opinion? It was a group effort that got the band to where they were in 1995, not a one man show and it's silly to argue who was more important than who. Indeed, there are many who feel that the band would've never achieved the success it did without the presence of a strong group chemistry - the proverbial "sum is greater than the parts" situation. I think most would also agree that the band wouldn't have been nearly as successful as it was without Gary's contributions, something at least partially borne out by his role with many of the band's most commercially successful songs from that era.

Ultimately, where a band ends up and how they got there is almost always more interesting than how it started. Look at Uncle Tupelo circa 1987, where Tweedy was very much a "junior partner," compared to the situation in 1994 when he and Farrar were essentially equal. Coincidentally, it was at this point at which Tupelo broke up, which gives some possible insight at how difficult band chemistry can be when the internal creative process changes so significantly.

I completely agree with all of this. And, I do hope that no one believes it was ever all a one man effort in that early era, even as far back as The Bunkhouse Album or even later in the M.T. era (the 95% comment is related to Gary not functioning creatively at that time, but he still produced the album).

In my point above, I was only directly elaborating on Olson's claim in regards to calling himself "the creator" (of which cannot be denied as noted by the history that I quoted) and how it relates to the Jayhawks name. Legalities (of which may be ridiculous) set aside, his role was so vital to not only setting the wheels in motion, the beginning success and on throughout the first 10 years of this band, that I don't believe he should ever be forced into any sort of "EX Jayhawk" status at any time.

LildeviladyK
09-10-2014, 08:51 AM
Was this an artistic endeavor, full of fire and passion, SR, or were the Jayhawks the Partridge Family?

Because I can tell you which era has fire, and which does not....

The credits for Blue Earth:

All songs written by Mark Olson except as noted.

"Two Angels" – 4:07
"She's Not Alone Anymore" – 3:23
"Will I Be Married" – 3:53
"Dead End Angel" – 3:40
"Commonplace Streets" – 5:21
"Ain't No End" (Olson, Louris, Marc Perlman) – 3:45
"Five Cups of Coffee" (Olson, Louris) – 3:52
"The Baltimore Sun" (Olson, Louris) – 3:10
"Red Firecracker" (Louris, Olson) – 3:08
"Sioux City" – 3:11
"I'm Still Dreaming, Now I'm Yours" – 3:45
"Martin's Song" – 3:31


One gets the feeling that Olson picked up the slack early on, in the crucial forming of the Jayhawks sound, and Gary came into his own on HTH. So it's understandable to be protective of the work, like a mother to her child.

"Martin's Song" and "Two Angels" are freaking amazing songs, some of the Jayhawks best. Two Angels might just be their best song, period. I'd love to see Olson get back with a tough producer again.

I don't think it was slack on Gary's part. I think he was still learning. I think it had a lot to do with how much on fire Olson was as a prolific songwriter during this period and how much Louris looked up to and respected Olson. Gary has stated that as far as his songwriting is concerned he "went to the school of Mark Olson". Gary's songwriting may have still been developing during this period; seeking to learn things from Olson. As time continued on through TTGG, Gary was finding his way as a stronger presence, I believe for two reasons: He was now blossoming as a songwriter, and Mark was wanting to be involved increasingly less and less with this kind of success.

LildeviladyK
09-10-2014, 08:54 AM
I guess he forgot about the Jayhawks records he made and which have given him name recognition...

Where do you get this idea from?

LildeviladyK
09-10-2014, 10:42 AM
Wow. I am seriously wondering if this poster got married to Brown Jenkin.

Nope. Just one of Mark's biggest fans on the entire planet. We do exist, regardless of the fact that you'd prefer to have all of us locked in some sort of gas chamber.

I stated a fact that was backed up by the history section of this fanpage:

"Essentially Olson was the one that set Louris and Perlman's current career in motion".

Gary also stated in regards to songwriting "I went to the school of Mark Olson as far as lyrics go "

For people like you to de-legitimize his very existence as an essential member of this band, *regardless* of where the band incarnation stands today is beyond laughable.

In addition, I applaud Gary's brave confessions with addiction, wish him well with recovery. It sincerely means everything and beyond to me because you see I am also one of Gary's biggest fans on the entire planet.

With that note, I cannot neglect that my fandom is 180 degrees apart from the reality of any situation. I don't believe that for anyone at all (not just Gary) that the label of addict suddenly awards you a totally free pass to be an asshole to people and not make amends with every single person that you affected. If it's true as the article stated (and in his interview) that he did make amends with the rest of the current band lineup, but for some reason neglected or perhaps refused to make amends with Olson, then there is a whole other dynamic here that is missing from the article, isn't there?

None of us knows 100% all that went down between the both of them (nor do I care to know or speculate about it -NONE OF MY BUSINESS, and TMI ALREADY but, I do believe that the strib article, timed with the adjoining article was timed to purposely slam Olson. I have had issues with Chris R.'s writing in the past anyway, this isn't the first time, and regardless of what Olson said in all of his bitterness, Chris R. should have taken the classy way out and left it alone. The fact that all of this is such *old news*, timed with writing about the touring of the reissues and the soon to be released "Goodbye Lizelle" was a totally tacky and tasteless move by the strib.

You don't go from "I've decided I want to spend the rest of my life writing songs with Gary" to "I don't want to see him ever again" without some serious shit in between. People get fed up and burned out from holding up the fort unsupported in silence and then need to vent. Should it have been to the strib? My opinion is no, and this is where he went horribly wrong....but, hey, we all have bad days, say things we may regret later to the *wrong people* don't we? Well, hasn't that happened to most of us at least once?

So the picture becomes clear. Those of you here who used to continuously and falsely claim that Mark was "shoving himself into the picture" "hey, look at me everybody, I am the most important one here", or claiming he wasn't allowing Gary to write songs, "it's all just about me me ME" have been fed a heavy dose of reality. It was because Gary was incapable of functioning at full capacity during those days.

The truth is that usually when someone you've had an intimate relationship with at any level says "I never want to see you again" it has a whole lot more to do with feeling hurt than anything else.

There is a band called Butterfly Jones who put out one of the greatest albums and one of my favorites of all time called "Napalm Springs". From a song off that album called: When People Are Mean

"So I wanna thank you
For showing me something I'd never seen
That it's usually just a sadness inside
When people are mean"

Doesn't this exactly apply to the situation of where Gary and Mark fall on the asshole meter? Addicts are inherently sad inside. We get fed up from caring too much and investing so much just to see something fail, and then we lash out in frustration. These things can easily place anyone at all on an asshole meter on any given day.

And interestingly, doesn't this sum up the *people are mean* dynamics on this fanpage's asshole meter?

Thoughts to ponder.

wheelhousetunes
09-10-2014, 10:45 AM
"Martin's Song" and "Two Angels" are freaking amazing songs, some of the Jayhawks best. Two Angels might just be their best song, period. I'd love to see Olson get back with a tough producer again.

It's peculiar that those two songs have a Louris co-write credit on Hollywood Town Hall....

wheelhousetunes
09-10-2014, 10:50 AM
I stated a fact that was backed up by the history section of this fanpage:

"Essentially Olson was the one that set Louris current career in motion".

Thoughts to ponder.

I never noticed that before.

I will from here on out refer to Gary Louris as Darth Vader.

sacred roots
09-10-2014, 03:27 PM
.

With that note, I cannot neglect that my fandom is 180 degrees apart from the reality of any situation. I don't believe that for anyone at all (not just Gary) that the label of addict suddenly awards you a totally free pass to be an asshole to people and not make amends with every single person that you affected. If it's true as the article stated (and in his interview) that he did make amends with the rest of the current band lineup, but for some reason neglected or perhaps refused to make amends with Olson, then there is a whole other dynamic here that is missing from the article

There is so much missing from the article that would shed great insight on who exactly deserves respect and apologies, who refused to do what, or who affected who. Besides these all being private affairs there are also legal matters involved so I wouldn't expect any more light being shed on this by anyone in a position to know any time soon. Which is really unfortunate because the general public pretty much has only this article to go with, which means that the "truth" will likely remain elusive.

As for Olson getting "slammed," it's my opinion - and my opinion alone - that he largely paved the road for that when he decided to speak with the press. He, or his team, should've known that airing these kinds of things in public often entails a risk of having your story distorted, no matter how just you think your position may be. There's no doubt that Olson and his camp feel particularly aggrieved here. I only wish they would've directed their anger and frustration in a manner that would've actually had a chance of resolving some of these issues.

Finally, I'm not going to publicly comment on Chris R for obvious reasons, but it should be noted that he wasn't involved in the original decision to do this story in early 2014, nor did he have anything to do with its editing or publication date.

sacred roots
09-10-2014, 03:34 PM
It's peculiar that those two songs have a Louris co-write credit on Hollywood Town Hall....

Good catch - I'd forgotten that.

lukpac
09-10-2014, 03:38 PM
Wasn't there also a modification of credits with the Ryko reissue of Blue Earth? Or am I imagining that?

lukpac
09-10-2014, 04:44 PM
Ok, not going crazy.

Original CD: "All songs by Olson (c) 1989 Gunflint Music/BMI except [Ain't No End] Perlman/Louris/Olson, [Five Cups of Coffee/The Baltimore Sun] Olson/Louris [Red Firecracker] Louris/Olson (c) 1989 Deadwood Music/BMI"

Ryko: "All songs written by M. Olson/G. Louris and published by Gunflint Music (BMI)/Deadwood Music (BMI) except [Two Angels/Martin's Song] published by Warner-Tamerlane Publishing Corp. (BMI), Pedal Blue Music (BMI), [Ain't No End] written by M. Perlman/G. Louris/M. Olson and published by Copyright Control/Deadwood Music (BMI)/Gunflint Music (BMI), and [The Baltimore Sun/Red Firecracker/Fingernail Moon] written by G. Louris/M. Olson and published by Deadwood Music (BMI)/Gunflint Music (BMI)."

So The Baltimore Sun switches from Olson/Louris to Louris/Olson, and all of the tracks that were Olson switch to Olson/Louris.

sacred roots
09-10-2014, 04:49 PM
Wasn't there also a modification of credits with the Ryko reissue of Blue Earth? Or am I imagining that?


Well, I just ran into the front room to check.

The original T/T CD and LP from 1989 shows this:

All songs by Olson except

Ain't No End (Perlman/Louris/Olson)
Five Cups of Coffee (Olson/Louris)
The Baltimore Sun (Olson/Louris)
Red Firecracker (Louris/Olson)


The Ryko/Restless/T-T reissue from 2003 shows this:

All songs written by M. Olson/G. Louris except

Ain't No End (M. Perlman/G. Louris/M. Olson)
The Baltimore Sun (G. Louris/M. Olson)
Red Firecracker (G. Louris/M. Olson)


Note, the flipping of the names around, ala the Lennon/McCartney situation referenced up thread. And it's not even consistent from one edition to another. Obviously something changed between 1989 and 2003. A possible clue is that the publishing info listed on the 2003 reissue for all tracks is the Jayhawk's original publisher, Gunflint Music, except for Two Angels and Martin's Song, the two songs that obviously were redone for HTH. For those two songs, the publisher is Warner-Tamerlane, who the band signed a deal with after they signed with American in 1991.

Speaking of which, on HTH Martin's Song and Two Angels are simply attributed to "Olson/Louris." I'm guessing that the change from the Twin/Tone era to HTH had something to do with the new publishing deal Mark and Gary signed with Warners.

This kind of thing rarely means that the actual authorship of the song has been revised, but it's interesting in a geeky kind of way and gives some insight to how complicated the publishing world can be (whose name comes first, how names are listed, retroactive purchase of publishing rights, etc).

deckerma
09-11-2014, 12:53 AM
as far as the music goes....... "cherry thieves" is a beauty

J. Chamberlain
09-13-2014, 08:34 PM
Ingunn Ringvold has a forever 27 years-old look about her. I just found her to be very charming, the one time I did meet her. Now I don't want to hit on Mark's wife while I'm trying to make an amend to him. That would ruin the amend. Just sayin'. I admire Mark Olson and the choices that he's made. He's a good dude.

J. Chamberlain
09-13-2014, 08:57 PM
I think he has already defined himself perfectly.....



I should have been nicer to you, ladyK! You could release an entire Olson bootleg series, and I would love it. I just wish you would put your tapes on dime. I wonder if Mark would want his shows on dime?

I agree with what you said a long time ago, Mark plays his best stuff live. You said something like that. Olson is stellar live! I like his set. I like his performance and delivery. He nails it.

Olson is Bob Dylan's Newport voice from '64. It's how I hear Marks voice, IMHO, as always. Listen to Bob Dylan from that year's Newport, all-acoustic set, there's Olson's voice right there. I mean, it's Bob. But the specific show, Newport '64, with Joan Baez, reminds me so much of Olson's voice it's weird.

J. Chamberlain
09-13-2014, 11:02 PM
I just mean she'll look like she's around 27, throughout her 30's and 40's. She just has a way about her. Ingunn doesn't look a day over 27. I don't even know how old she is. OK, now I'm turning into a lush of another sort.

J. Chamberlain
09-13-2014, 11:14 PM
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=ingunn%20ringvold%20dob

fortuleo
09-14-2014, 03:12 AM
I should have been nicer to you, ladyK! You could release an entire Olson bootleg series, and I would love it. I just wish you would put your tapes on dime. I wonder if Mark would want his shows on dime?

I agree with what you said a long time ago, Mark plays his best stuff live. You said something like that. Olson is stellar live! I like his set. I like his performance and delivery. He nails it.

Olson is Bob Dylan's Newport voice from '64. It's how I hear Marks voice, IMHO, as always. Listen to Bob Dylan from that year's Newport, all-acoustic set, there's Olson's voice right there. I mean, it's Bob. But the specific show, Newport '64, with Joan Baez, reminds me so much of Olson's voice it's weird.

True. Absolutely true. At the same time, Mark is something else entirely, following his own vision. I think you've said earlier that he is "the ultimate outsider" and it is an accurate definition. His artistic journey is fascinating. In a way, that's the most important thing the Jayhawks lost when he left. That singularity of "vision". Gary is one of my favorite musicians of the last 25 years (if not the favorite), but he doesn't have that in him. It's similar to the Lennon/McCartney debate. I'm more of a McCartney guy myself, but the "vision" was clearly Lennon's.

JoMama
09-14-2014, 08:33 AM
True. Absolutely true. At the same time, Mark is something else entirely, following his own vision. I think you've said earlier that he is "the ultimate outsider" and it is an accurate definition. His artistic journey is fascinating. In a way, that's the most important thing the Jayhawks lost when he left. That singularity of "vision". Gary is one of my favorite musicians of the last 25 years (if not the favorite), but he doesn't have that in him. It's similar to the Lennon/McCartney debate. I'm more of a McCartney guy myself, but the "vision" was clearly Lennon's.

Give Gary his props, he's given hugely to Mark's "vision" that made it something unique of its own. There's a chemistry that neither of them owns. The situation when 1+1 equals much more than two...
I would have loved to hear how Mark could help "re-vision" the post-Mark albums, or even better, to simply to bring some new harmonies into the vocal mix. But even that would have angered a very large amount of people too. Kind of like hearing Sammy Hagar sing "Jump" with Van Halen... :eek:
But for sure, Mark's "vision" is enhanced with Gary more so than without Gary. It's not an easy business to live a normal life in, especially when business has to be addressed so one can pursue their "art".

bryguy
09-14-2014, 09:11 AM
True. Absolutely true. At the same time, Mark is something else entirely, following his own vision. I think you've said earlier that he is "the ultimate outsider" and it is an accurate definition. His artistic journey is fascinating. In a way, that's the most important thing the Jayhawks lost when he left. That singularity of "vision". Gary is one of my favorite musicians of the last 25 years (if not the favorite), but he doesn't have that in him. It's similar to the Lennon/McCartney debate. I'm more of a McCartney guy myself, but the "vision" was clearly Lennon's.

This seems a little difficult for me to parse- and I think it would be for anyone outside of these guys. Musical vision seems to be something that is constantly changing. I'm not sure we can say that Mark has more vision than Gary- I guess I don't see how that can be quantified. Did the Jayhawks lose something when Mark left? Of course; but they also gained something. Gary was very clearly moving in the more pop direction and we can see from Mark's post work that he was keeping things "more traditional," for lack of a better phrase. Gary wanted to be big, seems like Mark wanted to play and keep it quieter, if not smaller. Those visions collided. But they certainly both had/have one- they are just different.

fortuleo
09-14-2014, 05:03 PM
I certainly didn't want to take anything away from Gary, sorry if it looked that way. As I said, he probably is my favorite musician of the last twenty years, along with Tweedy and Elliott Smith. One of the best creator of melodies since the sixties. But I see him as more a "conventional" rock musician than Mark, who's always been more of a poet, and has gradually become one of the true "originals" of the american music scene since leaving the band.

ChiefCrowe
09-14-2014, 06:10 PM
It's too bad what happened but I am glad things are moving on. I am looking forward to Mark's album and whatever the Jayhawks, and Gary do in the future (hoping that is a solo album by Gary!)

bryguy
09-14-2014, 08:27 PM
I certainly didn't want to take anything away from Gary, sorry if it looked that way. As I said, he probably is my favorite musician of the last twenty years, along with Tweedy and Elliott Smith. One of the best creator of melodies since the sixties. But I see him as more a "conventional" rock musician than Mark, who's always been more of a poet, and has gradually become one of the true "originals" of the american music scene since leaving the band.

They seem to approach songs in different ways (Gary and Mark that is). Of course I don't know this to be true, but it seems to me that melody drives Gary's lyrics, and lyrics drive Mark's melodies.

on the beach 3
09-16-2014, 08:11 PM
Nice to see that nothing has changed much around here.

Peace and Boat Drinks……….

JoMama
09-16-2014, 09:43 PM
Nice to see that nothing has changed much around here.

Peace and Boat Drinks……….

This is nothing. Ever go to some of the Van Halen blogs? The Sammy versus Dave stuff is fun.

jacieb
09-17-2014, 04:13 PM
This is nothing. Ever go to some of the Van Halen blogs? The Sammy versus Dave stuff is fun.

Sammy????

I think you may have been on the Van Hagar blog. It's easy to see how someone could make that mistake - Alex and Eddie made it for years.

bryguy
09-17-2014, 04:31 PM
Sammy????

I think you may have been on the Van Hagar blog. It's easy to see how someone could make that mistake - Alex and Eddie made it for years.

I liked both versions of the band- but they are really two different bands in my mind. I know people take sides with one singer or the other (stop me if this sounds familiar), but since I personally like both it doesn't create an issue for me.

Comparing album sales might be enlightening for some :-)

On a side note- I saw Sammy on his last solo tour before joining VH- that guy puts on an amazing show. And he was a NUT! Hanging upside down from the rafters playing his guitar. I think Mark Olson used to do that. No?

JoMama
09-17-2014, 04:54 PM
Sammy????

I think you may have been on the Van Hagar blog. It's easy to see how someone could make that mistake - Alex and Eddie made it for years.

I've listened to drunken fans in a bar, YouTube and otherwise broadcasted interviews and read some of the "press" and of course there are numerous VH blogs. There's also an extended interview with Sammy on a Howard Stern show that is also fun. I was a big VH fan back in the day.
Never thought much of Sammy.
Technique-wise, Sammy is a better guitarist than Dave who doesn't really play much; Sammy's voice is for sure wider ranging.
But Sammy has no style. It's all math-rock. He just doesn't come off as in any way as unique as Dave does, even though Dave is rather limited in his reach too. They're both way past their peaks, and Sammy is a smart businessman who sold his Tequila company for tens of millions of dollars more than he paid for it. It brought him cash and freedom from having to run a business. Hats off to Sammy's business acumen.
But his music just doesn't do it for me.
Oh well, I think the problem is obvious with the Jayhawks--and the same problem: BOTH versions of the band are excellent, but proponents of either one seem to like to despise and troll endlessly about which version they are most loyal to.
Maybe they should make an album with ALL the lineups included and call it "OICU812". :D

JoMama
09-17-2014, 05:04 PM
.
Comparing album sales might be enlightening for some :-)



According to WIKI: Two albums with Dave have reached 10 million in sales, giving Dave a clear overall edge, strictly by the numbers.
But with Sammy they charted more singles, and were fairly consistent. I'd say that Sammy made them "pop" and Dave certainly had paved the way, more of a showman than a pop songwriter. His cocky Diamond Dave persona got the best of him... Skyscraper is better, IMHO, than any of Sammy's solo albums...

bryguy
09-17-2014, 05:14 PM
According to WIKI: Two albums with Dave have reached 10 million in sales, giving Dave a clear overall edge, strictly by the numbers.
But with Sammy they charted more singles, and were fairly consistent. I'd say that Sammy made them "pop" and Dave certainly had paved the way, more of a showman than a pop songwriter. His cocky Diamond Dave persona got the best of him... Skyscraper is better, IMHO, than any of Sammy's solo albums...

For total sales- the Roth version takes it by far. The greatness of those early albums and the length of time they've been out equals mega sales. Every studio album with Sammy hit the charts at number 1. Roth didn't hit that. It's a tough comparison. Not a lot can stand up to VH's first three albums.

Now Dave solo... he just became a caricature of himself IMHO. Too cartoony for me. I'd take Sammy solo or Dave solo any day of the week.

JoMama
09-17-2014, 06:01 PM
For total sales- the Roth version takes it by far. The greatness of those early albums and the length of time they've been out equals mega sales. Every studio album with Sammy hit the charts at number 1. Roth didn't hit that. It's a tough comparison. Not a lot can stand up to VH's first three albums.

Now Dave solo... he just became a caricature of himself IMHO. Too cartoony for me. I'd take Sammy solo or Dave solo any day of the week.

Skyscraper is awesome, and I forgot he had these guys on 'Eat 'em And Smile', which was more "Diamond Dave". He toned it down slightly with the second album.
Some great Steve Vai guitars on those records, and really when you listen to Eat 'em back to back with 5150 (the first Sammy album by VH), you have to give Roth the edge in sheer bravado.
Me, I prefer Skyscraper. Billy Sheehan and Steve Vai. Hard to beat...

I was reading this funny thing on WIKI about 'Eat 'em And Smile--they re-recorded all the vocals in Spanish because there was a large record-buying market in their 20's in Mexico. The only problem was the 'spanish' Dave used was very generic so they called it "Gringo Spanish" and it didn't sell. :rolleyes:

bryguy
09-17-2014, 06:22 PM
Skyscraper is awesome, and I forgot he had these guys on 'Eat 'em And Smile', which was more "Diamond Dave". He toned it down slightly with the second album.
Some great Steve Vai guitars on those records, and really when you listen to Eat 'em back to back with 5150 (the first Sammy album by VH), you have to give Roth the edge in sheer bravado.
Me, I prefer Skyscraper. Billy Sheehan and Steve Vai. Hard to beat...

I was reading this funny thing on WIKI about 'Eat 'em And Smile--they re-recorded all the vocals in Spanish because there was a large record-buying market in their 20's in Mexico. The only problem was the 'spanish' Dave used was very generic so they called it "Gringo Spanish" and it didn't sell. :rolleyes:

I had totally forgotten about Vai and Sheehan. Both amazing talents. When all of that came out I waved it off and didn't give it a listen because I just found myself turned off by Dave. I'll need to check it out. Growing up in LA I'd hear of the terrible run in Dave had in the club scene. He challenged a friend to a fight- with bodyguards all around him of course. Gotta love Dave. Bravado in spades! :-). But the dude can sing (and scream....what is that??)

JoMama
09-17-2014, 06:35 PM
Okay, I should edit myself... LOL
Skyscraper was well done and Dave seemed in command of a lot of what his fame in VH had brought him. I said 'awesome' only because I think it was really well executed, and Dave wasn't alone in getting the credit. I think those first two Roth albums stand with the first two "Van Hagar" records.
It's the cheesy ballads that Hagar brought to the band. Sure, lots of money having a "hit single" but gosh, it just wasn't exciting to hear them on the radio...

Jedey
09-17-2014, 06:38 PM
Sammy Hagar lost his edge when he left Montrose, he got too glossy with Van Halen.

bryguy
09-19-2014, 09:33 AM
Sammy Hagar lost his edge when he left Montrose, he got too glossy with Van Halen.

There was a lot of Sammy between his stint with Montrose and his joining VH- and there's been a lot of Sammy since. I don't know that we can paint all of his work after his two years with Montrose as glossy. Even during his time in VH- he certainly was not the sole song writer. HSAS and Chickenfoot, even all of his solo work are hard to label that way. During the 80s he did use keyboards, but so did just about everyone- it's where music was going. I agree that Sammy moved in a little more of a pop direction. I liked it, but I know that some thought it went too far in that direction. All a matter of tastes I suppose.

axeeugene
09-19-2014, 11:04 AM
All a matter of tastes I suppose.

I may be a rarity in the VH commentary world, because I like both VanRoth and VanHagar. I think it's because I only started actually listening to VH closely in the Hagar era, and had to go back a bit to see the genius of the Roth version. Of course I remember when 1984 was all the rage - like MJ's Thriller it was impossible to avoid for a while - but only at OU812 did I start really paying attention.

Two different animals, obviously, but each tastes good for what it is.

One thing I'll say is that it does seem Hagar is less of a raging douche than Roth, and music aside, that counts for a lot in my book.

Nevertheless, "Panama", "Runnin' With The Devil" (see my first ever fanpage board post), and (OBVIOUSLY) "Hot For Teacher" are my all-time faves. Ya don't see any Hagar on THAT list!

sacred roots
09-19-2014, 11:21 AM
Am I the only one that's mildly amused that a thread about Mark Olson got hijacked by...Van Halen talk?

:D

axeeugene
09-19-2014, 11:46 AM
Am I the only one that's mildly amused that a thread about Mark Olson got hijacked by...Van Halen talk?

:D

Well I heard that once Gary Louris played with Van Halen, so it's not *entirely* off topic, is it?

Jedey
09-19-2014, 01:36 PM
Am I the only one that finds "I Can't Drive 55" too pedestrian?

axeeugene
09-19-2014, 04:12 PM
Am I the only one that finds "I Can't Drive 55" too pedestrian?

I suppose pedestrians would find it difficult to drive 55.

ChiefCrowe
09-19-2014, 06:01 PM
Well, I like Van Hagar better than Gary Louris and Mark Olson!

axeeugene
09-19-2014, 06:07 PM
Well, I like Van Hagar better than Gary Louris and Mark Olson!

YOU SHUT YOUR WHORE MOUTH!

Brown Jenkin
09-19-2014, 06:30 PM
Well, I like Van Hagar better than Gary Louris and Mark Olson!

Disturbing.

JoMama
09-19-2014, 06:36 PM
Am I the only one that's mildly amused that a thread about Mark Olson got hijacked by...Van Halen talk?

:D

Gosh, the same thing happened on that other site... Hmmm... ;)

ChiefCrowe
09-19-2014, 06:45 PM
I was just joking but I do like some Van Halen from time to time, both versions.

axeeugene
09-19-2014, 06:50 PM
I was just joking but I do like some Van Halen from time to time, both versions.

No way, man. You can't walk that back. I KNOW THE TRUTH!

VH is a lot of fun.

Brown Jenkin
09-19-2014, 07:40 PM
I was just joking but I do like some Van Halen from time to time, both versions.

I love Van Halen (the Roth version of the band, and I love their latest reunion album). The Hagar era was terrible, thus my comment.

Van Halen has a way of cutting through indie melodrama.

jacieb
09-20-2014, 12:52 AM
Am I the only one that's mildly amused that a thread about Mark Olson got hijacked by...Van Halen talk?

:D

Refreshing, ain't it!!!! :)

JoMama
09-20-2014, 06:41 AM
YOU SHUT YOUR WHORE MOUTH!

you almost got me with the "blows coffee out his nose" laugh... I only spilled a little on my Bruegger's napkin. Good job! :D

ChiefCrowe
09-20-2014, 12:04 PM
HAHAHA

I bet Gary and Sammy could write a good catchy rock single.


YOU SHUT YOUR WHORE MOUTH!

Jedey
09-20-2014, 06:13 PM
HAHAHA

I bet Gary and Sammy could write a good catchy rock single.They could form a band together and call it Whore Mouth.

axeeugene
09-20-2014, 06:22 PM
They could form a band together and call it Whore Mouth.

What, not HaGary?

Jedey
09-20-2014, 07:12 PM
What, not HaGary?

I see what you did there, very clever. Technically you did come up both names so whichever one they choose you should get some kind of royalty check...just saying.

Brown Jenkin
09-20-2014, 08:16 PM
Terrible last few posts.

bryguy
09-22-2014, 02:56 PM
at least the pitchforks and torches have been stowed away. for now.

JoMama
09-23-2014, 04:35 PM
at least the pitchforks and torches have been stowed away. for now.

Next time those goons start with their schtick, I'm bringin' Captain Feathersword in to straighten things out. :eek:


;)