A Good Day In Hell - The Official ILM Track-By-Track EAGLES Listening Thread

and i'm not a dave marsh apologist or anything. i never found him that compelling. a big mouth and not my favorite writer to read or opinions to read. i like that one book that chuck was in. the rock & roll confidential report.

i THINK hotel california and the long run are the strongest records. haven't listened to them in ages.

also: I may be in the minority in preferring The Long Run to anything else: as rancid a final album as Gaucho, and they got their shit together, only nowhere near as sharp as Gaucho.

ha – I missed scott's post

Take It To The Limit - can't deny the craft, it's a good tune and the drumming's nice. I don't like the strings and for once the guitars didn't register at all. The singing's fine, but really I never want to hear this again.

This is much better than the replacement bassist's moment in the sun. THat's fucking unlistenable.

Why do you say that, Bill?

they are responsible for the two least-eagles-y eagles hits and they might be my two fave tracks! i sense a pattern...

i'm still trying to figure out if i agree with spirit of radio being head and shoulders above every other rush song over here though....might take me a minute.

Actually, I'd say it's neck-and-neck with "Tom Sawyer," or rather it barely noses ahead because Geddy Lee amends the line "glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity" with a "yeah!" that implies he's celebrating said prizes/compromises, which takes it somewhere far beyond what ol' po-faced Peart probably had in mind when he wrote that line.

i do love that song but i don't know if i love it any more than i love free will or jacob's ladder on that album. great first side. the second side definitely got neglected by me when i bought that album.

i still love free will lyrics

Each of us
A cell of awareness
Imperfect and incomplete
Genetic blends
With uncertain ends
On a fortune hunt that's far too fleet

hmm…I seem to be in multiple minorities here: I think Kiss and Rush are totally great, the eagles are great, and that greatness is not canceled out by album filler, and like right honorable Lord above, the Long Run is best they done.

chiefly, my notion of music I like or dislike or viscerally despise or adore beyond measure is more of a good/bad dichotomy, rather than one centered around right/wrong. anyone whose ever made music I dislike is not my enemy.

My guess is that that us ILMers here are a lot lot younger than Marsh and his contemporaries, the Eagles. Marsh (and probly Henley to a significant extent) comes from an ideological standpoint common to boomers upset that the promise of the 1960s did not pan out. He was offended by them as his peers, representing qualities he considered a betrayal in ways that I think most reading this thread cannot sympathize with. Or shouldn't.

For him, Springsteen is RIGHT. So he can be married to Landau's right hand woman, write numerous books about Springsteen, host Springsteen shows on Sirius and thus loudly and often viciously advocate in public and as ostensibly a journalist/writer, a man for whom his household's livelihood depends. This is a conflict of interest any way you shake it. And again, I think any clear reading of his works reveals that everything is personal with this guy.

We need a Rush track-by-track to get over all the Eagles ickyness.

i love rush! or, you know, i did when i was a kid. i don't listen to them too much anymore but when i hear them i like hearing them. maybe an 80's rush listening party. i stopped buying their abums after permanent waves.

"Geddy Lee amends the line "glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity" with a "yeah!" that implies he's celebrating said prizes/compromises, which takes it somewhere far beyond what ol' po-faced Peart probably had in mind when he wrote that line."

There's a tension between the content and the delivery of this line that kinda summarizes Rush for me, for good or for ill.

Why do you say that, Bill?

― pplains, Thursday, September 26, 2013 10:46 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Hard to put my finger on. It's just so damn WIMPY

For him, Springsteen is RIGHT. So he can be married to Landau's right hand woman, write numerous books about Springsteen, host Springsteen shows on Sirius and thus loudly and often viciously advocate in public and as ostensibly a journalist/writer, a man for whom his household's livelihood depends. This is a conflict of interest any way you shake it. And again, I think any clear reading of his works reveals that everything is personal with this guy.

― veronica moser, Thursday, September 26, 2013 11:24 AM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

He wrote two books about Springsteen, both of which were combined to make a third, which added maybe 50 pages or so. So say he wrote three Springsteen books. I wouldn't call that "numerous."

He's also been pretty critical of Bruce (for supporting Kerry/throwing his lot in with the Democrats, for making middling records). Granted, not nearly as critical as someone outside the circle. But the comparison to Crouch/Marsalis doesn't hold for me.

For one thing, Marsalis is awful, Springsteen isn't. That aside, Crouch and Marsalis essentially conspired to define what "jazz" is and, more importantly, what it isn't (Miles electric is worthless, the avant-garde is pointless, and retracing Miles' 1965-66 steps is the only conceivable way forward). For Marsh/Springsteen to be the equivalent of Crouchsalis, they would have mounted huge anti-hip-hop campaigns and taken over all available outlets discussing the music and shutting down debate across the board, and putting forth the idea that Bruce is the only current rocker worth listening to. That didn't happen.

He's never hidden his connections with Bruce, and trusts that most readers will be able to think critically enough to keep things in perspective.

Crouchsalis!

a mythical two-headed beast...

Ha, I wish it was mythical (although I'm actually really looking forward to reading Crouch's Bird bio).

there's a third marsh/springsteen book for whatever that's worth: "bruce springsteen on tour: 1968-2005." and none of them will be remembered in time as the definitive springsteen bio. he has been eclipsed in that.

springsteen autobio a la chronicles would be the best. i really only wanna read stuff from the horse's mouth these days. that's why i loved that tom petty interview book so much. though there is probably a springsteen interview book out there somewhere...

dylan interview book is also great.

http://www.amazon.com/Talk-About-Dream-Interviews-Springsteen/dp/1620400723

and even a new one that came out this year

http://store.kobobooks.com/en-us/books/Title/TKab0nUpAki6EYyPi1MIdQ

Tarfumes, i know you are a Who fan and Marsh did a Who book. I kind of loathe Dave Marsh but i liked the book (maybe because i liked the subject matter). You?

Why do you say that, Bill?

― pplains, Thursday, September 26, 2013 10:46 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Hard to put my finger on. It's just so damn WIMPY

― One Way Ticket on the 1277 Express (Bill Magill), Thursday, September 26, 2013 10:48 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

So you're saying that you can't tell me why?

I love it. I didn't at first, though. I thought his criticisms of Quadrophenia were off the mark, and my initial impression of the post-Moon years was that Marsh lost interest. But when I went back to it, he gave those years exactly as much coverage as was needed (and probably spent more time on that section than Townshend did on writing those 80s Who songs).

It's really kind of an essential chronicle of how the relationship between artist and audience, particularly concert audiences, changed and decayed into the 70s. Marsh puts the Who's career in its proper sociopolitical context(s), and goes on tangents (e.g., Marxist theories of the avant-garde vis-a-vis what constituted "success" in the UK in the 60s), that I can't imagine any other writer tackling in that way (although it helps that the Who are really the only band that lend themselves to that kind of discussion).

xp

So you're saying that you can't tell me why?

― pplains, Thursday, September 26, 2013 12:41 PM (25 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

hahahaha, nice!

Agreed, i liked the book as well, though i cant articulate my thoughts nearly as well as you did in that post.

"This is much better than the replacement bassist's moment in the sun. THat's fucking unlistenable."

That's my second favorite Eagles song!

Scott there is SO much goodness on post permawaves Rush! And they remastered them to sound less digi-thin now.

Some insight into Bill Szymczyk's methods:

http://mixonline.com/recording/tracking/classic-tracks-joe-walsh-lifes-been-good//index.html

the song also needed a sound effect for the line “I go to parties sometimes until four/It's hard to leave when you can't find the door,” which is followed by a perfectly timed door closing, done in real time by Vitale by shutting the door to Bayshore's bathroom, with a U87 placed about three feet away and in a nicely resonant hallway.

Dude was a meticulous motherfucker.

tarfumes will like this. a composer dude came in just now and he was a percussion major at umass and max roach had a master class and he said to everyone in the room: so you're the guys who want to do this for a living? okay, here's your master class: GET A LAWYER.

and that was his master class.

Hahaha wow, that's amazing.

"This is much better than the replacement bassist's moment in the sun. THat's fucking unlistenable."

That's my second favorite Eagles song!

― i believe we can c.h.u.d. all night (Jon Lewis), Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:10 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post PermaliS

Should have said "unlistenable to me". A big hit, so apparently many people disagree with me (wouldnt be the first time)

"He's also been pretty critical of Bruce (for supporting Kerry/throwing his lot in with the Democrats, for making middling records)"

he did? Mr. Tarfumes, can you please point me towards instances of marsh doing these things? I'd really like to see that…

doesn't it seem like Rolling Stone, with no questions asked Springsteen 5 star reviews and covers, is like the JLC? was amused to learn that Crouch, a drummer, got kicked off the bandstand by David Murray or somebody similar during the loft jazz days for not being able to hang, and he was unable to forgive the avant-garde for embarrassing him.

I'd have to look it up, but I do remember reading an interview with Marsh where he called out Bruce for supporting Kerry. He's made his feelings pretty explicit about where he stands politically, and it's obvious that Bruce doesn't stand in the exact same place; Marsh isn't, and hasn't, made excuses for some of Bruce's questionable affiliations. And in The New Book Of Rock Lists Marsh called Lucky Town/Human Touch "the first failures of his career," and he didn't mean sales-wise.

doesn't it seem like Rolling Stone, with no questions asked Springsteen 5 star reviews and covers, is like the JLC?

Marsh hasn't written for Rolling Stone since 1983 (with the exception of a couple of paragraphs about Patti Smith, I think, in the mid-90s for an anniversary issue or something). He did write a couple of glowing Bruce reviews in RS in the 70s and 1980, though. And so what? It's not like he was propping up shitty records just because his buddy made them (as Crouch has made nearly his life's work).

In thinking about this, though, a better comparison might be the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, on whose voting board Marsh sits. But evidently Marsh's influence is limited: the Grateful Dead and the Eagles are in the Hall, and the MC5 aren't.

I think Kiss and Rush are totally great,

Haha, you probably won't like this:

"Kiss is not a great band, Kiss was never a great band, Kiss never will be a great band, and I have done my share to keep them off the ballot." -- Dave Marsh

marsh's heart of rock and soul bk is a great 'dipping into' read, and, pre-interweb etc, introduced me to lots of terrific songs i'd never heard before. he writes v. well abt madonna in it. i don't understand why marsh is wrong to see the eagles as being at least emblematic of the great sixties betrayal, or for suggesting that a lot of the values they incarnate - cocaine misogyny, commerce before art, contempt for their fans - suck.

yeah rrhof vote is like a cross between football and baseball halls of fame. committee determines who is on the ballot then voters decide who actually goes in. that's how you can have rush wait forever and still go in "first ballot".

"Take It To The Limit": Meisner is they only one in the band who could have sung this (and they still do it live? Alf, do you remember who tackled it when you saw them?). Another one that's sonic wallpaper to me. As for Country versions, Waylon & Willie had a hit cover in the '80s; it's not on youtube, so I'll get my Waylon box off the shelf in a minute to review.

Glenn choosing his words carefully for his one-time director:

TAKE IT TO THE LIMIT
GLENN: I just remember being very happy for Randy. We had tried, unsuccessfully, to get a piece of material for him — or from him — that might be a hit single, or turn into one. I don’t think we ever consciously tried to make a hit single. We finally succeeded with “Take It To The Limit.” That’s the first Eagles single to sell a million copies. It was our first gold single, maybe our only gold single. People always tended to buy our albums instead. We still had hit records, but they wouldn’t sell through as 45s much. We had a lot of #1s, but I know that “Take It To The Limit” was our first gold single. And when Randy would sing it in Japan — it was mass hysteria [laughs].

According to Meisner, he has approached the group's people about singing the song with them at LA-area shows. He never got a response.

So I've been missing this. I love "Take It Easy." People who think about the actual lyrics in Eagles songs have only themselves to blame.

Alf, do you remember who tackled it when you saw them?).

I cryptically linked to a YouTube above of Frey singing it.

here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNYBOKDOm9E

Alf, do you remember who tackled it when you saw them?).

pretty sure it was Frey

thank you, tarfumes. I guess he deserves more credit than I've given him.

People who think about the actual lyrics in Eagles songs have only themselves to blame.
I tend to blame the jerkwads who wrote them, not myself. If I could insert my own lyrics a lot of these songs would be much improved, like Take It to the Lemon.

Okay, Roach acquits himself better than I thought he would.

I pulled down the Willie & Waylon version and listened. It's pretty nice. No strings. Willie sings most of it. Waylon takes the middle verse, changing a line to "you can spend all your time making love".