Los Lobos C/D

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Anyone even care?

fletrejet, Friday, 21 February 2003 12:37 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

i dont care but im going to say classic for 'kiko and the lavender moon'

chaki (chaki), Friday, 21 February 2003 13:06 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

They're tight...Little Feat of the '90s. "Colossal Head" is OK and I like the Latin Playboys records.

frank p. jones (frank p. jones), Friday, 21 February 2003 13:44 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Little Feat of the '90s

Little Feat??!!!! Only the '90s??!!!!

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 21 February 2003 14:09 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Little Feat is good?

fletrejet, Friday, 21 February 2003 14:11 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

C'mon now, Los Lobos is pure classic, full stop. I can't think of too many other bands that have the sheer breadth that they do without sounding like a novelty act or something: from traditional conjunto through to blistering rockers, from straight-ahead pop through to murky sonic experimentation. All of the stuff I've heard is great, though maybe I could do without "La Bamba", just from overexposure (in a sense it was the worst thing that could have happened to them....even though it probably gave them wads of cash, it pigeonholed them in the minds of people who had never heard them before, which was very unfortunate).

Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Friday, 21 February 2003 14:42 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I agree with Sean about the breadth of their output (and I'll resist from making a cheap gag about their width). I'd bracket them alongside groups like the Dead and The Band in this respect. And as I said on another thread, for a Mexican-American band, the 'American' part is at least as important as the 'Mexican'.

'How will the wolf survive?', 'By the light of the moon' and 'Kiko' are all excellent (with 'Kiko' the pick), but I've not heard a bad record by them. 'Good Morning Aztlan' is half-decent, and I can recommend the compilation 'Just Another Band from East LA'.

Saw them recently at the Barbican, and they were fine but the audience was embarrassingly subdued. They just got on with it, but they probably didn't kick loose in quite the way they can. Finished with a stonking version of 'My Generation' in memory of John Entwhistle.

James Ball (James Ball), Friday, 21 February 2003 15:25 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

the world may say they agree or disagree with what you say i say the worlds typical view of a perfec t comment is not as the soul decides who we are and how we respond.

claire flynn (miss understood), Friday, 21 February 2003 17:24 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

let ppl decide who they are and so will the world let it decide and we have lost the fight

claire flynn (miss understood), Friday, 21 February 2003 17:27 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I like 'em! Also the Latin Playboys record I have is pretty interesting.

Sean (Sean), Friday, 21 February 2003 18:43 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

yep...the latin playboys stuff and the ll records recorded by froom and blake are pretty cool.

anybody else fond of other mexican american rock from around the time ll started up? isn't it criminal that the only plugz i can find is on the repo man soundtrack?

jq higgins, Friday, 21 February 2003 18:55 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

They're always great live, and they haven't made a bad record. Search "Colossal Head".

dan (dan), Friday, 21 February 2003 18:57 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Yeah, and one of 'em voiced the Taco Bell dog singing "Chances Are."

I swear that this is not a joke.

(Classic, btw--the band, not the dog).

J (Jay), Friday, 21 February 2003 20:48 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

i have a very soft spot for "how will the wolf survive".

gygax! (gygax!), Friday, 21 February 2003 21:35 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Last album wasn't bad either.

Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Saturday, 22 February 2003 02:22 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I saw them live about a month ago and they were fantastic. The Neighborhood and Kiko are great albums, but unlike some previous posters, I did not like Colossal Head at all.

Mark M, Saturday, 22 February 2003 03:43 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

whats the song they did that won an MTV award back in '96 or thereabouts? video was a bit like Moby's 'Go' video - all little people doing weird dances or something?!

stevem (blueski), Saturday, 22 February 2003 03:49 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Slightly related topic: Did they ever find out the whole story behind David Hidalgo's wife's murder?

paul cox (paul cox), Saturday, 22 February 2003 03:52 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

you mean Cesar Rosas' wife

gabbneb (gabbneb), Saturday, 22 February 2003 07:41 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

The song Little Japan, off of Colossal Head, is fantastic. Yuka Honda plays on it, i believe.

as a band, Classic.

derrick (derrick), Saturday, 22 February 2003 08:05 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Oh, yeah. Cesar Rosas.

paul cox (paul cox), Saturday, 22 February 2003 17:33 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

three years pass...
I care and I declare that the new one, "The Town and the City," is pretty kickass and weird and atmospheric. I'm on a 'rediscover Los Lobos' kick right now and I think they're due for recognition as one of the Great American Bands.

Haikunym (Haikunym), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 15:51 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Classic for breaking Krusty's fall and dying.

a.b. (alanbanana), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 16:21 (eleven years ago) Permalink

ha, i just saw vinyl copies of *how will the wolf survive* and the *and a time to dance* (or whatever it was called) EP, the only two records i ever cared about by this band, for $2 each in manhattan yesterday, and i almost bought them then decided not to, though maybe i should've. i never understood their '90s art-rockish stuff -- seemed to me like they wanted to be caifanes maybe, but weren't anywhere near good enough. maybe someday i'll relisten to it, though.

xhuxk (xheddy), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 16:28 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Chxxx, is there ANY Spanish-language rock that you cannot compare disparagingly with Caifanes?

Haikunym (Haikunym), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 16:37 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Latin Playboys stuff is better, but still - classic!

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 16:38 (eleven years ago) Permalink

As a live band they've caught the festival jam disease and the last guest star plagued album was pretty far from classic. I'm hoping the new album is more garagy than artsy.

Roy Kasten (Roy Kasten), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 16:50 (eleven years ago) Permalink

xp to Haiku:

Of course, tons of it. And I LIKE tons of it, especially in the early-to-mid '90s, when Los Lobos were supposedly at their peak of weirdness. But compared to Maldita Vecindad, Fobia, Santa Sabina, Aterciopelados, Los Fabulosos Cadillacs, La Castanenada, La Derecha, Heroes Del Silencio -- TONS of bands at that time -- Los Lobos's supposed weirdness just sounded really timid to me. And thin, too - they didn't rock as hard, they had less dance in their music, their prog beauty seemed way more amorphous. (What Caifanes was doing though, seemed more what Los Lobos and Latin Playboys too were *shooting* for, whether they'd actually heard Caifanes at the time or not. And they probably had, since Caifanes, in Mexico, where HUGE. But Los Lobos weren't even the most interesting Latin-rock band in the USA, actually -- I'd take Pastilla or Maria Fatal over them.) (As for their earlier stuff, I'd compare them to the Blasters, but not as good, with more emphasis on the Tex-Mex element that the Blasters had, though the Blasters did it first, in songs like "Border Radio," as I recall. But neither of them did it as much fun as Sam the Sham and the Pharoahs.) My main question while looking at that EP and LP yesterday was "damn, these guys were a bunch of cornballs. But I liked these records okay, once, so maybe I shouldn't mind." And I probably wouldn't have. Just didn't feel like carrying them around. (And again, maybe I WAS underrating their '90s stuff at the time; it's possible -- I'm just telling you how that hit my ears then. And for whatever it's worth, I actually DID buy a CD copy of *La Pista Y La Corazon* at the Virgin megastore last week, believe it or not -- but not for me; as a birthday present for somebody. It was the first Los Lobos album I bought in decades!)

xhuxk (xheddy), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 16:52 (eleven years ago) Permalink

I totally don't get "the cornballs" thing, and The Blasters weren't doing Tex-Mex before Los Lobos. Los Lobos had been playing together since the early '70s and their first album was 1978.

Roy Kasten (Roy Kasten), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 17:28 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Well, okay then Chucx. (Boy, ask an idle question...) But it seems to me that comparing Los Lobos, one of the most American bands of all time, to Mexican or South American bands is pretty misleading. And it's not like Kiko and Colossal Head were really any kind of weird avant-garde statement or anything, just the same sorts of grooves with a bit of Tom Waits and psychedelia layered on top. They were allowed to do that, it's a free country. I've got Kiko on right now, and it sounds pretty and fun, like my wife in a summer dress. And no one can say that they aren't great lyricists, although I know that lyrics are overrated and stupid and rockist and boring.

I might be wrong; as I said, I'm re-investigating it all, as I was kind of out of their loop, or they were out of mine. But I'm loving every possibly-cornball second of everything I hear, even The Ride, which Roy underestimates above. And Roy, the new one alternates between atmospheric stuff and more boogie-ish stuff, cumbia rock b/w floaty/growly things.

Haikunym (Haikunym), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 18:10 (eleven years ago) Permalink

funny that this thread should revive, since just yesterday i heard their song "how will the wolf survive?" -- damn if they weren't tight back then!

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 18:17 (eleven years ago) Permalink

>The Blasters weren't doing Tex-Mex before Los Lobos. Los Lobos had been playing together since the early '70s and their first album was 1978.<

Yeah, good point. I always forget all the local stuff Los Lobos was doing before their first national EP (not to mention the rockabilly-label Blasters LP before *their* first national LP). But wasn't Los Lobos's earlier stuff extremely folkloric, mainly devoid of the more eclectic, and well, I hate to say modernized but I will anyway, country/r&b/soul/rock/etc hybrid they eventually hit with, a hybrid I'm *pretty* sure the Blasters uncovered first? That's certainly the impression I always got, though I could be wrong. Either way, as far as I can tell, the Blasters did it *better* -- better (as in more specific, less obtuse) songwriting, better (as in more beautiful) singing, more push. And even at that, I don't much care about the Blasters (or the Alvins solo) after *Nonfiction* or so, either. (And honestly, Los Lobos's lyrics never really did all that much for me.)

>it's not like Kiko and Colossal Head were really any kind of weird avant-garde statement or anything, just the same sorts of grooves with a bit of Tom Waits and psychedelia layered on top. They were allowed to do that, it's a free country<

Who said they weren't? But yeah, maybe it was the Tom Waits part that stood in my way. Tom Waits parts do tend to do that to me. (And given that Tom ranks with history's all-time cornballs, and given that NPR-style "roots-rock", which usually tends not to have very much rock in it, is kinda cornball by definition, there you go.)

xhuxk (xheddy), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 18:27 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Of course, maybe I just never NOTICED what amazing songwriters Los Lobos were. That's certainly possible, and it's been a while since I tried to find out. But back then, I was always stumped by the claim.

xhuxk (xheddy), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 18:31 (eleven years ago) Permalink

well I favor 'em that way, but that might be kind of AAA radio of me

Haikunym (Haikunym), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 18:33 (eleven years ago) Permalink

I'm into lots of cornballs, of course, but

CLASSIC

gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 18:35 (eleven years ago) Permalink

The new Town and City is crap, even though Tchad Blake is producing it. My heart weeps. I love Los Lobos but they've totally coasted the last few albums--there's no energy with the Blake productions, so if you don't have really wicked arrangements and awesome hooks, it's just flatlined. Come back Mitchell! All is forgiven!

Jubalique (Jubalique), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 18:44 (eleven years ago) Permalink

haha - I like Mitchell but his finest moment is "Cafe Flesh"!

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 18:58 (eleven years ago) Permalink

I've heard of this legendary Cafe Flesh. I needs to find it. Needs to! In the meantime, I shall resign myself to Valley of the Dolls.

Jubalique (Jubalique), Wednesday, 12 July 2006 20:13 (eleven years ago) Permalink

The 1980's Los Lobos that was a Tex-Mex rockabilly/R&B band - CLASSIC.

The 2000's Los Lobos that is a Tex-Mex jam band - DUD.

I'm only familiar with the 1990's avant-garde Lobos in passing, so I can't comment (even though I love the Latin Playboys). But when a review copy of the GOOD MORNING (MAZATLAN?) album came my way around 2002 or so, I was shocked at how hippiefied they'd become.

For some reason, the vinyl of HOW WILL THE WOLF SURVIVE? is so common that if you pay more than $3 for it, you've been had. It's probably the best $3-or-less album you can get for the money.

Rev. Hoodoo (Rev. Hoodoo), Thursday, 13 July 2006 03:45 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Addendum: like I said, I still liked Los Lobos in the '90s, but hadn't kept up with them like I once had. So when that jam-band GOOD MORNING VIETNAM album (or whatever the hell that was called) turned up, I was wondering HOW did they get that way and WHEN did the transformation take place? Ah well.

Rev. Hoodoo (Rev. Hoodoo), Thursday, 13 July 2006 03:47 (eleven years ago) Permalink

a. Texas is not California.
b. I just listened to Good Morning Aztlan two days ago and it contains tight pop songs with solos but without any real "jamming." Maybe you don't like the songs, and yeah they might be kind of hippified sometimes (they have played with Jerry Garcia), but that record didn't sound anything like jam-band stuff to me.
c. Are you sure you're not thinking about Los Lonely Boys?

Haikunym (Haikunym), Thursday, 13 July 2006 12:46 (eleven years ago) Permalink

HAIKUNYM: You can split hairs all you want to, but the point is that they're not doing the same rootsy rockabilly/R&B thing that they used to 20 years ago. They have every right to do their hippy-dippy thing, but that doesn't mean I gotta like it. And I don't.

And GOOD MORNING SACRAMENTO (or whatever the hell that was called) may as well be an avant-garde Los Lonely Boys. I'm sticking with HOW WILL THE WOLF SURVIVE and BY THE LIGHT OF THE MOON.

Rev. Hoodoo (Rev. Hoodoo), Friday, 14 July 2006 04:02 (eleven years ago) Permalink

and YOU can capitalize ANYTHING you WANT to and get the ALBUM TITLE WRONG as many TIMES as you think NECESSARY to make your POINT, provided you HAVE one, and I ALREADY SAID 'maybe you dont' like the songs' so I guess I ALREADY KNOW what you're saying, and what you're saying is OH THEY WERE BETTER IN THE OLDEN TIMES SO I DON'T HAVE TO CARE ANYMORE TRA LA LA.

WHICH, as I've said before, IS FINE. Because those albums rocked too. But they always still do rocking tracks on all their records. Yes, including on Good Morning AZTLAN.

Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 14 July 2006 04:34 (eleven years ago) Permalink

a) I capitalize not because I'm yellin' at you, but because I don't see how I can make italics on this damn site! I know you just did, but as of yet I haven't unlocked that secret! So until I do, I AM GONNA CAPITALIZE MY NEKKID ASS OFF - TRA LA LA LA LA LA...

b) So they still do rocking tracks, huh? Rock as in "classic rock," or rock as in greasy, pre-psychedelic, ROCK & ROLL like they used to do in the punk clubs back in the 80s? 'Cause for the one minute I owned GOOD EVENING MASHMAHKAN (sold it long ago), I only remember hearing rock of the posthippie "classic rock" variety. I would have bought an El Chicano album if that's what I wanted.

Now you may be right - remember, I sold that joker because none of it sounded good to me. So even if they rocked and rolled like on the Slash albums, evidently it didn't make an impression.

Rev. Hoodoo (Rev. Hoodoo), Friday, 14 July 2006 12:33 (eleven years ago) Permalink

i was hoping the video for 'Kiko & The Lavender Moon' would be on youtube. but no joy. :(

Konal Doddz (blueski), Friday, 14 July 2006 12:34 (eleven years ago) Permalink

i've not checked Launch or other places for it mind you.

Konal Doddz (blueski), Friday, 14 July 2006 12:50 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Classic, but I do think they've relied a little too much on jam band tropes (and fans) as of late. Also, I could have sworn Froom and/or Blake haven't really been on board for the last couple of albums. I know John Leckie did one.

(P.S. Froom's "Cafe Flesh" soundtrack - "The Key of Cool" - is pretty dull.)

Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 14 July 2006 13:02 (eleven years ago) Permalink

it works well with the movie.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 14 July 2006 14:54 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Alright, so I got Colossal Head. Thoughts?

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 17 July 2006 20:55 (eleven years ago) Permalink

It's the Los Lobos version of a Latin Playboys record. Not inspired like their 80s stuff but a very solid album that manages to rock (but so much with the roll) a lot for its tired vibe, and I love the late-nite-jamming tracks (Life is Good, Buddy Ebsen Loves the Nighttime).

gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 17 July 2006 21:13 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Life is Good is more afternoon backyard barbecue, I guess. Maybe it's the progress of a day into night.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 17 July 2006 21:15 (eleven years ago) Permalink

(the album, that is)

gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 17 July 2006 21:15 (eleven years ago) Permalink

it's we're-older-and-a-little-ragged-but-we-can-still-get-it-up

gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 17 July 2006 21:21 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Alfred--

I lump This Time and Colossal Head together--both are post-Kiko, very "deconstructed," rough, loopy, and seems to trade the delicate production and melodicism that preceded them for a rougher style, both in production and in songwriting. More droneys, blues progressions, found-soundy effects, and lots of distortion. I liked Life Is Good because I can clap to it, and I liked "Buddy Ebsen Loves The Night Time" because it reminds me of sleepytime. That said, it was pretty disconcerting if you listened to The Neighborhood, which I loved for the AOR/folky pop songs, and Kiko, for its balance of that songwriting with a little more weirdness, and then turned on Colossal Head. Still neat for a major label album for me.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, LL seems to sway with the adventurousness of their producers--and this is the period when Froom/Blake started moving more and more towards experimenting beyond the polite edge of adult-alternative pop music, and they took a lot from Latin Playboys back to LL. After these two albums, LL went in search of new producers, with some middling results. Now this new one is with Tchad Blake sans Froom. And I don't like it so much.

Don't know if this at all answers your post. I suppose the other respnose could be, what do you think about it?

Jubalique (Jubalique), Tuesday, 18 July 2006 11:54 (eleven years ago) Permalink

three weeks pass...
Finally got around to buying those used copies of ...And a Time To Dance and How Will the Wolf Survive? for $1 each today. My verdict: pretty good. Not as exciting (singing wise, song wise, energy wise, rhythm wise) as the Freddie Fender or Joe "King" Carrasco (not to mention Blasters) LPs on my shelves, but I was definitely silly to get rid of my old copies when I did. The idea that they're considered great songwriters (at least here -- I'm pretty sure they already had a rep along those lines by the time of Wolf) completely stumps me; the lyrics strike me as pretty pro forma. Though oddly, the tracks that most tend to jump out at me are the faster polkas in Spanish, which might even seem less distinctive if I knew more East LA norteno-or-whatever bands; when they try to be meaningful (like in the title cut of Wolf), I start wincing, partly because their lyrics don't seem to have any of the specifics you get, say, in "Bus Station" or "Boomtown" on the Blasters' Non Fiction. Also, this is blasphemy, but I think I kind of hate Hidalgo's voice; it just floats somewhere out there and never connects. (I think that's Hidalgo not Rosas; correct me if I'm wrong.) But maybe more listening will change my mind about all this. Either way, there is really something wishy-washy in Wolf's sound; critics thought these guys made better "roots rock" than John Cougar at the time?? Sorry, that's absolutely nuts.

xhuxk (xheddy), Thursday, 10 August 2006 00:52 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Hidalgo reminds me of...Stevie Winwood, esp. on that first Latin Playboys record. Cesar Rosas is the bluesier one, Chuck, and his solo record from '99 has a real good version of Ike Turner's "You Got to Lose."

I myself only like them after "Kiko." "Kiko" is a bit diffuse for my tastes. for me, "Colossal Head" is far and away their best record, actually big-hearted and political, song structures actually ingenious, playing up but relaxed, plus their best-ever songtitle, "Buddy Ebsen Loves the Nighttime." Having seen them live a couple times, I think they're a tad overrated, but not much, and their whole shtick comes from Steve Berlin, my friends who know some of the band tell me. Anyway, I'll leave discussions of Cougar vs. The Wolf to others, but as usual Chuck makes an interesting point. To my ears, they are indeed the Little Feat of the (fill in the era). I think their specifics are far more in touch with the "world" than Lowell George or Bill Payne goin' on about Rock and Roll Doctors and their whole white-negro-funkateer thing they got into, but I get some bad wishy-washy vibes from "Kiko" that make the undeniable virtues of the *music* seem not so undeniable But I think the Latin Playboys are great, and I even have a live boot of them that's pretty amazing, with great sound. And it occurs to me that Calexico's stuff owes an awful lot to the Playboys, only it's not as good.

edd s hurt (ddduncan), Thursday, 10 August 2006 18:14 (eleven years ago) Permalink

I finally got Colossal Head a couple of weeks ago: I'm unimpressed by their Tom Waits imitations.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 10 August 2006 18:18 (eleven years ago) Permalink

if you want songwriting/Hidalgo vox, get By the Light of the Moon. if you want the best overall evidence of their greatness, get one of the collections.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 10 August 2006 18:58 (eleven years ago) Permalink

something wishy-washy in Wolf's sound; critics thought these guys made better "roots rock" than John Cougar at the time?? Sorry, that's absolutely nuts.

Maybe John Cougar's band didn't have enought Telecasters or something.

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 10 August 2006 19:02 (eleven years ago) Permalink

"enought" - that means they had naught one Telecaster

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 10 August 2006 19:02 (eleven years ago) Permalink

that's interesting, Tom Waits imitations. I don't hear it that way but I see where you get it, Alfred. I mean they seem to me to be actually masters of some kind of form where Waits, to my ears, is cut-rate primitivism of the most annoying kind. ( I like him, he's usually funny in interviews, but for fuck's sake, quit thinking you're getting down with the blues or whatever just because you sing through a megaphone and you've been down, in your mind, to Harry Parchman's Farm. You were better off being a cut-rate Randy Newman dozing at your piano. ) I mean it's arguable all those kind of performers, from Lobos to Waits, are hung up on some misguided idea of "American" and "roots" and "poignance" and that hobo-ism that even Beefheart often proved himself tedious and fake about, when they could just as soon be thinking of themselves as another pop band...from L.A. ....

edd s hurt (ddduncan), Thursday, 10 August 2006 20:27 (eleven years ago) Permalink

some misguided idea of "American" and "roots" and "poignance" and that hobo-ism that even Beefheart often proved himself tedious and fake about

Often? I would say maybe temporarily (around Spotlight Kid, Clear Spot).

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 10 August 2006 22:29 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Oh, Beefheart--I mean I love that shit as music but less these days as expression of untrammeled American vigor...all that. I mean in the words themselves, which of course are *often* if not temporarily great. But yeah, I suppose Tim I do mean when he went Ted Templeman on those two records (altho I love "Clear Spot" and think that's a pointer toward what he could've done had he not been planning to turn into someone that Tom Waits would later rip off); also, plenty of "Trout Mask" is kinda like that, the beat-gen boho shit he did later like "Hey Garland, I Dig Your Tweed" also toes the line in my book. But shit, that music is so tensile and so dense that my objections are really minor. And Lobos and Calexico, too, certainly have their tensile moments but overall, it's often a bit weak, as on the otherwise wonderful (Ellingtonian horn arr.) "Kiko and the Lavender Moon." Lavender moon.

edd s hurt (ddduncan), Friday, 11 August 2006 00:00 (eleven years ago) Permalink

Colossal Head sounds like a below-average Tom Ze record.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Friday, 11 August 2006 00:07 (eleven years ago) Permalink

eleven months pass...

i was hoping the video for 'Kiko & The Lavender Moon' would be on youtube. but no joy. :(

-- Konal Doddz (blueski), Friday, 14 July 2006 12:34

is is now :)

blueski, Tuesday, 24 July 2007 13:57 (ten years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

REVIVE!

lukevalentine, Monday, 7 December 2009 20:17 (seven years ago) Permalink

I would like to commend David Hidalgo's work on the smash hit single of the year, "Must Be Santa"

lukevalentine, Monday, 7 December 2009 20:19 (seven years ago) Permalink

eight months pass...

I think the new Los Lobos album is a total peach! liking Los Lobos is an accomplishment for me, since years of SoCal operant conditioning made it difficult for me not to say "shut up Robert Hilburn" every time the subject of Los Lobos came up

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Saturday, 14 August 2010 15:00 (seven years ago) Permalink

shut up Robert Hilburn

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Saturday, 14 August 2010 15:00 (seven years ago) Permalink

Is this a return to their roots move?

curmudgeon, Saturday, 14 August 2010 17:24 (seven years ago) Permalink

i looked online but couldn't find out who produced tin can trust. if they've dropped Froom i'm more excited about this

....some kind of psychedelic wallflower (outdoor_miner), Saturday, 14 August 2010 17:48 (seven years ago) Permalink

Producer is just listed as Los Lobos here: http://music.barnesandnoble.com/Tin-Can-Trust/Los-Lobos/e/826663121100/?itm=2&USRI=los+lobos

_Rudipherous_, Saturday, 14 August 2010 17:52 (seven years ago) Permalink

I hate it when bands take a production credit - the engineer on this record is John Macy.

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Saturday, 14 August 2010 17:59 (seven years ago) Permalink

I heard at a barnesandnoble yesterday, and I recognized the Grateful Dead cover, the Clapton/Winwood vocals, the Spanish language song, and correctly guessed Los Lobos. It was good though, and the best thing barnesandnobles was playing.

it made sense when i did it (Zachary Taylor), Sunday, 15 August 2010 02:44 (seven years ago) Permalink

listened to the samples of this on Amazon .. wow, it sounds fantastic. will definitely pick this up

Stormy Davis, Sunday, 15 August 2010 02:53 (seven years ago) Permalink

Has anybody heard the Hildago/Rosas CD?

banjoboy, Sunday, 15 August 2010 05:14 (seven years ago) Permalink

Um, sorry...it's Hidalgo.

banjoboy, Sunday, 15 August 2010 05:15 (seven years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

Colossal Head rules. One of the best albums of the 90s.

brimstead, Saturday, 23 February 2013 03:10 (four years ago) Permalink

if yous need some hip cliches, the second half of it is like portishead remixing Peter green era fleetwood Mac

brimstead, Saturday, 23 February 2013 03:12 (four years ago) Permalink

one year passes...

C

brimstead, Thursday, 24 April 2014 04:54 (three years ago) Permalink

invoking robert hilburn is not a good thing, ugh what a filthy sausage

brimstead, Thursday, 24 April 2014 05:06 (three years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

underrated

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 14 March 2017 18:06 (eight months ago) Permalink

I mean even this dopey Disney songs album is p great

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 14 March 2017 18:11 (eight months ago) Permalink

yeah Hildago's take on that Toy Story song.. "I Will Go Sailing No More" is just gorgeous

kurt schwitterz, Tuesday, 14 March 2017 18:18 (eight months ago) Permalink

Hildago and Rojas became friends over a mutual love of Randy Newman records in the early 70s, so kind of a full circle thing.

kurt schwitterz, Tuesday, 14 March 2017 18:19 (eight months ago) Permalink

So underrated. Like I've said before, it's like somebody flipped a switch and they were suddenly not cool, despite a relative lack of drop off.

The more you know: supposedly they are notorious at local clubs for drinking at the bar dry at the end of the night.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 14 March 2017 19:09 (eight months ago) Permalink

Ugh, drinking the bar dry at the end of the night.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 14 March 2017 19:10 (eight months ago) Permalink

feel like Rojas' blues dad schtick has taken them into "uncool" territory

kurt schwitterz, Tuesday, 14 March 2017 19:25 (eight months ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.