Site indices

Previous Issue <-> Next Issue


Errors-To: rush-request@syrinx.umd.edu
Reply-To: rush@syrinx.umd.edu
Sender: rush@syrinx.umd.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: rush@syrinx.umd.edu
To: rush_mailing_list
Subject: 01/08/91 - The National Midnight Star #145  ** Special Edition **

**   ____     __           ___ ____   ___        ___       **
**    /  /_/ /_     /\  / /__/  /  / /  / /\  / /__/ /     **
**   /  / / /__    /  \/ /  /  /  / /__/ /  \/ /  / /___   **
**                                                         **
**                    __            ___       ____         **
**        /\  /\   / /  \  /\  / / /  _  /__/  /           **
**       /  \/  \ / /___/ /  \/ / /___/ /  /  /            **
**                                                         **
**                  ____ ____  ___  ___                    **
**                 /__    /   /__/ /__/                    **
**                ____/  /   /  / /  \                     **


          The National Midnight Star, Number 145

                 Tuesday, 8 January 1991
Today's Topics:
           Neil Interview - Modern Drummer 5/87
           Neil Interview - Modern Drummer 10/87
           Neil Interview - Modern Drummer 8/88
---------------------------------------------------------

Here are three Modern Drummer articles sent in by the' West Coast
Connection'.  Thanks again to Meg for the transcription!

rush-mgr

---------------------------------------------------------

From: mjahnke%sdcc13@ucsd.edu (******* Meg *********)
Subject: Neil Interview - Modern Drummer 5/87

_Modern Drummer_ - May 1987

[included the single "Pieces of Eight"]

"The Quest For New Drums"
   by Neil Peart

    Early in 1986, I started to think that it was time for a new drumkit.
My red Tamas had been through four or five serious tours, and had been used
in the recording of _Signals_, _Grace Under Pressure_, and _Power Windows_.
They still sounded and looked great, but were getting a little tired, and
besides, every four or five years I just like a change -- perhaps a
different sound and look.

    But how to choose? Well, I think people usually buy what they've been
satisfied with before, or they buy something that someone else sounds good
playing. That's okay, I suppose, but this time I wanted to make absolutely
sure that I was choosing the best-sounding drums available (or at least,
the best sounding to me).

    So I spoke to Neal Graham at the Percussion Center in Fort Wayne, and
we arranged to have no less than six identically sized kits with the same
heads brought together in the same room, so that I could do an objective
"road test" of each one. We tried to pick the most resonant shells from
each of the makers in which I was interested. There was a set of Tama
Artstars, a set of Premier Resonators, a set of Yamaha Tour series, the new
Ludwig Super Classics, a set of Sonors, and a set of Tempus fiberglass
drums from Canada -- what I felt would be the best drums from six countries
and three continents. (Although I would certainly have included Gretsch in
this category, I already have a small Gretsch practice kit at home, so I
know they probably sound a bit warmer than I was looking for -- plus the
company proved surprisingly uncooperative in regard to this test.)

    I enjoyed the long drive down to Forst Wayne from Toronto with my wife
Jackie, cruising through the heartland in spring. It was lovely winding
along the Maumee River in a good car, thinking thoughts of spring -- and of
having all those drums to play with.

    But before that, I had to survive the ordeal of my first serious drum
seminar(!). I had promised Neal Graham for years now that someday I would
do my first real clinic for him, though the idea of speaking in front of a
crowd seemed a lot more intimidating than just playing drums. But there
would never be a better opportunity than this, and sometimes I like to do
things that scare me! Fortunately, it went pretty well, and I felt good
about having "survived" the experience.

    The next day, we went out to Larry Yager's farmhouse, and I spent the
whole day tuning and comparing the different kits, trying to be as
objective and careful as I could. I took a walk outside once in a while to
give my ears a break, as darkening skies, strengthening winds, sporadic
raindrops, and weather warnings threatened my first tornado! I've always
wanted to see one...I think!

    But I do love to see nature in dramatic action like that, and it was
nice to walk outside and be whipped by the wind for a few minutes. Refreshed
and energized by these natural forces, I bravely returned indoors, and
tuned and compared some more.

    Playing the kits side by side, and sometimes two simultaneously, I was
trying to detect the subtle differences between them. Of course, all of
these are great-sounding drums; any difference I would find would have to
be so subtle that only the most careful evaluation could detect it. In
fact, I would have been happy to record or tour with any of these drums, but
I was looking for something special -- that extra bit of tonality and
"snap."

    While I was shopping for snap, Larry was shopping for hardware,
comparing the different "shiny bits" for durability, practicality, and good
design. We settled on mainly Premier stands, with a few bits and pieces
from Tama and Pearl.

    It was interesting that the 9x13 tom seemed to be the "acid test" for
tom sounds. In each of the kits, the 8x12 and 16x16 toms were "much of a
muchness," but there were subtle differences in that 9x13 that really told
the tale. It seems to be a critical size.

    I also checked out a few snare drums, and was particularly impressed by
the new Pearl model with the interchangeable shells. Nice idea! But I'm
afraid nothing has taken the place of the old Slingerland yet; it's still
number one.

    Another interesting discovery was that the Premier Resonators were
anything but resonant! We received permission from the company to remove
the inner shells, and then they sounded quite good -- rather comparable to
the Yamahas and Sonors in having a warm, very "controllable" sound. I'm
sure any of these would make very good studio drums, for getting a good
sound with a minimum of fuss.

    But I was looking for something a little edgier, a little more exciting
-- something that needed a careful tuning and playing approach to bring it
alive. And I found it, too, in the Ludwigs. The results were surprising, as
I must admit Ludwig had been a kind of "dark horse" contender to me. In
fact, it was a very near thing between them and the Tamas. I had to take
another walk outside, and then compare them again to be sure. (Disappoint-
ingly, but perhaps fortunately after all, the tornado failed to appear!)

    But there is was: the response, the tonality -- the overall excitement
of the Ludwig sound was just fractionally better. So...I ordered a set!

    We were to start working on nw material in the fall, and I really
wanted to update my electronic outfit as well. I had been watching the
progress of digital sampling units for a couple of years, and felt that the
time was right to explore that. I spoke with the band's "technological
mentor," Jim Burgess, told him what I was after, and he recommended that
Akai unit, with a Yamaha MIDI controller. I decided to stay with the latest
Simmons pads, as I like the feel of them.

    The sounds are digitally stored on those little 3 1/2" computer disks,
and once you put them into the Akai's RAM memory, you can edit and change
them at will without affecting the original sample. Assigning them to
different pads is a simple affair, and you can copy from the RAM to a new
disk to create new setups and safety copies. With the Yamaha MIDI
controller, you can create "chains," which allow you to change programs
with the flick of a footswitch. For example, in one of the new songs on
which we're working as I write, I play an African drum setup for the
verses, and then "click" to a setup of my acoustic Tama drums, sampled from
"Grand Designs", for the choruses. Fantastic! I love it!

    I have mentioned before in MD's pages that I do not have a natural
empathy with technological things -- they often give me a headache -- but
at the same time I had to get into this, because, in the simplest terms, it
does what I want! I have an insatiable hunger for new percussion sounds,
but there is just no room in my existing setup for any more drums! This
way, I can have access to every percussion sound ever played (and some
beyond), and still be able to reach them all!

    I spent some time with Jim assembling a library of disks: all kinds of
ethnic percussion, acoustic drum samples from our _Power Windows_ album
paint cans, big sheets of metal, industrial sounds, pipes being struck --
you name it! The possibilities are absolutely infinite.

    One more decision that had to be made was whether or not to have the
Vibrafibing applied to the inner shells. My last three kits had been
treated by the Percussion Center with this thin layer of fiberglass, which
is meant to even out the tonality. In keeping with my policy this time of
taking nothing for granted, I asked them to do a sample 9x13 Ludwig tom to
compare with an untreated one. Once again, it was a painstaking decision; I
even took them into "Le Studio" to listen to, since I was in Quebec at the
time. I found them to be a little sharper with the Vibrafibing, and the
tonality was a little more focused.

    Making a decision on the finish was equally difficult. As much as I
loved the Candy Apple Red finish of my Tamas, I just couldn't have the same
color again! Neal and I discussed a few possibilities, and he did me up a
sample with a mix consisting of an opalescent white base, with just a hint
of pink in it, and a few metallic flecks to highlight the opalescence.
(More goodies from the "hot rod" finishes book!) I stayed with the brass
plating on the hardware -- because I couldn't think of anything nicer!

    Another thing I have been seeking for quite a while is a keyboard
percussion synthesizer. I had been playing a marimba quite a lot and really
wanted some kind of more portable instrument to use live and (hopefully) in
the studio. Once again, Jim did some research and came up with a unit made
by the KAT company in Massachusetts.

    It is available in modules of one octave and up, and basically consists
of a set of soft rubber pads laid out as a keyboard. I decided on a three-
octave range, and since the KAT is also a programmable MIDI controller,
compatible with the Akai unit, I started collecting samples of marimbas,
vibes, tubular bells, glockenspiel, tuned African percussion, harp
arpeggios -- again, you name it!

    Like many percussionists, I had long harbored a secret wish to create a
piece of music using only percussion instruments, and this looked like the
key to that dream! I practiced with the KAT for a few days and then, when I
had a free day, recorded a "demo" of a marimba piece I had been working on
over the summer.

    I began with the marimba part, double-tracked it, and then overdubbed
my acoustic drums on top (yes, the new Ludwigs!). I began experimenting
with overdubbing different vibe sounds, a bass marimba, a cabasa,
castanets, concert toms, metal sheets, African toms, and some highly tuned
bongos. (All of this was played with mallets on the KAT unit.) I did use
one of Geddy's keyboard sounds, but since it consisted of a marimba with a
human voice mixed in, I decided that was close enough!

    The biggest difficulty was finding a good bass instrument in the
percussion library. The bass marimba didn't provide the power in the bottom
end that I was looking for, so we experimented with some other things. We
ended up using an African drum called a Djembe -- transposed to the
keyboard -- and I played the bass part with that! It made me laugh -- a new
definition of "bass drum"!

    The piece is entitled "Pieces Of Eight" because of all the different
time signatures it ended up meandering through. I hadn't thought about that
too much just playing the marimba, until I had to learn it on drums! With
only a day to record it all, I didn't really have time to play it more than
a couple of times through, so that, too, was a good challenge.

    I find it interesting as a drummer to work with a melodic instrument
and think melody as well as rhythm. You can really get into some wild
areas! In a way, I wish I hadn't been so obsessed with drums alone in the
beginning and had acquired more knowledge of music theory. But I suppose in
this day and age you do have to specialize!

    Now, if I only had about two weeks in the studio to work on this
thing...

    So I've got my new drumkit. Am I happy now? Well, yeah! Here I've
managed to hang on to the best of both worlds: an exciting-sounding
acoustic set and an incredibly versatile and "user-friendly" electronic
set. Who could ask for more?
    Well, how about "Pieces Of Eight" becoming a hit single? Ha-ha!

CREDITS

Recorded and mixed at Elora Sound Studios
Engineered by Jon Erickson
Technical Assistance by Jim Burgess, Larry Allen, and Tony Geranios
Copyright 1987 by Neil Peart

----------------------------------------------------------

From: mjahnke%sdcc13@ucsd.edu (******* Meg *********)
Subject: Neil Interview - Modern Drummer 10/87

_Modern Drummer_ - October 1987

Neil Peart Drum Giveaway Results
"Here's To The Winners"
   by Neil Peart

    Well, I have to tell you, this has been a very interesting and
rewarding contest! 1,767 entries -- from places as far off as Zimbabwe and
Finland -- came flowing into the offices of Modern Drummer. They
represented many different styles and approaches. One of the more unusual
entries was sent in by a female drummer with a minimalist credo: The whole
tape contained just a single tom beat. Boom. She should have know I am not
one of those who believe that "less is more"!

    The first time around, each of the tapes was listened to by the
individual editors of MD. Once the entrants were narrowed down to about
150, these were listened to by a panel consisting of Ron Spagnardi, Editor/
Publisher, Rick Mattingly, Senior Editor, Rick Van Horn, Managing Editor,
and Bill Miller, Associate Editor. Together they scored each one and then
sent on the hightest-scoring 46 to me.

    Then my part of it began! I sat down with my Walkman and played each one
of the tapes, making notes as I listened. Also, I was careful not to listen
to more than 10 or 12 at a sitting, so I wouldn't get burned out or
overlook anything. I just closed my eyes and listened hard, and then I
wrote down what I liked and didn't like about the performance. When I was
particularly impressed by one, I put a big "star" beside the name.

    After I'd listened through once to each of them, I went through my
notes, choosing the "starred" ones for reevaluation, and checking to see if
any of my written comments on others seemed to merit a second listening.
After this, I was left with a lucky 13 semifinalists.

    I have to say that I was very impressed with the overall quality of
these 46 performances. In the little paragraphs that I wrote about each
tape, almost every drummer got a good review. (You won't find that out in
the real world!) All of these players had very good technique, very musical
sounding drums, and there was plenty of imagination and excitement. There
is no question in my mind that there are a lot of very good drummers out
there.

    The question might be raised: What did I judge them on? I must admit
the criteria were necessarily pretty subjective. Of course, I was aware of
technique and ability as I listened, but what moved me and the other
judges, too, I'm sure, were more subtle qualities of imagination, rhythmic
feel, and arrangement. I listened through those 13 tapes once more, this
time a little more critically, and once again made notes as I listened,
this time a little more analytically. That got me down to four finalists --
and now the judging got really tough. I listened to those last four again
and again -- but I just couldn't decide. I really liked then all, each for
different reasons. They really couldn't be qualitatively compared. Sure,
one of the things I'm happiest about is that these final four were all so
different in every way -- in musical style, indiviual style, and overall
approach. But it didn't make deciding any easier.

    For three days, I just kept coming back to those four and trying to
make up my mind -- which three, and in which order? They are all great, but
none of them is entirely the perfect choice. Who should be number one?

    Well, I decided, there really can't be a number one. What I have here
before me are four number ones. But I only have three prizes. So what else?
I'll have to get another prize!

    At this point, I decided to call my good friend Lennie DiMuzio at
Avedis Zildjian, to see if he might be willing to help me out in this. Sure
enough, Lennie came through for me, and now there is a "Fourth First Prize"
-- consisting of a set of Zildjian cymbals. My sincere thanks go out to
Lennie and the good people at Avedis Zildjian for their help in this (and
other) matters.

    In keeping with the idea of "four number ones," my ranking of these
four is somewhat arbitrary, based on the slenderest of prejudices, as is
the awarding of the prizes, so I won't degrade their efforts by that kind
of distinction here. These are some of the reasons why I like the winners.

    The entry by Jack Hess of Indianapolis is very original, in that he
spiced up his performance by triggering occasional synthesizer sounds. He
was one of a few entrants to think of this -- a very imaginative idea, but
he was the one to carry it off the best. He obviously spent a great deal of
time working on this piece, and the work pays off in the tightness and
integrity of the whole performance. The playing is first-rate, the rhythms
are very modern, and the dynamics are effectively varied both by tough and
by some tasteful rim playing. Overall, it's an excellent piece of music,
and it is very satisfying to listen to.

    I like the one by Wayne Killius, because it has such a nice approach to
a traditional, but abstract, form. His playing demonstrates a lovely touch.
It is also one of very few to use a bit of brushwork -- and is very musical
and unusual. The groove is very sophisticated, based around a funky,
walking kind of rhythm, and there are some great sections of what I call
"stiff-armed" syncopation -- a difficult style to control so smoothly. This
is a superbly restrained and deceptively simple piece of work.

    Mark Feldman of New York City sent in a nice tape also. I liked the
dark mood, the interesting construction, his smooth technique and
combinations of nice tonalities. I thought it was technically and
rhythmically quite sophisticated and very smoothly performed. Again, this
is not an easy style to pull of as well as Mark has done. The refrain of
the intro is a tasteful idea, and frames the whole piece nicely, making it,
like the others, truly a piece of music.

    The fourth one -- one I just couldn't leave out -- is by Mikel Masters
of Clearwater, Florida. I was impressed most of all because it is such an
exciting solo, but it also shows great technique, is smoothly delivered,
and is thoroughly bombastic and overplayed. I like that! The arrangement
revolves around an excellent melodic tom pattern, and I like the sound of
his drums very much, too. Part of my second set of notes reads:
"interesting, original, flashy..." and that about captures this one, a very
flamboyant and exciting performance, firmly in the Gene Krupa tradition.

HONORABLE MENTION (in alphabetical order)
Each of these was an exception entry, and if I'd had more drumsets to give
away, these people would surely have gotten one, too:

Terry Carleton, Palo Alto, California
Scott Cutshall, Meadville, Pennsylvania
Roli Garcia, Laredo, Texas
Christopher Gately, Haverford, Pennsylvania
Kevin Hart, Bourbonnais, Illinois
Scott Hobgood, Norman, Oklahoma
Jari Kettunen, Iisalmi, Finland
Joey Nevolo, Neptune City, New Jersey
Yuergen Renner, Roosevelt Island, New York

----------------------------------------------------------

From: mjahnke%sdcc13@ucsd.edu (******* Meg *********)
Subject: Neil Interview - Modern Drummer 8/88

_Modern Drummer_ - August 1988

"Creating The Drum Part"
   by Neil Peart

    Recently, an "Ask A Pro" question crossed my desk that was not easily
answerable in 25 words or less, so I thought: "Aha! Here's another excuse
for an article." But here -- you'll see what I mean:

    "Your ability to play in odd times, play odd accents, and insert your
fills in the most peculiar -- yet proper -- places is surpassed by none. To
follow some of your more difficult music exactly seems (at my level)
impossible! My question is: While you are playing, how do you think ahead
to what you will play next? More specifically, do you 'think by numbers'?
Do you 'hear' the upcoming riff in your mind? Do you see the 'hardcopy' of
your music in your mind, or do you just let it flow? Can you give me any
advice on a workable mental tract to use while playing?"
							Matt Ancelin
							Toms River NJ

    Now, aside from adding to my wonder about why I get so many letters
from Toms River, New Jersey, and making me blush with embarrassment, you
can see that there's plenty of "food for thought" here. Many drummers'
minds will start to whirl when they think about these things, and I think
all of Matt's assertions are, or can be true.

    But let's start at the beginning: with the numbers. Of course, it's
never too early to learn to count, a skill that you'll need forever. So it
makes sense that when you first begin to dabble in odd times, or even learn
to flow well in 4/4 or 6/8, counting will teach you the "program." As you
become more fluent in different rhythmic foundations, you will be able to
recall these "hardwired programs," to set you into the right "cadence," or
to let you pick up the "odd" beats at different times. I've written about
this before, so I won't give it too much emphasis now, but you learn to
subdivide the time signatures into their even-and-odd components, or to
multiply them to make a series of odd bars add up to one long, even one.
This is a trick I have used many times, playing 4/4 over 7/8, 5/4, or 6/8,
and just holding the rhythm chugging along until all the bar lines add up
again, and I can take off somewhere else!

    There is another thing, too -- a wordless mental "language" that I use
to understand and remember parts. Certain phrases even have a kind of
picture symbol; not notation, or the physical move, but an inner image of
the effect of some little technique or rhythmic twist. So in that sense, I
don't hear the upcoming phrase in my mind so much as see it. This, by its
very nature, is unfortunately not communicable to others. I guess that's
why we have written music!

    But let's get into the really deep waters of this question. All of the
above will set you up for comfortable improvising, but what if you want to
arrange a drum part, one that will stand forever as the definitive way of
playing a song? (I know, I know...dream on!) Starting from ground zero, you
have a blank slate -- a new song -- and a drum part to create for it. So
you play detective, look for clues, put two and two together -- and come up
with seven. (Always a good answer!)

    But the clues. Perhaps the songwriter will play you a rough tape. On
it, there will be some indication of the tempo, whether it's from a drum
machine or in the inherent "lilt" to the music as it's played. Then there
will be dynamic hints: how the song builds, where you might want to make
the strongest statement, where you can be subtle and supportive, and where
you might add some rhythmic interest. What does the song need? Where are
the vocal parts, the instrumental parts, the choruses, the bridges? These
are all the building blocks, not only of the song, but also of your part in
it.

    So you mind starts to sift possibilities: perhaps a big backbeat on the
3 for the verses, maybe a quarter-note bass drum with 16ths on the hi-hat
for the chorus. And those bridges: Let's try a driving 2 and 4 on the
snare, with a quarter-note ride, to build into the chorus, and then plane
out under the vocals. And I think we could do some clever stuff in that
intro to the instrumental: Bring it down and play across the time, with
lots of those "ghost notes" that Rod Morgenstein is always talking about.

    Listen to the song another couple of times, mentally going over your
"map" of the musical terrain and trying to cement the arrangement details
in your head. Again, people use different ways to accomplish this, and all
are good. It doesn't matter if you write out some notation (or use the kind
of "shorthand" that many drummers do), or if you're able to rough it out in
your head just from memory. In this case, if it works, it's right! Is the
song dark and introverted, or is it light and airy? Do you want to be able
to dance to it, or is it "just for the ears"? Does your band's common
stylistic ground run to samba, ska, swing, or speed metal? What sorts of
fills are appropriate, and where are they appropriate? And if you're
playing speed metal, can you introduce some ideas from ska, samba, or swing
that might make it more interesting? This is where the fun starts.

    Inevitably, it's going to be rough the first few times, especially if
you and the rest of the band are all trying to learn the song at once. If
you can do some experimenting with it at home, even if it's just on
magazines to your Walkman, more to the good. But if you're diving right
into it, again there are two approaches. Some people start as simply as
possible. Then, if they feel compelled to add to that minimalist approach,
they will. Other people start the opposite way -- trying everything they
can possibly think of in the first few run throughs, then gradually
eliminating the ideas that don't work. There's much to be said for either
approach. In the first case, you'll interfere with the rest of the band
less, and you'll come up with a good, conservative part. In the second
instance, however, you're more likely to stumble into something original
and unexpected, and if you have the luxury or working by yourself, it's at
no one else's expense. This is, I suppose, the ideal. (Sadly, our world
doesn't tend toward the ideal, and if others are complaining about all the
noise you're making, you may not make many friends. And let's face it: In
this business, you need friends, and you should certainly not alienate the
bass player! So be nice.)

    The big word here: LISTEN. As you play the song, take time out from
your explorations of outer space to listen to what your friend, the bass
player, is getting at, and to see how the other instruments are responding
to your rhythmic input. There may be something nice happening that will
trigger other directions for you. One of the wonderful things about working
with other musicians is coming up with something together. When the whole
band gets excited about something, you just know it's going to work,
because everybody will be happy, feel part of this holistic experience, and
play their fingers off.

    But there are still many options open to you. Much will depend upon
your own temperament as a player. What sort of situation makes you most
comfortable? Do you like to have your part worked out as much as possible,
so your only concern when you play or record the song is getting it right?
Some wise editor once advised an agonizing writer: "Don't get it right, get
it down!" There's something in that for musicians as well, though perhaps
not what the literary advisor meant. If you find you fly best "by the seat
of your pants" -- again, if it works, it's right. Go wild.

    I have told the story before about how I was a big Keith Moon fan as a
beginning drummer. All I wanted to do was get in a band that would play
some Who songs so I could wail like he did. But when I finally found a band
that actually wanted to play these songs, I discovered to my chagrin that I
didn't like playing like Keith Moon. It was too chaotic, and things just
weren't placed rationally. I wanted to play in a more careful, deliberate
way -- to think about what I played where, and not just "let it happen." I
am driven by a strong organizational, perfectionist demon. Of the two
extremes, I must confess I probably prefer the dull and "correct" to the
adventurous foray that doesn't quite come off. Again, that's a personal
thing, and I sure don't think I'm necessarily right. It's just the way I
am. So I'll continue along in that vein for a while -- as that's what comes
naturally -- and talk about organizing a song.

    My personal approach is fairly linear. I'll often start simply at the
beginning of the song and gradually build it -- if not dynamically, then in
terms of activity. A simple roll around the toms in chorus one might double
up in chorus two, and then by chorus three become a rip-roaring, two-bar,
triplet-feel flurry of 64th notes. Or a gentle backbeat in verse one can
develop through a Latin feel on the ride cymbal in verse two, and be echoed
by a double-time full-throttle "race to the finish" during the rideout.
Then there are accents, pushes, hi-hat chokes, sudden pauses, feel-shifts,
staccato punctuations, downbeats on the toms instead of the snare, leaving
the downbeat out, or emphasizing the upbeats on the ride pattern. There's
also something I hear Manu Katche doing with Peter Gabriel and Robbie
Robertson: insinuating the rhythm -- playing all around the beat without
actually playing it, but it's absolutely there. This gets more complicated,
but also more fun, and is very satisfying when you pull it off (not only
for yourself, but for the song, the other musicians, and, hopefully, the
audience.

    People so often seem to forget that an audience doesn't have to
understand the music to enjoy it. How many of the millions of people who
loved Pink Floyd's song "Money" and bought the _Dark Side Of The Moon_
album knew -- or cared -- that it was in 7/4? Peter Gabriel's "Solsbury
Hill" again is in seven, and is one of the cleverest maskings of odd time
-- and just happened to be a big hit for him. The time signature just
didn't matter; the musicians used skill and musicality to make it feel
good, and that's what the audience responded to. That's what
"accessibility" is really all about: communicating the thing properly.
That's your ultimate responsibility, and your ultimate blame. Sure, there
are no black-and-white absolutes in music, (or almost none), but it
sometimes happens that a great song doesn't "click" with people because it
just wasn't put together right. The listeners might not be able to
articulate the flaw, and neither may the musicians. But if it doesn't reach
the people you would have expected to like it, the song just didn't
connect. So it's up to us to make the connections.

----------------------------------------------------------

To submit material to The National Midnight Star, send mail to:

    rush@syrinx.umd.edu

For administrative matters (additions, deletions & changes), send
mail to:

    rush-request@syrinx.umd.edu

There is ftp access available on Syrinx now.  The network address to ftp
to is:

    syrinx.umd.edu       or       128.8.2.114

When you've connected, userid is "anonymous", password is <your userid>.
Once you've successfully logged on, change directory (cd) to 'rush'.
There is a README file giving brief information on what is contained in
the directories.  Currently available: previous issues of the NMS, lyrics,
and a relatively current subscriber's list.  Future avaiability will include
articles, interviews, etc.  Anything with a ".Z" suffix is in compressed 
format, and requires you run 'uncompress' on it before you can read it.

There is also a mail server available (for those unable or unwilling to ftp).
Previous issues of The National Midnight Star (in it's current incarnation),
lyrics, individual articles, and more are now available at an archive file
server.  For more info, send email with the subject line of HELP to:

    server@ingr.com

These requests are processed nightly.  Use a subject line of MESSAGE to
send a note to the server keeper or to deposit a file into the archive.

[ NOTE: the address "htodd@gmuvax2.gmu.edu" is no longer available for
  back issues of the NMS, due to disk space problems at their site.  This
  address may or may not become active again for this purpose; stay tuned
  here for details.                                                       ]

The contents of The National Midnight Star are solely the opinions and 
comments of the individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the 
opinions of the management.

List Management

*********************************
End of The National Midnight Star
*********************************



Previous Issue <-> Next Issue