18th February 2007 03:31 PM |
|
|
winter |
pdog,
thanks much - i friend just loaned me scar tissue today - i am generally not a fan of rock biographies (they are very rarely well written), but I have heard this one is pretty good - i am sure there is some interesting stuff in there |
19th February 2007 07:07 AM |
|
|
crb69 |
Scar Tissue is a great book and you will get to know Anthony well by reading it along with the history of the earlier line up of the Peppers. Anthony is lucky to be alive today along with John. Although I like Anthony's vocals and lyrics (similar to the way I adore Mick), John & Flea are the RHCP (like Keith is the Stones). |
19th February 2007 02:25 PM |
|
|
texile |
quote: winter wrote:
an oberservation -
apparently it's ok to totally trash the stones if you are a member of this board (see repeated posts about ronnie keith's playing, habits, etc. and mick's shiny jackets), but it is not ok to say something noncrital but probably true and less than glorifying about the stones if you are in another band that is in the public spot light
get over yourselves my fellow stones fans . . .
i'm all for slamming the stones ...i do it all the time.
i was more annoyed by keidis inplying that the peppers deserved the grammy more than the chicks.
fuck, i don't even care about the grammys,
but i think the chicks' cd kicks ass all over arcadium.
and for that matter, the John mayer trio can out-hendrix and out-groove the peppers anyday.
the peppers are a good, funky band,
they just don't have that thing that makes them go to a higher place.
i guess its a matter of taste. |
19th February 2007 02:41 PM |
|
|
glencar |
quote: texile wrote:
true, and i am guilty of it too...
but keidis' comment about wishing he would rather have lost to gnarls than the chicks irked me, with the implication being he tought the peppers were more deserving or 'daring' than the chicks.
not true and short-sighted...
flamboyant musical personas, cryptic lyrics and a funky back-beat don't make something daring.
they take thier cues from clinton with all of the above- but the man's message was political, social and off-the-wall...he had something to say and the funk just gave him a way to say it.
the peppers don't have that depth....
they're a good band, frusiante and flea being exceptional musicians but again, keidis is the mouthpeice that gets in he way.
the chicks said more with good songwriting, organic musicianship and lyrics about real people.
The Dixie Chix were a solid lock for that Grammy. Gnarls Barkley was a refreshing new face on the music scene & their "Crazy" song was infectious delight whereas the Chix dirges were standard propaganda. |
19th February 2007 03:29 PM |
|
|
texile |
ill have to respectfully disagree with the chilli lovers..
and i will say this:
i love them for using billy on thier cd,
that may have been the last song billy contributed to so bless them for that.
|
20th February 2007 02:45 AM |
|
|
IanBillen |
[quote]pdog wrote:
No one questioned influence, you said he acted like him to the point he wanted to be him. That is false. Re-read the stuff you said... I've met Anthony too, a few times... Big fucking deal. Doesn't make me an expert on him. I met Iggy too, only briefly.
__________________________________________________________
I feel he is so heavily influenced he's over-the-top on being an Iggy Prototype though. their is a difference you are right in being influenced and actually acting and looking pretty much like Iggy. One look at that guy on stage for two minutes and I say, hmmmm, this guy acts and looks like Iggy Pop quite a lot....and he knows it. Hair-Shirtless-Tight Paints or Jeans- Actions- I mean sure, he has some originality...but that is like only 20-25% on zstage from what I can see of his look and act. The rest is just an Iggy Pop want to be.
Sue me, but you'll never change my mind....for crying out loud when I first saw them in the mid-late eighties (before they were main stream)I thought that as a Teenager. Nobody put the bug in my head.
Ian |