Please visit my archives (part 2) (1 Viewer)

[mjp]

I started using a computer program to catalog my records, partly so I could avoid buying things I already had, but mainly for the ability to easily look up songs that appear on several different albums. Which might not seem like something you'd ever need to do, but you never know when you might need to locate all 10 versions of Duppy Conqueror.

The program includes an option to upload the database to "the cloud," which means I can see it from work (when I'm buying records instead of doing my job, apparently), and as an unintended bonus, allows you to rifle through my records without making a mess in my house. And mock my musical taste in that clever High Fidelity way of yours.

They make a similar program for books (and movies). But I don't know if I can afford to devote more of my dwindling days to entering more things that are laying around my house into databases. Though some of the pictures from the original "Please visit my archives" thread lead me to believe I know someone who could use the book version...

FYI - you don't have to enter all of those track lists (or book details) manually - you just enter the record's catalog number or title (or the book's ISBN number) and the program finds the details for you. Like any automated, Internet-based thing that relies on crowdsourced data, sometimes the results need some cleaning up, but it's pretty good.

 

[Purple Stickpin]

No mocking here, but if the only Dylan Bootleg Series you have is the Witmark Demos, then you've missed some essential material. BS 1-3 and 4 (Judas!) are excellent. 6 is important as a live document of the transitional year of 1964. For starters. Really, I'd say get them all except for the Basement Tapes, which I've never cared for.

 

[mjp]

I love Bob Dylan. He was very important to me when I was younger. But he's just not one of those artists that I've ever felt the need to hear everything he's ever recorded. What was originally released on the LPs was enough. What was originally released up through Desire was enough for me. Then throw Infidels on there as a bonus. After that, never cared.

The CDs you sent me are interesting, and I liked hearing them. But I don't think I need to have those bootleg releases on the shelf here. Especially the live stuff. Not really down with most live records. Judas or not. ;)

 

[hoochmonkey9]

We have about 193 of the same records.

You (or Carol) don't have enough Miles Davis.

 

[Purple Stickpin]

I love Bob Dylan. He was very important to me when I was younger. But he's just not one of those artists that I've ever felt the need to hear everything he's ever recorded. What was originally released on the LPs was enough. What was originally released up through Desire was enough for me. Then throw Infidels on there as a bonus. After that, never cared.

The CDs you sent me are interesting, and I liked hearing them. But I don't think I need to have those bootleg releases on the shelf here. Especially the live stuff. Not really down with most live records. Judas or not. ;)

I know you don't dig on folks quoting whole posts (or quoting posts at all), but I'm inclined to do so here. First of all, the Bootleg Series 1-3 is a career compilation much like Biograph. So if you really like Biograph, you'll really like BS 1-3. Secondly, BS 4 is the night Dylan went punk (as far as we can tell) and changed R&R forever; live music is where life changes. Thirdly, Oh Mercy is an '89 release produced by Daniel Lanois that is as good as Blood/Tracks and Desire. You may have preconceived notions - I know I do - but consider what you are missing. I'll stop now. Your choice.

 

[roni]

that's one amazing program.

 

[mjp]

The actual desktop program is even better. The online version is kind of limited in what it will do (doesn't allow song title search, etc.).

So if you really like Biograph, you'll really like BS 1-3.

Well then I'll have to give those a try. They are a set, yeah? I seem to recall...

the night Dylan went punk (as far as we can tell) and changed R&R forever...

The overly provincial, precious and pretentious attitude of most of the "folkies" back in those days gave someone like Dylan, who wanted to fall more into line with what was happening in rock and roll, something to kick against. Otherwise that whole Dylan going electric thing is a lot of hot air. Everyone "went electric" eventually. Okay, maybe not Pete Seeger. But everyone else. Dylan fronting a rock band (for lack of a better term - they never really rocked) wasn't a shocking change (except to the aforementioned provincials), it was inevitable.

The way Dylan wrote songs is what tipped all the other musicians sideways, and rightfully so. That's where he changed everything. But honestly, I don't think that had anything to do with pre or post- electric. The songs are the same to me, just in different surroundings.

live music is where life changes.

Is it? I've seen a thousand bands play live (including Dylan in 1978), and I can count on the fingers of one hand the times any of them deviated from their norm or changed my life or theirs (including Dylan in 1978). For Dylan specifically, his propensity to never play his songs the same way twice isn't artistic genius, it's just fucking annoying. Not because I need to hear whatever performed exactly like the record, but because I don't need to hear another version of whatever, and then by the time I've adjusted to it, it's over. And next time it will be different again. That's not art, it's hostility. He really seems to hate playing his own music for the people who buy tickets to hear him play it.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Thirdly, Oh Mercy is an '89 release produced by Daniel Lanois that is as good as Blood/Tracks and Desire

True that

That's not art, it's hostility. He really seems to hate playing his own music for the people who buy tickets to hear him play it.

True that. And he tours non stop. I got lucky and caught him at the Warfield once in apparently a good mood. Not a single song was off mark.

 

[roni]

then by the time I've adjusted to it, it's over. And next time it will be different again. [...] He really seems to hate playing his own music for the people

That's what seperates him from The Boss. He's also changing versions all the time, but not because he hates it, but because he likes that live-feeling so much, that lifeliness so much. You really can feel and experience his joy in live-appearences while you listen.

But then, Bukowski really HATED reading in public - and he did it so tremendously perfect and moving and matching, like no one else could read his poems (and I think I've experienced close to a hundred trying it, maybe much more).

p.s.:
I love 'Blood on the Tracks', I love 'Desire'. I love 'Blonde on Blonde' and that about covers it for me for Dylan. But I do not know all that much of him, I must admit.

 

[skiroomalum]

I've seen Dylan probably 7 or 8 times, in smaller venues and twice at the worst place I've ever seen a show (Pauley Pavillion at UCLA). I guess I always went expecting some sublime moment or two. Never happened.It would take literally a minute or more to figure out what song he was playing.
The best he ever sounded was in covering other people's songs. When the Wiltern Theatre closed for renovation years ago, he was the closing act. He did Brown Sugar and killed it, and also a decent version of Warren Zevon's Mutineer. I haven't seen him perform live in at least 10 years and have never had the itch to see him again.

 

[Black Swan]

I guess I always went expecting some sublime moment or two. Never happened.It would take literally a minute or more to figure out what song he was playing.

:wb:
I really love Bob Dylan, always have.
But I only seen him once at the Bell Centre in Montreal. For 2 hours I only saw his back side and could hardly figure out what he was singing. Everything sounded the same. I'd get some relief when I did recognize something only because I knew the words of the songs. I'll listen to a cd in my car before I do that again.

 

[mjp]

You (or Carol) don't have enough Miles Davis.

He has more than three records?

 

[PhillyDave]

Saw him 3 times, once in a sorta small venue on a double bill with Patti Smith. The first time 88(?) sucked, just unrecognizable, every song. Apparently he'd been drinking too much to be any good or make any sense. The Patti Smith double bill was top notch rock n roll from both of them. All songs weren't recognizable but the tunes were strong and had kick. Lots of solos.

 

[LickTheStar]

The 1-3 Bootleg series is really fantastic. It's got Talkin Bear Mountain Picnic Massacre Blues and probably the definitive version of Idiot Wind.

And a couple tracks with George Harrison. If that's your scene.

 

[PhillyDave]

I love 'Blood on the Tracks', I love 'Desire'. I love 'Blonde on Blonde' and that about covers it for me for Dylan. But I do not know all that much of him, I must admit.

His Highway 61 Revisited and Bringing It All Back home really are essentials too. I don't think that's an exaggeration, whether you know all that much of him or not...

 

[Purple Stickpin]

His Highway 61 Revisited and Bringing It All Back home really are essentials too.

Without a doubt. I would list the following as essential:

The Freewheeling
The Times They are a Changin'
Another Side
Bringing it all Back Home
Highway 61
Blonde on Blonde
Blood on the Tracks
Desire
Oh Mercy!
Biograph
Bootleg Series (BS) 1-3
BS 4
BS 7
BS 12
and I'm currently awaiting the arrival of this monstrosity in full anticipation that it will get added to the list (in which case, one can drop BS 4).

 

[PhillyDave]

great list. If Roni gets hooked I'd say he should then make his way to The Basement Tapes, Planet Waves, the Band's first two records, and these 3 from the most recent part of his career: Time Out of Mind, Love and Theft, and Modern Times. "this monstrosity"? Yeah, some day i'll get that.