Dark Side of the Moon was a concept album, not a personal philosophy. "Money" is a musical representation of a period in a person's life. You've apparently gotten past that phase — having gone back to suckling on the government teat — but are still stuck on "Us and Them."

Yeah, you can't even read a political speech in a literal fashion, so why would I try to "prove" to you that Van Halen produced all the edge out of his music over time, leaving bland AOR? You just have to listen to it.


If you believe P is true, and someone else offers contradictory belief Q, then you can't believe Q valid while still believing P valid.


Hohum, you're equivocating on 'imperfection'. An aesthetic of imperfection isn't the same as an imperfect aesthetic.


It doesn't mean theocracies and Kelly Clarkson become good because people voted for them, which is the logical conclusion to your position. Mao was popular, so's Castro, etc.. If a murdering tyrant had a mind control device that ensured his popularity, you'd have to conclude he was great leader. Maybe you want to reconsider popularity, say limit it to people who think, or have good taste, or are rational, etc.. Again:

"Your view amounts to saying anything produced on American Idol is just as culturally, intellectually, and aesthetically valuable as Wagner's The Ring of the Nibelung."

You've not contradicted this, only give further support to it.

Now you're reducing the interest in long-lasting popular music ['lots of people out there want to hear songs by the Beatles, Floyd and Led Zep in high quality sound like you get from FM radio'] with EVH's personal dissolution as a musician. Which is fine, but at least admit that's what you're doing, your personal nut against Sammy which bleeds over into your conception of popular culture. But at least you're denying the validity of any viewpoint other than your own.



But Q doesn't detract from P, disproves P in many objective ways which you consistently ignore, and in fact makes P possible. Believing Q doesn't prevent you from believing P and people who believe Q can lead fully, happy lives without ever knowing people believe P. In theory, people who believe P could be the same way, but in practice they think they're special and cannot comprehend how anyone could think otherwise in good conscience.



Then what's the standard for perfection? Some people might say Robert Johnson's "Hellhound on my Trail" and others bang their heads to "Beelezebub has a devil put aside for me, for me, for meeeeeeeeee".



No, I'd conclude that he had a mind control device ensuring his popularity. In real life, tyrannies have to maintain constant pressure on their subjects, and the best way is to monitor them for anything they might like, not permit them to have personal tastes, and remove anything that they might like. I don't think Obama is a good President, but the people chose him so he's "popular". It's your projection that what I'm saying is reduced to 'popularity = good'.

In the real world, technological advances lead to a successful New York Piano company branching out into phonographs, and started releasing discs in various formats during the day. The sound quality was higher than other releases of the era, although not the physical duration of the discs.

After being acquired in a corporate takeover, twenty years after the company was founded Vocalian released the only recordings of Robert Johnson in his lifetime. "Terraplane Blues" even sold 5,000 copies. ARC, Brunswick and Columbia Records would be essential in keeping that work available for a time when they might be able to make money off of it, thirty years later if that's what it takes for Eric Clapton [whose work I mostly can't stand] to think it's "good" and go on to inspire Brian May and the people who made "Abbey Road". Those guys only got work because recording equipment and musical instruments were available for sale to people who have their own idea of what makes good music and had access to a marketplace.



I know what all those words mean, but that sentence makes no sense. How do you prevent people who don't have good taste from becoming popular, short of gulags? People collectively decide what they like and what they like is by definition popular.





You've not supported this, only re-asserted it as if saying "Shazam" again will turn you into a superior being with superior aesthetics. The atmospheric keyboard arpeggios opening "Right Now" are dramatic, undergirded by omnious bass chords until the band crashes in with a slow-burning riff that builds until Sammmy says he doesn't want any tomorrow doesn't show any detriment to EVH as musician/composer, except maybe to someone whose tastes are stuck in 1984.

Since your responses have nothing to do with anything I said, I'll let you have the last word on whatever it is you think we're talking about.

Van Hagar barely even made videos, certainly nothing to compare with those starring the photogenic DLR. They still sold millions of records and concert tickets.

Damn, man! That makes me want to like, change my life & shit! S'like an after-school special with a pulse!

K

Heh, a song about Kurt Cobain, written by the guy who starred at the first concert Cobain went to. Ah, the irony.

And, in case you think Sammy looked a little too much like Robert Plant in the first video...



Been a long time indeed... Over 25 years.

The music video content of MTV was winding down by 1986. Almost every new video coming from anyone was just a live performance. Come up with a list of the most memorable music videos ever, most of them will be pre-1986. The only ones I can even remember post-1986 involve either papier maché dinosaurs or Alicia Silverstone's underpants.