The 'Mats to be on the Tonight Show Tomorrow (9/9)

[Captain Caveman]

ears are ringing hard for the 2nd time this week.

[Delete This Account]

the 'mats rocked the Tonight Show. anyone who doesn't "get" them is fine with me. i'll stake my place that they continue to carry to carry the rock and roll torch, of what is good and pure about a finger-in-the-air concept that has always been at it's best when giving voice to the dis-enfranchised and rebels without a clue.

 

jw

[The Dean]

the 'mats rocked the Tonight Show. anyone who doesn't "get" them is fine with me. i'll stake my place that they continue to carry to carry the rock and roll torch, of what is good and pure about a finger-in-the-air concept that has always been at it's best when giving voice to the dis-enfranchised and rebels without a clue.

 

jw

 

I have no problem with what it represents. It's the music I find offensive.

 

Anyway, why "the Mats"? Where does that come from?

[Captain Caveman]

I have no problem with what it represents. It's the music I find offensive.

 

Anyway, why "the Mats"? Where does that come from?

 

I'd heard that it was based on an early review that derogatorily referred to them as the placemats, i guess someone decided to own it and use it.

[The Dean]

I'd heard that it was based on an early review that derogatorily referred to them as the placemats, i guess someone decided to own it and use it.

 

That was my original guess, but it got no traction, so I assumed it was wrong. Thanks.

[Delete This Account]

not sure if it was from a review, but in their ever amusing self-deprecating way, The Replacements adopted the nickname placemats -- you should hear their version of "Send in the Clowns" -- and that was then shortened to simply: The Mats.

 

jw

 

mutts, is also acceptable

 

 

 

I have no problem with what it represents. It's the music I find offensive.

 

Anyway, why "the Mats"? Where does that come from?

 

pray tell, what do you find offensive with the mats music? not sure I understand.

 

jw

[Chef Jim]

the 'mats rocked the Tonight Show. anyone who doesn't "get" them is fine with me. i'll stake my place that they continue to carry to carry the rock and roll torch, of what is good and pure about a finger-in-the-air concept that has always been at it's best when giving voice to the dis-enfranchised and rebels without a clue.

 

jw

 

We don't get them? What's there to get? Are they a spoof band like Spinal Tap? If so then it all makes sense.

[Delete This Account]

I have no problem with what it represents. It's the music I find offensive.

 

Anyway, why "the Mats"? Where does that come from?

 

give "Skyway" a listen, or "Achin' to Be." try out "Nightclub Jitters," or "I Will Dare." The various versions of "Can't Hardly Wait," are full of fear and desperation.

and what to dislike about a band that summed much of its reason for being in these lyrics from the mats iconic anthem, "Bastards of Young:"

 

The ones who love us best

Are the ones we'll lay to rest

And visit their graves

On holidays at best

The ones who love us least

Are the ones we'll die to please

If it's any consolation

I don't begin to understand them

 

jw

 

We don't get them? What's there to get? Are they a spoof band like Spinal Tap? If so then it all makes sense.

 

 

just checked: i still don't like the flute band.

 

jw

Edited September 20, 2014 by john wawrow

[Chef Jim]

just checked: i still don't like the flute band.

 

jw

 

You just don't get them.

[RuntheDamnBall]

Really? You didn't like them? Quirkiness aside, Craig Finn is a great songwriter. I just love how he sings a verse then keeps talking off mic to seemingly no one. I think his stories via his songs are up there with the best of them.

 

But I appreciate that music is an individual thing. I just don't want people to miss them because they aren't necessarily a name band

Yeah his talk-singing and mugging for the crowd shtick just grates on me. Musically they were alright.

[The Poojer]

Therein lies the beauty of rock. We can all find something that makes us happy, as long as we are all listening to something, we all win!

 

 

Yeah his talk-singing and mugging for the crowd shtick just grates on me. Musically they were alright.

[RuntheDamnBall]

Therein lies the beauty of rock. We can all find something that makes us happy, as long as we are all listening to something, we all win!

Totally. I'm sure my tastes drive other people nuts, too.

[The Dean]

not sure if it was from a review, but in their ever amusing self-deprecating way, The Replacements adopted the nickname placemats -- you should hear their version of "Send in the Clowns" -- and that was then shortened to simply: The Mats.

 

jw

 

mutts, is also acceptable

 

 

 

pray tell, what do you find offensive with the mats music? not sure I understand.

 

jw

 

I'm not really a fan of three/four chord music. Garage bands don't do it for me. I could listen to the Stones in the 60's, but quickly got sick of it. But how embarrassing is it to see Mick strutting around on stage, mugging, while the band is playing this adolescent dreck? At least they have surrounded themselves with some real musicians. (Chuck Leavell for example).

 

With that said, the Replacements don't strike me as being the worst of the lot. The music is somewhat tolerable, if sort of run of the mill for the genre. I would have suggested the lead singer get some vocal training. I mean, one would expect professional musicians to be constantly working on their craft. Improving their musicianship, singing, etc. Maybe they do that, and it takes a lot of work to sound this raw and untrained. If so, they shouldn't be embarrassed about displaying their skills a bit more.

 

Edit: The iTunes/U2 commercial just aired here and I feel compelled to say: Is Bono the most self-absorbed douche in music? See I can also dislike talented musicians who choose to pose on stage, and play "rock anthems". Then, of course, commercialize it as much as possible. I find them reprehensible.

Edited September 21, 2014 by The Dean

[Delete This Account]

I'm not really a fan of three/four chord music. Garage bands don't do it for me. I could listen to the Stones in the 60's, but quickly got sick of it. But how embarrassing is it to see Mick strutting around on stage, mugging, while the band is playing this adolescent dreck? At least they have surrounded themselves with some real musicians. (Chuck Leavell for example).

 

With that said, the Replacements don't strike me as being the worst of the lot. The music is somewhat tolerable, if sort of run of the mill for the genre. I would have suggested the lead singer get some vocal training. I mean, one would expect professional musicians to be constantly working on their craft. Improving their musicianship, singing, etc. Maybe they do that, and it takes a lot of work to sound this raw and untrained. If so, they shouldn't be embarrassed about displaying their skills a bit more.

 

 

guess, that's where we differ. raw and untrained is, to a degree, the foundation of rock and roll for me.

Westerberg made it a point to include takes that included a mistake, a wrong note, perhaps, on the cuts placed on the actual albums. imperfection was the key, because who among us is perfect.

 

adolesence, sure. i have no problem with that. i hope i die before i get old. and it's the flaws, i think, that help reveal all of us.

 

jw

Edited September 22, 2014 by john wawrow

[The Dean]

guess, that's where we differ. raw and untrained is, to a degree, the foundation of rock and roll for me.

Westerberg made it a point to include takes that included a mistake, a wrong note, perhaps, on the cuts placed on the actual albums. imperfection was the key, because who among us is perfect.

 

adolesence, sure. i have no problem with that. i hope i die before i get old. and it's the flaws, i think, that help reveal all of us.

 

jw

 

I get the "warts and all" approach. I'm not the biggest fan of it, but it has a certain charm. That doesn't preclude someone from working on becoming a better, more accomplished, musician. I think "raw and untrained" is a great place for a teenager to start. If they are serious about music, I figure they should become trained and hone their skills. Mistakes are fine, let them be in production if you want, but I'm thinking you work hard to avoid them in the first place. And seriously, how hard is it for the lead singer to work on his vocals a bit?

 

Miles Davis said something to the effect of "It's the notes you don't play that matter." I think, "I can "not play" those notes and I can't even play." I'm kidding of course--well to a degree anyway.

 

And I don't equate adolescent with youthful, but I take your point. On living with a youthful outlook I believe we can agree. But while one accepts their faults don't we try to correct them (at least those we perceive as actual flaws)?

[NoSaint]

 

 

I get the "warts and all" approach. I'm not the biggest fan of it, but it has a certain charm. That doesn't preclude someone from working on becoming a better, more accomplished, musician. I think "raw and untrained" is a great place for a teenager to start. If they are serious about music, I figure they should become trained and hone their skills. Mistakes are fine, let them be in production if you want, but I'm thinking you work hard to avoid them in the first place. And seriously, how hard is it for the lead singer to work on his vocals a bit?

 

Miles Davis said something to the effect of "It's the notes you don't play that matter." I think, "I can "not play" those notes and I can't even play." I'm kidding of course--well to a degree anyway.

 

And I don't equate adolescent with youthful, but I take your point. On living with a youthful outlook I believe we can agree. But while one accepts their faults don't we try to correct them (at least those we perceive as actual flaws)?

 

 

i bet if you ask wawrow, or the band.... theyd argue they arent faults, so why are you trying to correct them? your judging their product through your own lens of what good musicianship should be. id guess they look at it through a different perspective and have probably grown a lot in the areas that they consider priorities.

[The Dean]

i bet if you ask wawrow, or the band.... theyd argue they arent faults, so why are you trying to correct them? your judging their product through your own lens of what good musicianship should be. id guess they look at it through a different perspective and have probably grown a lot in the areas that they consider priorities.

 

No doubt. Well, some doubt, actually, I suppose. But you are probably right for the most part. They call them flaws and mistakes but don't really consider those to be faults. I might ask how many flaw, or mistakes, are acceptable to them, before they start thinking "we need to work on this". But mostly my point is about musicianship.

 

I freely admit to never having been the biggest rock and roll fan. The music that influenced me most, growing up, was soul music, R&B and jazz. You played with Ray Charles and you better be good--and tight! James Brown was known for being very demanding on his musicians. The horn charts for these guys required chops and attention to detail. So the "rock" I listened to tended to reflect many of these same attributes.

 

A good example is Van Morrison. Van is rooted in early R&B and the blues. Early Van is very raw. and it's decent. But Van's music grew and morphed--and improved, IMO. Astral Weeks is like nothing that came before it. Then jazz started to influence his music. Traffic, Santana, Zappa, The Band---this kind of rock demanded some musical acumen and required a degree of instrumental proficiency.

 

The new wave/punk thing to some extent was a reaction to the excesses in production of disco, and stuff of that ilk. I understand that, to a degree. But even some of those early new-wavers, grew and developed and embraced some musical proficiency. Joe Jackson and Elvis Costello come to mind. I happen to like Jackson, and find Elvis a bit of a bore, but I respect both for growing past the three-chord banging of their roots.

 

Anyway, I think I've made it clear that I'm not really a raw rock and roll fan---and that I'm an obnoxious music snob. Ignore me.

Edited September 22, 2014 by The Dean

[NoSaint]

 

Anyway, I think I've made it clear that I'm not really a raw rock and roll fan---and that I'm an obnoxious music snob. Ignore me.

 

no worries - i cast a pretty wide net musically. but i tend to evaluate different genres, or bands on different criteria - some based on their intentions, some based on my own taste. you like what you like and their isnt any shame in that. there are plenty of bands that arent my cup of tea but are talented in their own ways too.

[Buftex]

Just put on "Let It Be" (the Replacements), turn it up loud... nothing "run of the mill" about that band in their prime...if ther were, the mill would be a much better place to hang out.

[Captain Caveman]