Re: Ted's reviews...

[KILLINFO@aol.com]

Hi all,

In a message dated 1/2/02 11:30:28 AM, bobdog@pseudobuddha.com writes:

>well ted, the word "suck" didn't appear in either review so they can't
>be that bad.

In a message dated 1/2/02 2:19:24 PM, Steuart.Liebig@maritz.com writes:

>just dread the day when a review arrives where the
>guy obviously does 'get it' but still thinks you're crap... :o)

In a message dated 1/2/02 1:30:40 PM, steve@steve-lawson.co.uk writes:

>I'm with Stig on this one - I thought it was a pretty good review spoilt
>by some biases that the reviewer seems determined to apply against 
>his better judgement... 

I guess you're right. I should count my blessings. I hope I didn't come 
off 
as whiny and self-pitiful. I was just wondering how other folks deal with 
this sort of thing mostly. 

In a message dated 1/2/02 10:38:31 AM, Steuart.Liebig@maritz.com writes:

>i actually use reviews like this in my press pieces because they actually
>do give the idea of what the music is - - *as seen through the eyes of the
>reviewer* - - which means that the reviewer is wearing his/her biases on
>his/her sleeve. 
>
>(one of my favorite reviews of one of my discs was saying that you 
>shouldn't
>listen to it by yourself in a dark house. the reviewer didn't like the
>disc, but it sure *did* something to him.) 
>
>also consider that there are some great descriptors in here that would
>make me intrigued by your project:

Well, perhaps your right again. I really didn't think about it that way 
(funny
thing, since since my day job is in advertising/marketing). 

>** the last bit about making you want to get out your guitar and e-bow,
>while seeming like a slam, may actually be great because it points to the
>listener being inspired to go and make music . . . 

Okay, okay. Group hugs al around! My faith in myself (and in humanity 
in general) has been restored. :-) I guess what kind of bothered me
to begin with about the "bad" review was the "Steve Vai" reference. 
I'm not especially a fan of Mr. Vai but I do respect his prodigious 
abilities. I find the idea of being compaired to him to be a little
comical. My own native abilities in regard to fretwork are pretty 
doggone meager to say the least. I'd say that my playing is probably 
only slightly more interesting to WATCH than the development of 
refridgerator mold. It sounds a lot speedier that it is. And, as for
"gurning," I am reminded of a quip shared here a week or so ago
about David Gilmour's stage presence behind a lap steel being
comparable to that of an average lathe opperator. That's something 
that could honestly be said about me in all likelyhood. Like Leo Kottke 
I have to remind myself to keep my lips together and not drool all
over my instrument. :-)

>for what it is worth, your stuff makes me want to grab my guitar
>as well, and i think that is pretty cool. It is inspired music and i
>listen to it often (via mp3's).

Thanks! I guess compliments don't get any better than that.

In a message dated 1/2/02 12:15:11 PM, lucafeed@tin.it writes:

>Well, if I had received this line, I would have been really proud.
>Videodrome is (altought a little "old viewed") a very, very deep movie.

I guess I ought to check it out. I've heard of it before but I've never 
viewed it. 

>Do music for yourself, it's the most difficult challenge (if "you" 
>exists).

I pretty much do. Like the visual art I also do (and have done for a 
number 
of decades now). Both expressions are extensions of "who I am" in my 
own internal dialog with myself. 

In a message dated 1/2/02 12:55:55 PM, altruist@altruistmusic.com writes:

>> or at least neither one really seems to understand
>> what caused the music to be made in the first place (me). 
>
>I think that's inevitable -- they weren't presented with "you," after
>all, but with one particular example of the fruits of your own musical
>work.  For them (or anyone else) to have the same understanding of the
>material (and its origins) as the guy who single-handedly saw it from
>inception to execution isn't gonna happen.

My expectations are high, perhaps too high. Critisism accepted.

>> Did I make a mistake in being rather
>> stingy on the liner notes? Should I have said more? 
>
>Did you want listeners to identify the material with any specific
>ideas/ambitions/concepts that you had in mind?  Is this music "about"
>something in particular, and is knowing about that fundamental to people
>enjoying it, in your mind?  

Not especially. Each piece may have had a context or a set of references 
in my own mind but I have no expectation that others will do anything 
other 
than provide their own. That's one of the beautiful things about art.

>My advice?  Approach any press you get, good or bad, with both an open
>mind and a grain of salt.

Advice taken. Thanks everybody.

Best,

Ted Killian