Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25 - String of Pearls
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
I just added this record to the discography (as well as the Beatle album). Does anyone know the total length of the record?
Jakob Kallin, webmaster of EnterTheSoulAsylum.com
-
SleazyStreet
- Stranger
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:51 pm
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
Looks like it clocks in at 53:40.
Just curious, if you were compilation producer, what would your 14 track SA Playlist look like?
Just curious, if you were compilation producer, what would your 14 track SA Playlist look like?
-
blueharvest
- O'Jeezer
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:37 pm
- Location: Tokyo, Japan
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
I'm quite sure there have been a few other "what is your best of playlist?" threads already. Track them down and add to it to restart those threads if you are interested.
But anyway, here's why I'm not a fan of "string of pearls". Like I said, I don't think the song makes sense and I also don't think there is a point to the song (unless you call supposedly being clever a point). Take a look at the lyrics. We start with a prostitute swinging her string of pearls. they break. She nearly gets hit by a car as she tries to pick the pearls up. The driver of the car is racing to the hospital because his wife is about to give birth. It's unclear whether they make it to the hospital. She gives birth to Siamese twins. JUMP AHEAD 40 YEARS and the Siamese twins have become an insecure President (Really?! Siamese President(s)!? Is this the same United States that I know. Not gonna happen). He takes responsibility for some unclear mumbo-jumbo and some new nameless character who seems to be a knife-wielding, blood-stained (for no reason) janitor appears (somewhere, at this point location has become completely ignored) and sweeps everything under the rug (literally? metaphorically? what exactly is he sweeping? he's sweeping the "taking of responsibility"? Why would he do that? to what purpose?) This man, apparently has an unhappy marriage because his wife has left him, but he loves his children (who are never again mentioned. Neither is he for that matter). The wife in question has gone to a former lovers funeral who seems to have died in a freak bathroom accident (is this situation supposed to convey comedy? sympathy? or was it just a convenient rhyme?). At the funeral, this woman and the widow seem to find out about each other and get into a fight which involves the comedy genius hijinx that one would expect of an overacted, over the top Chris Columbus comedy (not a good thing). All of this behavior sets off something in the preacher who is administering the funeral. He seems more comfortable with dead people than the living, especially women (this may be the only good idea in the song). And what is his reaction? He runs away and jumps in his car and drives away. What!? Why would he drive away? Is he abandoning his job forever? Where is he going? Wouldn't it be more plausible that he would stick around and at least try to salvage the situation and possibly his career?
So he turns the corner and from his car that one must assume is riding at at least 20 mph he manages to spot the light reflected off a pearl. Don't know about you, I've seen light reflect off diamonds, glass, gold, silver, but I have never seen light reflect off of a pearl. Pearls do not sparkle. Their sheen is rather dull. He picks up the pearl from the gutter. Now this is a gutter. On a road. You want me to believe that this pearl is big enough that it didn't simply fall through the grate? Whatever. And he doesn't know what to think at this point. Well, obviously he thought enough to stop driving, pull over and pick it up. (when I'm driving, I stop all the time to pick up really tiny things that may or may not be of some value, and not have an opinion about it. Happens all the time). So he takes it home and cleans it (so it was dirty. tell me again how it was shining so brightly that he noticed it while driving at least 20mph?). He gives it to a nun. I'm assuming this is later that day or perhaps the next. Obviously there were no consequences to abandoning a funeral earlier that day or the day before. She doesn't accept it, but actually she takes it anyway and gives it to the young prostitute who lost a pearl LAST NIGHT. Is this supposed to be the same girl from the beginning? If you've followed the "narrative" (i use that term loosely) you'll notice that the story previously jumped ahead by approximately 40 years so that the Siamese baby would grow up to become President. Therefore, the girl who lost the pearl in the beginning cannot be the same girl who is missing a pearl at the end. There is a complete lack of logic and common sense in the song. Decisions seem to have been made in the writing in an attempt to have a) words that rhyme, and b) some semblance of cleverness. As pop music, it's no worse than most of the other crap that constitutes popular music these days; as an SA song, definitely in the lower 50% of their entire catalogue.
Now the other point I made, that there is no point to the song, will be shorter. String is often compared to Nice Guys in that they each cover one long narrative. The difference in them is that Nice guys has a theme, String doesn't. Nice guys is commenting on several social problems, cause and effect in society, societal degradation. All of these topics are at least attempting to form a cohesive whole. I don't know what String is about? Even if the story made sense and looped around logically, who cares? The song is a collection of mostly impossible characters involved in events that don't lead up to anything. The whole thing is an excuse to link back and have the audience think "wow, that was cool. It's really clever. It all links back together at the end". I do not think the song is cool or clever or succeed in logically linking back at the end. If you can defend it in a way that allows the song to make sense and be internally consistent and logical (that means without bringing your own experience into the narrative to fill in the logic gaps) I'd be happy to hear about it.
peace and stay cool
J
But anyway, here's why I'm not a fan of "string of pearls". Like I said, I don't think the song makes sense and I also don't think there is a point to the song (unless you call supposedly being clever a point). Take a look at the lyrics. We start with a prostitute swinging her string of pearls. they break. She nearly gets hit by a car as she tries to pick the pearls up. The driver of the car is racing to the hospital because his wife is about to give birth. It's unclear whether they make it to the hospital. She gives birth to Siamese twins. JUMP AHEAD 40 YEARS and the Siamese twins have become an insecure President (Really?! Siamese President(s)!? Is this the same United States that I know. Not gonna happen). He takes responsibility for some unclear mumbo-jumbo and some new nameless character who seems to be a knife-wielding, blood-stained (for no reason) janitor appears (somewhere, at this point location has become completely ignored) and sweeps everything under the rug (literally? metaphorically? what exactly is he sweeping? he's sweeping the "taking of responsibility"? Why would he do that? to what purpose?) This man, apparently has an unhappy marriage because his wife has left him, but he loves his children (who are never again mentioned. Neither is he for that matter). The wife in question has gone to a former lovers funeral who seems to have died in a freak bathroom accident (is this situation supposed to convey comedy? sympathy? or was it just a convenient rhyme?). At the funeral, this woman and the widow seem to find out about each other and get into a fight which involves the comedy genius hijinx that one would expect of an overacted, over the top Chris Columbus comedy (not a good thing). All of this behavior sets off something in the preacher who is administering the funeral. He seems more comfortable with dead people than the living, especially women (this may be the only good idea in the song). And what is his reaction? He runs away and jumps in his car and drives away. What!? Why would he drive away? Is he abandoning his job forever? Where is he going? Wouldn't it be more plausible that he would stick around and at least try to salvage the situation and possibly his career?
So he turns the corner and from his car that one must assume is riding at at least 20 mph he manages to spot the light reflected off a pearl. Don't know about you, I've seen light reflect off diamonds, glass, gold, silver, but I have never seen light reflect off of a pearl. Pearls do not sparkle. Their sheen is rather dull. He picks up the pearl from the gutter. Now this is a gutter. On a road. You want me to believe that this pearl is big enough that it didn't simply fall through the grate? Whatever. And he doesn't know what to think at this point. Well, obviously he thought enough to stop driving, pull over and pick it up. (when I'm driving, I stop all the time to pick up really tiny things that may or may not be of some value, and not have an opinion about it. Happens all the time). So he takes it home and cleans it (so it was dirty. tell me again how it was shining so brightly that he noticed it while driving at least 20mph?). He gives it to a nun. I'm assuming this is later that day or perhaps the next. Obviously there were no consequences to abandoning a funeral earlier that day or the day before. She doesn't accept it, but actually she takes it anyway and gives it to the young prostitute who lost a pearl LAST NIGHT. Is this supposed to be the same girl from the beginning? If you've followed the "narrative" (i use that term loosely) you'll notice that the story previously jumped ahead by approximately 40 years so that the Siamese baby would grow up to become President. Therefore, the girl who lost the pearl in the beginning cannot be the same girl who is missing a pearl at the end. There is a complete lack of logic and common sense in the song. Decisions seem to have been made in the writing in an attempt to have a) words that rhyme, and b) some semblance of cleverness. As pop music, it's no worse than most of the other crap that constitutes popular music these days; as an SA song, definitely in the lower 50% of their entire catalogue.
Now the other point I made, that there is no point to the song, will be shorter. String is often compared to Nice Guys in that they each cover one long narrative. The difference in them is that Nice guys has a theme, String doesn't. Nice guys is commenting on several social problems, cause and effect in society, societal degradation. All of these topics are at least attempting to form a cohesive whole. I don't know what String is about? Even if the story made sense and looped around logically, who cares? The song is a collection of mostly impossible characters involved in events that don't lead up to anything. The whole thing is an excuse to link back and have the audience think "wow, that was cool. It's really clever. It all links back together at the end". I do not think the song is cool or clever or succeed in logically linking back at the end. If you can defend it in a way that allows the song to make sense and be internally consistent and logical (that means without bringing your own experience into the narrative to fill in the logic gaps) I'd be happy to hear about it.
peace and stay cool
J
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
If music sounds cool, most people will like it without getting literal. Do you look at MC Escher drawings and say "This one is no good, it makes no sense.. those stairs start here and end there underneath where they started. That's not logical." It's just a fun tune, that's all... On this note, does the beloved Artificial Heart get the logic treatment too?
I've made a few compilations... I've modeled them after setlists from particular tours. I've got an 80s Mix, 1995 mix, a 1999 mix... Here's an across-the-board Mix I made for someone a couple years ago:
1. Somebody to Shove (Grave Dancers Union, 1992)
2. Bittersweetheart (Let Your Dim Light Shine, 1995)
3. Gone Forgotten (Let Your Dim Light Shine B-side, 1995)
4. Misery (Let Your Dim Light Shine, 1995)
5. Whatcha Need (The Silver Lining, 2006)
6. Can’t Go Back (Made to Be Broken, 1986)
7. Cartoon (Hang Time, 1988)
8. Easy Street (And the Horse They Rode In On, 1990)
9. Black Gold (Grave Dancers Union, 1992)
10. Without a Trace (Grave Dancers Union, 1992)
11. Sometime to Return (Hang Time, 1988)
12. Closer to the Stars (Live 1995, orig. While You Were Out)
13. Black Star (Candy From a Stranger outtake, demo pre-1998)
14. We 3 (And the Horse They Rode In On, 1990)
15. Freak Accident (The Silver Lining outtake, Live 2001)
16. Be On Your Way (And the Horse They Rode In On, 1990)
17. Freaks (While You Were Out, 1986)
18. Never Really Been (Made to Be Broken, 1986)
19. Runaway Train (Grave Dancers Union, 1992)
20. Oxygen (The Silver Lining, 2006)
21. Just Like Anyone (Let Your Dim Light Shine, 1995)
22. Stranger (Say What You Will, 1984)
I've made a few compilations... I've modeled them after setlists from particular tours. I've got an 80s Mix, 1995 mix, a 1999 mix... Here's an across-the-board Mix I made for someone a couple years ago:
1. Somebody to Shove (Grave Dancers Union, 1992)
2. Bittersweetheart (Let Your Dim Light Shine, 1995)
3. Gone Forgotten (Let Your Dim Light Shine B-side, 1995)
4. Misery (Let Your Dim Light Shine, 1995)
5. Whatcha Need (The Silver Lining, 2006)
6. Can’t Go Back (Made to Be Broken, 1986)
7. Cartoon (Hang Time, 1988)
8. Easy Street (And the Horse They Rode In On, 1990)
9. Black Gold (Grave Dancers Union, 1992)
10. Without a Trace (Grave Dancers Union, 1992)
11. Sometime to Return (Hang Time, 1988)
12. Closer to the Stars (Live 1995, orig. While You Were Out)
13. Black Star (Candy From a Stranger outtake, demo pre-1998)
14. We 3 (And the Horse They Rode In On, 1990)
15. Freak Accident (The Silver Lining outtake, Live 2001)
16. Be On Your Way (And the Horse They Rode In On, 1990)
17. Freaks (While You Were Out, 1986)
18. Never Really Been (Made to Be Broken, 1986)
19. Runaway Train (Grave Dancers Union, 1992)
20. Oxygen (The Silver Lining, 2006)
21. Just Like Anyone (Let Your Dim Light Shine, 1995)
22. Stranger (Say What You Will, 1984)
-
blueharvest
- O'Jeezer
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:37 pm
- Location: Tokyo, Japan
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
Hi Yaz
Pretty good setlist you've got there. Nice to see some love for the preGDU era!
Very interesting that you bring up Escher (my favorite artist BTW!) because in a way you actually reinforce my argument there. The whole point (there's that word again) of Escher is to not make sense (although it should be noted that his art that we are talking about only represents a small part of his overall oeuvre). Escher while being a great artist, was also a very good mathematician. The subject of his art makes no sense but is created through the entirely logical mathematical shapes that the art is based around. It's chaos in the system. It's showing that everything is connected and influences everything else and represents the illogic of reality. There is meaning (both implicit and explicit) within and beyond and behind Escher's art. That is not at all what is happening in String of Pearls. I don't for one second believe that Dave wrote the song with the intention of writing a song to represent anything other than the imagery that he is presenting. LYDLS includes many "slice of life" images and characters. We are introduced to these people, offered very limited information on them and then they disappear. The characters in String are left there floating in the song. None of them does anything significant, and most act unrealistically. I don't see any underlying pattern here. As someone who has attempted writing of verse and song and spent 6 years of college and uni analyzing the works of writers and artists great and small, I can tell you that there has to be more than the intention of "fun" in order to create art. To reduce it to "it's just a fun tune" i think does a huge disservice to Dave as a songwriter. Lyrically, the song is just badly executed. That's not a problem; Shakespeare write his fair share of duds too. As a student (and a fan), I find the 90's era of Dave's writing to be very frustrating. There is a clear shift away from the 1st person perspective to an omniscient 3rd person perspective. Omniscient isn't what Dave does best. He tends to get a bit too cute and "clever" and unfortunately, simplistic to do that voice really well.
In String's defense: I said that I would put it in the lower 50% of SA tunes. It would probably fall into the bottom 20% if it wasn't for the music that accompanies the words. It does have a pretty awesome swinging groove.Not enough to save it but, I wouldn't be opposed to hearing it in the background.
Artificial Heart! Truly an amazing tune. Lacking logic? Probably. But again, go to the lyrics. It is clearly stated in the first line of the song that it is a work of probably, mostly fiction: A second hand story (this simple statement allows the teller of the tale to embellish it; turn it more into fantasy than reality (the song takes on a weird fairy tale tone to my ears)). The story itself is internally logical. The characters act in a way that is consistent with how they are presented (although somewhat stereotypical: hot 17 year old girl, crazy perverted religious dude). The lyrical selection of vocabulary is unforced (the only reason to use 'urinal' in Strings is to have a word rhyme with 'funeral'). And the kicker... Artificial Heart has a point! Some things and questions brought up in the song: religious fanaticism leading to violence, the judicial system again failing to properly punish violent and sexual crimes against women, media sensationalization of crime. The music is jaw-droppingly fantastic. One of Karl's (RIP) most up-front and groovy bass lines (completely drives the song), great riffs and use of sound effects. Can't say enough good things about it.
Good one Yaz!
J
Pretty good setlist you've got there. Nice to see some love for the preGDU era!
Very interesting that you bring up Escher (my favorite artist BTW!) because in a way you actually reinforce my argument there. The whole point (there's that word again) of Escher is to not make sense (although it should be noted that his art that we are talking about only represents a small part of his overall oeuvre). Escher while being a great artist, was also a very good mathematician. The subject of his art makes no sense but is created through the entirely logical mathematical shapes that the art is based around. It's chaos in the system. It's showing that everything is connected and influences everything else and represents the illogic of reality. There is meaning (both implicit and explicit) within and beyond and behind Escher's art. That is not at all what is happening in String of Pearls. I don't for one second believe that Dave wrote the song with the intention of writing a song to represent anything other than the imagery that he is presenting. LYDLS includes many "slice of life" images and characters. We are introduced to these people, offered very limited information on them and then they disappear. The characters in String are left there floating in the song. None of them does anything significant, and most act unrealistically. I don't see any underlying pattern here. As someone who has attempted writing of verse and song and spent 6 years of college and uni analyzing the works of writers and artists great and small, I can tell you that there has to be more than the intention of "fun" in order to create art. To reduce it to "it's just a fun tune" i think does a huge disservice to Dave as a songwriter. Lyrically, the song is just badly executed. That's not a problem; Shakespeare write his fair share of duds too. As a student (and a fan), I find the 90's era of Dave's writing to be very frustrating. There is a clear shift away from the 1st person perspective to an omniscient 3rd person perspective. Omniscient isn't what Dave does best. He tends to get a bit too cute and "clever" and unfortunately, simplistic to do that voice really well.
In String's defense: I said that I would put it in the lower 50% of SA tunes. It would probably fall into the bottom 20% if it wasn't for the music that accompanies the words. It does have a pretty awesome swinging groove.Not enough to save it but, I wouldn't be opposed to hearing it in the background.
Artificial Heart! Truly an amazing tune. Lacking logic? Probably. But again, go to the lyrics. It is clearly stated in the first line of the song that it is a work of probably, mostly fiction: A second hand story (this simple statement allows the teller of the tale to embellish it; turn it more into fantasy than reality (the song takes on a weird fairy tale tone to my ears)). The story itself is internally logical. The characters act in a way that is consistent with how they are presented (although somewhat stereotypical: hot 17 year old girl, crazy perverted religious dude). The lyrical selection of vocabulary is unforced (the only reason to use 'urinal' in Strings is to have a word rhyme with 'funeral'). And the kicker... Artificial Heart has a point! Some things and questions brought up in the song: religious fanaticism leading to violence, the judicial system again failing to properly punish violent and sexual crimes against women, media sensationalization of crime. The music is jaw-droppingly fantastic. One of Karl's (RIP) most up-front and groovy bass lines (completely drives the song), great riffs and use of sound effects. Can't say enough good things about it.
Good one Yaz!
J
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
J, thanks for your insightful reply to my rather curt post. Yeah, some of the Dim Light era lyrics are a bit forced... The lyrical viewpoint shift has been noted by many others as well. But without getting too far off topic, there's gonna be innumerable ways to put together a 15-song or 20-song mix CD. And there's always gonna be great stuff left off. At the very least, that's a good problem to have!
There are very few greatest hits CDs that I own or truly like... If a band is going to put out a compilation, I'd much rather it be all live stuff, or previously unreleased songs.
There are very few greatest hits CDs that I own or truly like... If a band is going to put out a compilation, I'd much rather it be all live stuff, or previously unreleased songs.
-
blueharvest
- O'Jeezer
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:37 pm
- Location: Tokyo, Japan
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
Haha! good point! Let's get this back on topic 
Totally agreed. Most Greatest Hits CDs are 2 lies for the price of one. In SA'a case it's quite hard to say which songs were bonafide hits of the commercial radio/MTV airplay variety. There certainly weren't 14 or 15 that would fall into that category unless you count every single that was released (hit or not). But then again, I haven't listened to commercial radio, music TV program or watched a video in about 10 years so I may be very wrong. So true that they are a blisteringly awesome live act (never actually seen them to my eternal shame. I've relied on YouTube and bootlegs to see 'em). The thing that has been missing from the official live releases is the between song banter, really bad jokes, fake song intros and stuff like that. I'd also classify SA as one of the greatest cover bands ever, possibly only second to the Ramones.
When I consider 95% of their pre-GDU output and a decent chunk of stuff since then "greatest hits", the idea of shortening that down to less than 20 tunes is almost impossible. Throw in all the live covers and it absolutely is impossible.
Gonna go make some new SA playlists for the ipod!
laters!
J
Totally agreed. Most Greatest Hits CDs are 2 lies for the price of one. In SA'a case it's quite hard to say which songs were bonafide hits of the commercial radio/MTV airplay variety. There certainly weren't 14 or 15 that would fall into that category unless you count every single that was released (hit or not). But then again, I haven't listened to commercial radio, music TV program or watched a video in about 10 years so I may be very wrong. So true that they are a blisteringly awesome live act (never actually seen them to my eternal shame. I've relied on YouTube and bootlegs to see 'em). The thing that has been missing from the official live releases is the between song banter, really bad jokes, fake song intros and stuff like that. I'd also classify SA as one of the greatest cover bands ever, possibly only second to the Ramones.
When I consider 95% of their pre-GDU output and a decent chunk of stuff since then "greatest hits", the idea of shortening that down to less than 20 tunes is almost impossible. Throw in all the live covers and it absolutely is impossible.
Gonna go make some new SA playlists for the ipod!
laters!
J
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
OK, blueharvest, you really took my question seriously. 
OK,'m gonnna answer to your post in more detail later, or tomorrow, but definitely soon. Right now I'm busy with school related stuff. So why am I even responding now if i don't have anything to say really? well, now that I've seen your response I just feel I gotta let you know that I will come back with my answers to your (rhetorical) questions about the song and my interpretation of it, so that you wouldn't think I ran off or something. OK, i don't know what I'm trying to say right now
just that I'm gonna be back
OK,'m gonnna answer to your post in more detail later, or tomorrow, but definitely soon. Right now I'm busy with school related stuff. So why am I even responding now if i don't have anything to say really? well, now that I've seen your response I just feel I gotta let you know that I will come back with my answers to your (rhetorical) questions about the song and my interpretation of it, so that you wouldn't think I ran off or something. OK, i don't know what I'm trying to say right now
just that I'm gonna be backRe: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
It is my impression that Greatest Hits collections are mainly aimed at people who haven't listened to a band before and wouldn't take the time to listen through several albums to "discover" them. When I was much smaller, I heard songs from the Greatest Hits albums of artists like The Police, Queen, Freddie Mercury, and Cat Stevens. I can't remember listening to regular albums until many years later, and I don't think I would have enjoyed those nearly as much. I think much of the same goes for many of those who listen to a lot of music: if they tried to get every album from every artist, they wouldn't get to hear nearly as many artists as if they "concentrated" their collections with compilations.
I rarely buy albums, so I don't know if the price tag has anything to do with this as well. I do remember buying the Black Gold compilation at a shamelessly low price from a record store in Sweden. It makes sense that Greatest Hits compilations would be cheaper since they only consist of old songs, but then I don't know if they do in fact cost less. If they don't, they should!
I rarely buy albums, so I don't know if the price tag has anything to do with this as well. I do remember buying the Black Gold compilation at a shamelessly low price from a record store in Sweden. It makes sense that Greatest Hits compilations would be cheaper since they only consist of old songs, but then I don't know if they do in fact cost less. If they don't, they should!
Jakob Kallin, webmaster of EnterTheSoulAsylum.com
-
blueharvest
- O'Jeezer
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:37 pm
- Location: Tokyo, Japan
Re: Playlist: The Very Best of Soul Asylum out 01/25
Spodiba,
Awesome. can't wait to hear what you have to say. Although, it was Dells message that initially inspired me to go into, upon reflection, possibly too much detail. And actually to be completely honest, I really used to like String of Pearls. Me and my buddy used to jam it all the time and screw up the lyrics and sequence completely. It was only years later that I realized how little the song made sense to me.
Homesick,
Totally see what you are saying about discovering bands through Greatest hits albums. Some of the bands I love the most now I initially first heard through tv, radio, friends, background music in shops etc. I first picked up GH albums for Dylan, the Doors, The clash, Tom Petty, Ramones, velvet underground, Pixies... They are all really high on my playlists. Heck, I only had the Beatles red and blue compilations for years! Now the fun is tracking down the original albums in used shops for a cheap price. Almost as fun as back issue comic book shopping!
J
Awesome. can't wait to hear what you have to say. Although, it was Dells message that initially inspired me to go into, upon reflection, possibly too much detail. And actually to be completely honest, I really used to like String of Pearls. Me and my buddy used to jam it all the time and screw up the lyrics and sequence completely. It was only years later that I realized how little the song made sense to me.
Homesick,
Totally see what you are saying about discovering bands through Greatest hits albums. Some of the bands I love the most now I initially first heard through tv, radio, friends, background music in shops etc. I first picked up GH albums for Dylan, the Doors, The clash, Tom Petty, Ramones, velvet underground, Pixies... They are all really high on my playlists. Heck, I only had the Beatles red and blue compilations for years! Now the fun is tracking down the original albums in used shops for a cheap price. Almost as fun as back issue comic book shopping!
J