[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote :

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

Yes I know that is the myth you are trying to propagate here;
sycophantically.

(I was of course paraphrasing your own words, thus mocking you.)

The truth is nobody you associate with is a top notch, in-demand, world
class musician. This is especially true of Jubba, whose main claim to fame
is riding the coattails of others!

You have no idea what you're talking out. Par for the course.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Jenn said:

Your lack of knowledge on the topic is stunning, but not surprising.

Doesn't Dickless's ignorance catch you up short? Maybe he's hung up on the
notion that nobody can be any good if they sell out to the movie studios.
Maybe he believes that those who are anointed by God to be the vessels of
musical purity should never take money for their performances, and anybody
who accepts payment to perform is crass and materialistic.

Now that you've vacated that ivory tower where Scottie espied you, maybe you
can sublet it out to Dickless.

[James Smith]

"Jenn" wrote :

[My idol] worked on albums by all of the Beatles except Lennon. Can
you
imagine the studios hiring someone who they don't consider to be the
best?

Yes.

Why would they?

If you think studios only hire "the best" then you are clearly bonkers. A
whole slew of factors conspire. For example (a minor example but one of
many) nepotism is fairly common in the business.

You should know that by now Martin!

I see that you have this delusional holy view of the Beatles and anything
connected with them, all of which you see through rose tinted glasses due to
a trifling association. Having had a relationship of actual substance, it is
quite clear to me that you are pretending to have experience which you don't
have. You are trying to impress your little clique here. Those of us who
know better can see you for what you are.

Lack of understanding of the music business noted.

A wholly egotistical and arrogant comment without any substantiation, but I
will throw it back at you since you reveal your simple minded view of the
music business. That is because it is largely created inside your head, an
imaginary world in which it is not conceivable that studios hire the wrong
people. In the real world, the music business isn't one dimensional like
that.

Some credits ['of my idol Laurence Jubor']:
Barry Manilow album

Has been

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

all the James Bond movies the past 10 years or so

Name them

For Your Eyes Only, View to a Kill, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is
Not Enough, Die Another Day, Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace

I know he noodled on a Bond track during the brief period when Jubba was
granted an opportunity or two (1978-1980, nothing of note since). Imdb
doesn't like him on the above list though so you need to provide the
credits.

lots of Disney (Pocahantas, etc.)

LOL!

Are you kidding me? Every professional guitarist in LA would love that
credit.

Bull****.

Al Stewart

LOL!

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

Good Will Hunting, Men in Black, Home Improvement,

Trash

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

Cleo Laine...

LOL!

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

The lie Jenn repeated here five times is that Jenn knows the motivations of
ALL professional musicians residing in LA area and can speak on behalf of
all said musicians. Horse****. Jenn waves a twig around for a living, she is
on the periphery at most. And just because Jenn lusts after money or credits
or some association with proper musicians, it does not follow that all pro
guitarists in the LA area are all shallow individuals who will all turn any
trick without any regard to their musical orientation, beliefs, and
motivations.

Your lack of knowledge on the topic is stunning, but not surprising.

Yet more of that arrogance and egotism.


--


Jim Smith

[James Smith]

"Jenn" wrote :

Juber is not a world class guitatrist, whatever that vague phrase
might mean. I have seen much better.
He is competent, but not musical.
Htere were others posting here at that time who agreed.

Thanks for your opinion. I suppose that the Hollywood contractors are
simply wrong.

We only have your assertion that Jubby is the most sought after session
guitarist in the world.

I didn't say that, but close enough. If you don't believe me, call the
contractors. Or go to Local 47 and check the date books. Knock
yourself out.

No. You claim that your pen pal is the worlds greatest living guitarist. You
prove it!

Let's get something straight here right now : Hollywood contracts are no
measure of talent.

lol Let's just say it's a pretty good indication.

No. Let's say that you say that, but you do not have the authority to do so.
In fact, the most revered guitarists in rock music history just give up
being regular session musicians once they have public recognition. Why would
they compromise their art when they don't NEED to? Jubbles bucks that trend.
Obviously, he can't shift enough Jubble-product.


--


Jim Smith

[James Smith]

"Jenn" wrote :

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

Yes I know that is the myth you are trying to propagate here;
sycophantically.

(I was of course paraphrasing your own words, thus mocking you.)

The truth is nobody you associate with is a top notch, in-demand, world
class musician. This is especially true of Jubba, whose main claim to
fame
is riding the coattails of others!

You have no idea what you're talking out.

My 30 years in the business counts for nothing according to a twig waver.
Wow!


--


Jim Smith

[James Smith]

"Jenn" wrote :

You are saying that they are not equally superlative
but you won't tell us your ranking, because you might
offend one or more of them.
That is where your being a fawning sycophant comes into play.
You are ass kissing.

No, ass kissing would be saying they are better than they are to try
to
get close to them or some other reason.

You do that a lot.

Incorrect

You kiss ass day in, day out.
Of course you lack the balls to admit this!
As Clyde says you're a fawning sycophant.

In my case, not having balls is as it should be.

Could you clarify that please.

How's it working out for you?

Pathetic.


--


Jim Smith

[James Smith]

"Jenn" wrote

as you said earlier, you don't want to offend
anyone that might advamce your career.

Nope, I've never said that.

Clyde stated pretty much exactly what you said.


--


Jim Smith

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 2, 5:13*pm, "James Smith" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote *:

[My idol] worked on albums by all of the Beatles except Lennon. *Can
you
imagine the studios hiring someone who they don't consider to be the
best?

Yes.

Why would they?

If you think studios only hire "the best" then you are clearly bonkers. A
whole slew of factors conspire. For example (a minor example but one of
many) nepotism is fairly common in the business.

You should know that by now Martin!

I see that you have this delusional holy view of the Beatles and anything
connected with them, all of which you see through rose tinted glasses due to
a trifling association. Having had a relationship of actual substance, it is
quite clear to me that you are pretending to have experience which you don't
have. You are trying to impress your little clique here. Those of us who
know better can see you for what you are.

Lack of understanding of the music business noted.

A wholly egotistical and arrogant comment without any substantiation, but I
will throw it back at you since you reveal your simple minded view of the
music business. That is because it is largely created inside your head, an
imaginary world in which it is not conceivable that studios hire the wrong
people. In the real world, the music business isn't one dimensional like
that.

Some credits ['of my idol Laurence Jubor']:
Barry Manilow album

Has been

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

all the James Bond movies the past 10 years or so

Name them

For Your Eyes Only, View to a Kill, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is
Not Enough, Die Another Day, Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace

I know he noodled on a Bond track during the brief period when Jubba was
granted an opportunity or two (1978-1980, nothing of note since). Imdb
doesn't like him on the above list though so you need to provide the
credits.

lots of Disney (Pocahantas, etc.)

LOL!

Are you kidding me? *Every professional guitarist in LA would love that
credit.

Bull****.

Al Stewart

LOL!

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

Good Will Hunting, Men in Black, Home Improvement,

Trash

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

Cleo Laine...

LOL!

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

The lie Jenn repeated here five times is that Jenn knows the motivations of
ALL professional musicians residing in LA area and can speak on behalf of
all said musicians. Horse****. Jenn waves a twig around for a living, she is
on the periphery at most. And just because Jenn lusts after money or credits
or some association with proper musicians, it does not follow that all pro
guitarists in the LA area are all shallow individuals who will all turn any
trick without any regard to their musical orientation, beliefs, and
motivations.

Your lack of knowledge on the topic is stunning, but not surprising.

Yet more of that arrogance and egotism.

You're totally unconvincing in every conceivable aspect. In fact, you
sound like nothing more than a frustrated music industry outsider who
is cruising Usenet anonymously and lashing out at those more
successful than you.

In other words, you're a dime a dozen, loser.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 2, 5:35*pm, "James Smith" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote :





Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

Yes I know that is the myth you are trying to propagate here;
sycophantically.

(I was of course paraphrasing your own words, thus mocking you.)

The truth is nobody you associate with is a top notch, in-demand, world
class musician. This is especially true of Jubba, whose main claim to
fame
is riding the coattails of others!

You have no idea what you're talking out.

My 30 years in the business counts for nothing according to a twig waver.
Wow!

Bull****. You're an industry insider in the same way your pal Arny was
a professional recording engineer.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

My 30 years in the business counts for nothing according to a twig waver.

Bull****. You're an industry insider in the same way your pal Arny was
a professional recording engineer.

Actually, allmovie.com lists more than 50 individuals named "James Smith".
Most of them are actors, but a few are productionoids, like camera wranglers
and bestboys. Dickless didn't claim to have achieved any notable status
during his "30 years in the business". He might well have 30 years in as a
step-n-fetchit. That lack of advancement is consonant with his blaring
insecurity and empty bravado. Just like Krooger, as you pointed out.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 2, 1:42*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 1, 11:43*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 10:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 2:50*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 5:36*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article

m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 2:30*am, Jenn
wrote:
In article

ps.c
om,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 29, 11:40*pm, Jenn

wrote:
In article

Jenn, not everything is equally excellent

Where did I say that?

Here, its the sum history of your postings.
You go gaga over eryone.

OK, let's try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vWQk47ROcw

This guy sucks. *If I played this badly, I'd start doing
live
sound
at a
church for a living. *He should quit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ac4MsjQaEc

This should instead be "Blowin Chunks". *Can't he at least
learn to
TUNE
fercryinoutloud? *This guy plays like Dylan presently
sings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2DC6S4i4wk

Are you kidding me? *Your Lowden is WAY outclassing you.
*You're
killing
this beautiful arrangement. *And close your lips.

you gaga and fawn over everyone you know.

No I don't.

If you know someone, then that makes them the best ion the
world.

No it doesn't.

You must know some mediocre,'or even just merely good
players!

Of course. *But why would I talk about them here?

I'm glad that we could clear that up.

When someone mentions *a name of a person
you kn ow, I never here you say that he is mediovre, or
even merely good.
He is always just fantastice!!!

I don't work with anyone you would name here who is mediocre. *You
don't
understand how good you have to be to make it as a performer. *I'm
BARELY in the professional performance scene in L.A. and other
places.
*
I've made other decisions (and interests) for my career. *I'm very,
very
lucky that I can make a percentage of my income, around $20,000 a
year
the past few years, as a player of brass and trombone. *So when
someone
whose style I share and understand gets mentioned here, they are at
a
place in the profession where they are REALLY special players; the
top
fraction of a percent of the people who are serious about playing.
*If
you ask 100 people are really into this niche of guitar playing
(solo
fingerstyle acoustic) who their favorite 5 players are, the vast
majority would name those players I shared YouTube videos of.

you shared more than five players. which of these are in 'your'
top five, and in what order?

In no order: *Smith, Juber, Huttlinger, Gerhard, McManus. *Based on
more
than these videos.

Probably based on the five you most are in fear of ****ing off!

Yep, that's it exactly. *Thanks.

as you said earlier, you don't want to offend
anyone that might advamce your career.

Nope, I've never said that. *You're imagining things. *Bad batch of
Thunderbird?

essentially, that is what you said.
You don't want to rank them for fear of offending one or more of them.
there are people you work with/for in a competitive field.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 2, 1:43*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:39*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*"James Smith" wrote:

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

according to jenn, thay are all equally great.

Nope, I've never said that. *You're making things up.

She won't tejj us which greats are greater
tah the other greats, out of fear of offending the not quite
the greatest of the greats.

Do you believe that there is a "best guitarist (or anything else) in the
world"?

yes to guitarist, yes to to other things
live or dead or currently incapacitated to some degree?

live, not incapacitated - B.B. King
live, of current limitation in capacity - Peter Green in his prime
dead, Roy Buchanon

combining all three, Peter Green

whatever you might think of them, and whatever you might think of
those
I excluded, or those in styles I excluded (classical, flamenco,
Hawaiian, Country, Folk, etc.), at least I stood
up, I have an opinion, and I told you what it is.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 2, 1:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 1, 11:36*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 3:59*pm, George M. Middius wrote:
Sacky burbled:

LOL!!!! That is what being a fawning sycophant is all about!!!!

Um, no, Clyde, it isn't.

My dear SHhhh, yes it is

No, it's not.

yes it is

fawning·ly adv.
Synonyms: fawn1, apple-polish, bootlick, kowtow, slaver1, toady,
truckle
These verbs mean to curry favor by behaving obsequiously and
submissively: fawned on her superior; students apple-polishing the
teacher; bootlicked to get a promotion; lawyers kowtowing to a judge;
slavered over his rich uncle; toadying to members of the club; nobles
truckling to the king.

syc·o·phant *(sk-fnt, sk-)
n.
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering
influential people.

Gee, that would be just awful of me if any of it fit, which it doesn't.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 2, 3:01*pm, "James Smith" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote :

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

Yes I know that is the myth you are trying to propagate here;
sycophantically.

(I was of course paraphrasing your own words, thus mocking you.)

The truth is nobody you associate with is a top notch, in-demand, world
class musician. This is especially true of Jubba, whose main claim to fame
is riding the coattails of others!

--

He is better off doing that, because when he tries to fly solo,
he fallls flat on his face.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 1, 11:36*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 3:59*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Sacky burbled:

LOL!!!! That is what being a fawning sycophant is all
about!!!!

Um, no, Clyde, it isn't.

My dear SHhhh, yes it is

No, it's not.

yes it is

fawning·ly adv.
Synonyms: fawn1, apple-polish, bootlick, kowtow, slaver1, toady,
truckle
These verbs mean to curry favor by behaving obsequiously and
submissively: fawned on her superior; students apple-polishing the
teacher; bootlicked to get a promotion; lawyers kowtowing to a judge;
slavered over his rich uncle; toadying to members of the club; nobles
truckling to the king.

syc·o·phant *(sk-fnt, sk-)
n.
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering
influential people.

Gee, that would be just awful of me if any of it fit, which it doesn't.

b y your own admissiion, yes, it does.
your state of denial is no surprise to me
you already admited that you won't say even the least
negative thing here about your associates, for fear of loss of work.

No, you made that up. *Why?

Youare asking me why I did something that I did not do.
That is like me asking you why you molest children, I would
never ask you why you do something that yo9u do not do.

No, I'm not. You said that I won't say anything negative for fear of
loss of work. I didn't say that.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 12:53*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 2, 1:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:36*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 3:59*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Sacky burbled:

LOL!!!! That is what being a fawning sycophant is all
about!!!!

Um, no, Clyde, it isn't.

My dear SHhhh, yes it is

No, it's not.

yes it is

fawning·ly adv.
Synonyms: fawn1, apple-polish, bootlick, kowtow, slaver1, toady,
truckle
These verbs mean to curry favor by behaving obsequiously and
submissively: fawned on her superior; students apple-polishing the
teacher; bootlicked to get a promotion; lawyers kowtowing to a judge;
slavered over his rich uncle; toadying to members of the club; nobles
truckling to the king.

syc·o·phant *(sk-fnt, sk-)
n.
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering
influential people.

Gee, that would be just awful of me if any of it fit, which it doesn't.

b y your own admissiion, yes, it does.
your state of denial is no surprise to me
you already admited that you won't say even the least
negative thing here about your associates, for fear of loss of work..

No, you made that up. *Why?

Youare asking me why I did something that I did not do.
That is like me asking you why you molest children, I would
never ask you why you do something that yo9u do not do.

No, I'm not. *You said that I won't say anything negative for fear of
loss of work. *I didn't say that.


You said this:

“2. If one of my friends looks themselves up on The Google and sees
that
I have called them "mediocre", it would hurt our relationship. The
logical fallacy that you are committing is that you think that I
always
comment when a friend is mentioned. I don't. If I don't care for
what
they do, I stay quiet. I have to work with these people.”

And then you said this:
“Let's say that you worked in a business that was super highly
competitive, and those people are part of a very small group of
people
who are qualified to do the work. Further, several of those people
are
personal friends. WHen you work together, it is often in high
pressure
situations in close quarters.
Now in that situation, would you rank the quality of those co-
workers,
based on a video of their work that captures one moment in time, and
post that opinion on the internet? “

Obviously, your reasons for not ranking tham are based upon
fears over your position in the workplace. That makes you appear to be
a
fawning sycophantic toady. It also means that you just broke
your most amazng streak on RAO. You WERE the only person
who never lied on RAO! Nos, we can't say that anymore.
And if you do, it would juet be a second lie, aded onto your
fisrt one.

This is a sad day, you have broken your cherry, you are now
a consumate liar, just like the rest of us on RAO.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 3, 12:53*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 2, 1:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:36*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 3:59*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Sacky burbled:

LOL!!!! That is what being a fawning sycophant is all
about!!!!

Um, no, Clyde, it isn't.

My dear SHhhh, yes it is

No, it's not.

yes it is

fawning·ly adv.
Synonyms: fawn1, apple-polish, bootlick, kowtow, slaver1, toady,
truckle
These verbs mean to curry favor by behaving obsequiously and
submissively: fawned on her superior; students apple-polishing
the
teacher; bootlicked to get a promotion; lawyers kowtowing to a
judge;
slavered over his rich uncle; toadying to members of the club;
nobles
truckling to the king.

syc·o·phant *(sk-fnt, sk-)
n.
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering
influential people.

Gee, that would be just awful of me if any of it fit, which it
doesn't.

b y your own admissiion, yes, it does.
your state of denial is no surprise to me
you already admited that you won't say even the least
negative thing here about your associates, for fear of loss of work.

No, you made that up. *Why?

Youare asking me why I did something that I did not do.
That is like me asking you why you molest children, I would
never ask you why you do something that yo9u do not do.

No, I'm not. *You said that I won't say anything negative for fear of
loss of work. *I didn't say that.


You said this:

³2. If one of my friends looks themselves up on The Google and sees
that
I have called them "mediocre", it would hurt our relationship. The
logical fallacy that you are committing is that you think that I
always
comment when a friend is mentioned. I don't. If I don't care for
what
they do, I stay quiet. I have to work with these people.²

And then you said this:
³Let's say that you worked in a business that was super highly
competitive, and those people are part of a very small group of
people
who are qualified to do the work. Further, several of those people
are
personal friends. WHen you work together, it is often in high
pressure
situations in close quarters.
Now in that situation, would you rank the quality of those co-
workers,
based on a video of their work that captures one moment in time, and
post that opinion on the internet? ³

Obviously, your reasons for not ranking tham are based upon
fears over your position in the workplace. That makes you appear to be
a
fawning sycophantic toady. It also means that you just broke
your most amazng streak on RAO. You WERE the only person
who never lied on RAO! Nos, we can't say that anymore.
And if you do, it would juet be a second lie, aded onto your
fisrt one.

This is a sad day, you have broken your cherry, you are now
a consumate liar, just like the rest of us on RAO.

You're insane or you're taking comprehension lessons from Scott. The
ONLY conclusion you can draw from my statements is that it's about
possible loss of work? Unreal.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:43*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:39*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*"James Smith" wrote:

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

according to jenn, thay are all equally great.

Nope, I've never said that. *You're making things up.

She won't tejj us which greats are greater
tah the other greats, out of fear of offending the not quite
the greatest of the greats.

Do you believe that there is a "best guitarist (or anything else) in the
world"?

yes to guitarist, yes to to other things
live or dead or currently incapacitated to some degree?

live, not incapacitated - B.B. King
live, of current limitation in capacity - Peter Green in his prime
dead, Roy Buchanon

combining all three, Peter Green

whatever you might think of them, and whatever you might think of
those
I excluded, or those in styles I excluded (classical, flamenco,
Hawaiian, Country, Folk, etc.), at least I stood
up, I have an opinion, and I told you what it is.

Well, bully for you. Here's my point: I never say that anyone is THE
BEST at anything. That's because of two factors:
1. I haven't heard everybody. Neither has anyone else. There's
probably a guy in the Kentucky hills who sits on his porch all day for
40 years and plays all day who is amazing.
2. We're talking about art. The evaluations are subjective. We've
shown that here. How can one say that there is a "best"?

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:42*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 1, 11:43*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 10:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 2:50*am, Jenn wrote:
In article

m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 5:36*pm, Jenn
wrote:
In article

s.co
m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 2:30*am, Jenn
wrote:
In article

grou
ps.c
om,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 29, 11:40*pm, Jenn

wrote:
In article

Jenn, not everything is equally excellent

Where did I say that?

Here, its the sum history of your postings.
You go gaga over eryone.

OK, let's try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vWQk47ROcw

This guy sucks. *If I played this badly, I'd start
doing
live
sound
at a
church for a living. *He should quit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ac4MsjQaEc

This should instead be "Blowin Chunks". *Can't he at
least
learn to
TUNE
fercryinoutloud? *This guy plays like Dylan presently
sings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2DC6S4i4wk

Are you kidding me? *Your Lowden is WAY outclassing
you.
*You're
killing
this beautiful arrangement. *And close your lips.

you gaga and fawn over everyone you know.

No I don't.

If you know someone, then that makes them the best ion
the
world.

No it doesn't.

You must know some mediocre,'or even just merely good
players!

Of course. *But why would I talk about them here?

I'm glad that we could clear that up.

When someone mentions *a name of a person
you kn ow, I never here you say that he is mediovre, or
even merely good.
He is always just fantastice!!!

I don't work with anyone you would name here who is mediocre.
*You
don't
understand how good you have to be to make it as a performer.
*I'm
BARELY in the professional performance scene in L.A. and other
places.
*
I've made other decisions (and interests) for my career. *I'm
very,
very
lucky that I can make a percentage of my income, around $20,000
a
year
the past few years, as a player of brass and trombone. *So when
someone
whose style I share and understand gets mentioned here, they
are at
a
place in the profession where they are REALLY special players;
the
top
fraction of a percent of the people who are serious about
playing.
*If
you ask 100 people are really into this niche of guitar playing
(solo
fingerstyle acoustic) who their favorite 5 players are, the
vast
majority would name those players I shared YouTube videos of.

you shared more than five players. which of these are in 'your'
top five, and in what order?

In no order: *Smith, Juber, Huttlinger, Gerhard, McManus. *Based on
more
than these videos.

Probably based on the five you most are in fear of ****ing off!

Yep, that's it exactly. *Thanks.

as you said earlier, you don't want to offend
anyone that might advamce your career.

Nope, I've never said that. *You're imagining things. *Bad batch of
Thunderbird?

essentially, that is what you said.

No, it's not.

You don't want to rank them for fear of offending one or more of them.
there are people you work with/for in a competitive field.

I prefer to have good relationships with people who I work with in
already stressful situations.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote

as you said earlier, you don't want to offend
anyone that might advamce your career.

Nope, I've never said that.

Clyde stated pretty much exactly what you said.

No, he didn't.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote :

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

Yes I know that is the myth you are trying to propagate here;
sycophantically.

(I was of course paraphrasing your own words, thus mocking you.)

The truth is nobody you associate with is a top notch, in-demand, world
class musician. This is especially true of Jubba, whose main claim to
fame
is riding the coattails of others!

You have no idea what you're talking out.

My 30 years in the business counts for nothing according to a twig waver.
Wow!

You've had 30 years in the music business?

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote :

Juber is not a world class guitatrist, whatever that vague phrase
might mean. I have seen much better.
He is competent, but not musical.
Htere were others posting here at that time who agreed.

Thanks for your opinion. I suppose that the Hollywood contractors are
simply wrong.

We only have your assertion that Jubby is the most sought after session
guitarist in the world.

I didn't say that, but close enough. If you don't believe me, call the
contractors. Or go to Local 47 and check the date books. Knock
yourself out.

No. You claim that your pen pal is the worlds greatest living guitarist.

No, I've never said that.

You
prove it!

That's pretty hard to do if you don't want to check with the union or
look at the date books. Why don't you ring up the major contractors in
LA and ask them? Do you know who they are?


Let's get something straight here right now : Hollywood contracts are no
measure of talent.

lol Let's just say it's a pretty good indication.

No. Let's say that you say that, but you do not have the authority to do so.
In fact, the most revered guitarists in rock music history just give up
being regular session musicians once they have public recognition. Why would
they compromise their art when they don't NEED to? Jubbles bucks that trend.
Obviously, he can't shift enough Jubble-product.

lol Your depth of ignorance is huge. The "most revered guitarists in
rock music history" aren't qualified to play the sessions that I'm
speaking of. You probably don't understand why.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote :

[My idol] worked on albums by all of the Beatles except Lennon. Can
you
imagine the studios hiring someone who they don't consider to be the
best?

Yes.

Why would they?

If you think studios only hire "the best" then you are clearly bonkers. A
whole slew of factors conspire. For example (a minor example but one of
many) nepotism is fairly common in the business.

I'm sure that nepotism plays some small role. But if you can't cut the
book as well as someone else, few contractors are going to risk their
livelihoods for those reasons.


You should know that by now Martin!

I see that you have this delusional holy view of the Beatles and anything
connected with them,

Huh? Where do you get that idea?

all of which you see through rose tinted glasses due to
a trifling association. Having had a relationship of actual substance, it is
quite clear to me that you are pretending to have experience which you don't
have. You are trying to impress your little clique here. Those of us who
know better can see you for what you are.

Great! Ignore me then. YOU are obviously the expert.


Lack of understanding of the music business noted.

A wholly egotistical and arrogant comment without any substantiation, but I
will throw it back at you since you reveal your simple minded view of the
music business. That is because it is largely created inside your head, an
imaginary world in which it is not conceivable that studios hire the wrong
people. In the real world, the music business isn't one dimensional like
that.

Some credits ['of my idol Laurence Jubor']:
Barry Manilow album

Has been

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

all the James Bond movies the past 10 years or so

Name them

For Your Eyes Only, View to a Kill, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is
Not Enough, Die Another Day, Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace

I know he noodled on a Bond track during the brief period when Jubba was
granted an opportunity or two (1978-1980, nothing of note since). Imdb
doesn't like him on the above list though so you need to provide the
credits.

lots of Disney (Pocahantas, etc.)

LOL!

Are you kidding me? Every professional guitarist in LA would love that
credit.

Bull****.

Al Stewart

LOL!

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

Good Will Hunting, Men in Black, Home Improvement,

Trash

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

Cleo Laine...

LOL!

Every professional guitarist in LA would love that credit.

Bull****.

The lie Jenn repeated here five times is that Jenn knows the motivations of
ALL professional musicians residing in LA area and can speak on behalf of
all said musicians. Horse****. Jenn waves a twig around for a living, she is
on the periphery at most. And just because Jenn lusts after money or credits
or some association with proper musicians, it does not follow that all pro
guitarists in the LA area are all shallow individuals who will all turn any
trick without any regard to their musical orientation, beliefs, and
motivations.

Your lack of knowledge on the topic is stunning, but not surprising.

Yet more of that arrogance and egotism.

OK, I overstated when saying "every professional guitarist". Guys that
play in bars on the occasional weekends and would therefore qualify as
professionals might not care about being fulltime pros and therefore
wouldn't value a Disney credit on their resume, for example. Neither
would Slash or Van Halen or other famous rock players. The people I'm
speaking of are people just making a living, live and recorded, paying
into the pension fund, supporting their families, just folks in the
neighborhood kind of people. And if you don't think that the people who
get studio calls everyday are world-class players, you simply don't know
what you're talking about.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 2:25*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 2, 1:42*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:43*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 10:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 2:50*am, Jenn wrote:
In article

m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 5:36*pm, Jenn
wrote:
In article

s.co
m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 2:30*am, Jenn
wrote:
In article

grou
ps.c
om,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 29, 11:40*pm, Jenn

wrote:
In article

Jenn, not everything is equally excellent

Where did I say that?

Here, its the sum history of your postings.
You go gaga over eryone.

OK, let's try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vWQk47ROcw

This guy sucks. *If I played this badly, I'd start
doing
live
sound
at a
church for a living. *He should quit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ac4MsjQaEc

This should instead be "Blowin Chunks". *Can't he at
least
learn to
TUNE
fercryinoutloud? *This guy plays like Dylan presently
sings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2DC6S4i4wk

Are you kidding me? *Your Lowden is WAY outclassing
you.
*You're
killing
this beautiful arrangement. *And close your lips.

you gaga and fawn over everyone you know.

No I don't.

If you know someone, then that makes them the best ion
the
world.

No it doesn't.

You must know some mediocre,'or even just merely good
players!

Of course. *But why would I talk about them here?

I'm glad that we could clear that up.

When someone mentions *a name of a person
you kn ow, I never here you say that he is mediovre, or
even merely good.
He is always just fantastice!!!

I don't work with anyone you would name here who is mediocre.
*You
don't
understand how good you have to be to make it as a performer.
*I'm
BARELY in the professional performance scene in L.A. and other
places.
*
I've made other decisions (and interests) for my career. *I'm
very,
very
lucky that I can make a percentage of my income, around $20,000
a
year
the past few years, as a player of brass and trombone. *So when
someone
whose style I share and understand gets mentioned here, they
are at
a
place in the profession where they are REALLY special players;
the
top
fraction of a percent of the people who are serious about
playing.
*If
you ask 100 people are really into this niche of guitar playing
(solo
fingerstyle acoustic) who their favorite 5 players are, the
vast
majority would name those players I shared YouTube videos of.

you shared more than five players. which of these are in 'your'
top five, and in what order?

In no order: *Smith, Juber, Huttlinger, Gerhard, McManus. *Based on
more
than these videos.

Probably based on the five you most are in fear of ****ing off!

Yep, that's it exactly. *Thanks.

as you said earlier, you don't want to offend
anyone that might advamce your career.

Nope, I've never said that. *You're imagining things. *Bad batch of
Thunderbird?

essentially, that is what you said.

No, it's not.

You don't want to rank them for fear of offending one or more of them.
there are people you work with/for in a competitive field.

I prefer to have good relationships with people who I work with in
already stressful situations.

Fine, then spare us you fawning sycophancies.
Stop telling us how great and wonderful is each and every
luminous presence in your professional life.
It comes off as all so insincere and Pollyanna-i

If you can't even give us a simple rank order showing
us the relative 'bestness' of all the "greats" for fear of
'offending one of them for the least slight , we know that
you are not willing to give us any believable
assessments, and when you give us your "oohs" and
"aahs" about this associate , or that associate, of yours,
it is colored by your unwillingmness to be the least
bit critical.

Follow this simple adage in reference to your peers.
"If you can't tell us anything bad
about of you peers, don't say anything
at all about any of them!"

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 12:59*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Oct 3, 12:53*am, Jenn wrote:





In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:36*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 3:59*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Sacky burbled:

LOL!!!! That is what being a fawning sycophant is all
about!!!!

Um, no, Clyde, it isn't.

My dear SHhhh, yes it is

No, it's not.

yes it is

fawning·ly adv.
Synonyms: fawn1, apple-polish, bootlick, kowtow, slaver1, toady,
truckle
These verbs mean to curry favor by behaving obsequiously and
submissively: fawned on her superior; students apple-polishing the
teacher; bootlicked to get a promotion; lawyers kowtowing to a judge;
slavered over his rich uncle; toadying to members of the club; nobles
truckling to the king.

syc·o·phant *(sk-fnt, sk-)
n.
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering
influential people.

Gee, that would be just awful of me if any of it fit, which it doesn't.

b y your own admissiion, yes, it does.
your state of denial is no surprise to me
you already admited that you won't say even the least
negative thing here about your associates, for fear of loss of work.

No, you made that up. *Why?

Youare asking me why I did something that I did not do.
That is like me asking you why you molest children, I would
never ask you why you do something that yo9u do not do.

No, I'm not. *You said that I won't say anything negative for fear of
loss of work. *I didn't say that.

You said this:

“2. *If one of my friends looks themselves up on The Google and sees
that
I have called them "mediocre", it would hurt our relationship. *The
logical fallacy that you are committing is that you think that I
always
comment when a friend is mentioned. *I don't. *If I don't care for
what
they do, I stay quiet. *I have to work with these people.”

And then you said this:
“Let's say that you worked in a business that was super highly
competitive, and those people are part of a very small group of
people
who are qualified to do the work. *Further, several of those people
are
personal friends. *WHen you work together, it is often in high
pressure
situations in close quarters.
Now in that situation, would you rank the quality of those co-
workers,
based on a video of their work that captures one moment in time, and
post that opinion on the internet? “

Obviously, your reasons for not ranking tham are based upon
fears over your position in the workplace. That makes you appear to be
a
fawning sycophantic toady. It also means that you just broke
your most amazng streak on RAO. You WERE the only person
who never lied on RAO! Nos, we can't say that anymore.
And if you do, it would juet be a second lie, aded onto your
fisrt one.

This is a sad day, you have broken your cherry, you are now
a consumate liar, just like the rest of us on RAO.

You've gone all this way just to prove that Jenn doesn't want to hurt
the feelings of her colleagues by ranking them on the Internet.

This is not your finest day.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 1:23�am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
�Clyde Slick wrote:





On Oct 2, 1:43�am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
�Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:39�pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
�"James Smith" wrote:

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

according to jenn, thay are all equally great.

Nope, I've never said that. �You're making things up.

She won't tejj us which greats are greater
tah the other greats, out of fear of offending the not quite
the greatest of the greats.

Do you believe that there is a "best guitarist (or anything else) in the
world"?

yes to guitarist, yes to to other things
live or dead or currently incapacitated to some degree?

live, not incapacitated - B.B. King
live, of current limitation in capacity - Peter Green in his prime
dead, Roy Buchanon

combining all three, Peter Green

whatever you �might think of them, and whatever you might think of
those
I excluded, or those in styles I excluded (classical, flamenco,
Hawaiian, Country, Folk, etc.), at least I stood
up, I have an opinion, and I told you what it is.

Well, bully for you. �Here's my point: �I never say that anyone is THE
BEST at anything. �That's because of two factors:
1. �I haven't heard everybody. �Neither has anyone else. �There's
probably a guy in the Kentucky hills who sits on his porch all day for
40 years and plays all day who is amazing.
2. �We're talking about art. �The evaluations are subjective. �We've
shown that here. �How can one say that there is a "best"?

Plus, do we really need to constantly rank everything in our lives?
Can't we just enjoy the things that bring us pleasure without
assigning a score to them? That's obnoxious.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 7:41�am, Clyde Slick wrote:

Fine, then spare us

Speak for yourself. If you haven't noticed, you seem to be pretty much
alone on this one. (The exception, of course, is bitter music industry
pariah "Jim Smith," who just resents Jenn's success.)

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 9:45*am, Boon wrote:
On Oct 3, 12:59*am, Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 3, 12:53*am, Jenn wrote:

In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:36*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 3:59*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Sacky burbled:

LOL!!!! That is what being a fawning sycophant is all
about!!!!

Um, no, Clyde, it isn't.

My dear SHhhh, yes it is

No, it's not.

yes it is

fawning·ly adv.
Synonyms: fawn1, apple-polish, bootlick, kowtow, slaver1, toady,
truckle
These verbs mean to curry favor by behaving obsequiously and
submissively: fawned on her superior; students apple-polishing the
teacher; bootlicked to get a promotion; lawyers kowtowing to a judge;
slavered over his rich uncle; toadying to members of the club; nobles
truckling to the king.

syc·o·phant *(sk-fnt, sk-)
n.
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering
influential people.

Gee, that would be just awful of me if any of it fit, which it doesn't.

b y your own admissiion, yes, it does.
your state of denial is no surprise to me
you already admited that you won't say even the least
negative thing here about your associates, for fear of loss of work.

No, you made that up. *Why?

Youare asking me why I did something that I did not do.
That is like me asking you why you molest children, I would
never ask you why you do something that yo9u do not do.

No, I'm not. *You said that I won't say anything negative for fear of
loss of work. *I didn't say that.

You said this:

“2. *If one of my friends looks themselves up on The Google and sees
that
I have called them "mediocre", it would hurt our relationship. *The
logical fallacy that you are committing is that you think that I
always
comment when a friend is mentioned. *I don't. *If I don't care for
what
they do, I stay quiet. *I have to work with these people.”

And then you said this:
“Let's say that you worked in a business that was super highly
competitive, and those people are part of a very small group of
people
who are qualified to do the work. *Further, several of those people
are
personal friends. *WHen you work together, it is often in high
pressure
situations in close quarters.
Now in that situation, would you rank the quality of those co-
workers,
based on a video of their work that captures one moment in time, and
post that opinion on the internet? “

Obviously, your reasons for not ranking tham are based upon
fears over your position in the workplace. That makes you appear to be
a
fawning sycophantic toady. It also means that you just broke
your most amazng streak on RAO. You WERE the only person
who never lied on RAO! Nos, we can't say that anymore.
And if you do, it would juet be a second lie, aded onto your
fisrt one.

This is a sad day, you have broken your cherry, you are now
a consumate liar, just like the rest of us on RAO.

You've gone all this way just to prove that Jenn doesn't want to hurt
the feelings of her colleagues by ranking them on the Internet.

This is not your finest day.

My target opportunites were way down during your abscence

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 9:52*am, Boon wrote:
On Oct 3, 7:41 am, Clyde Slick wrote:



Fine, then spare us

Speak for yourself. If you haven't noticed, you seem to be pretty much
alone on this one. (The exception, of course, is bitter music industry
pariah "Jim Smith," who just resents Jenn's success.)

LOL!!
we are all alone here on RAO
we had Jim, George, Shhh, and me
commenting on Jenn's toadyism.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 11:58*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Oct 3, 6:52*am, Boon wrote:

On Oct 3, 7:41 am, Clyde Slick wrote:

Fine, then spare us

Speak for yourself. If you haven't noticed, you seem to be pretty much
alone on this one.

*Oh well that's just intolerable. *In a group of ...oh let's be
generous
and call it 5...someone has a different point of view than you.


With you and Boon back, we are up to seven,

Boon
Scott
'George
Shhh
Jim
Clyde
Jennn

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 1:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Oct 2, 11:31*pm, Jenn wrote:



In article ,
*"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote :

Juber is not a world class guitatrist, whatever that vague phrase
might mean. I have seen much better.
He is competent, but not musical.
Htere were others *posting here at that time who agreed.

Thanks for your opinion. *I suppose that the Hollywood contractors are
simply wrong.

We only have your assertion that Jubby is the most sought after session
guitarist in the world.

I didn't say that, but close enough. *If you don't believe me, call the
contractors. *Or go to Local 47 and check the date books. *Knock
yourself out.

No. You claim that your pen pal is the worlds greatest living guitarist.

No, I've never said that.

You
prove it!

That's pretty hard to do if you don't want to check with the union or
look at the date books. *Why don't you ring up the major contractors in
LA and ask them? *Do you know who they are?

Let's get something straight here right now : Hollywood contracts are no
measure of talent.

lol *Let's just say it's a pretty good indication.

No. Let's say that you say that, but you do not have the authority to do so.
In fact, the most revered guitarists in rock music history just give up
being regular session musicians once they have public recognition. Why would
they compromise their art when they don't NEED to? Jubbles bucks that trend.
Obviously, he can't shift enough Jubble-product.

lol *Your depth of ignorance is huge. *The "most revered guitarists in
rock music history" aren't qualified to play the sessions that I'm
speaking of. *You probably don't understand why.

*I have no idea what goes on in selecting "session players" over
others.
Probably little different than any other job search where who you know
is
often as important as what you know.

But I do have an opinion on an aspect raised early in the discussion.
Juber certainly shows he has all the chops to play great guitar.
In session gigs he executes what someone else creatively directs.
His execution may be as flawless as anyone, I don't really know.

But when left relying on his own creativeness in the bits Jenn has
provided,
he gets a bit embroiled in demonstrating technical prowess which
doesn't lend itself
to creating that musical emotion that moves me.
It's amazing guitar playing but it isn't amazing music to me.

Stephen mentioned that the level of appreciation for his prowess
increases
with the level of musical training. *I have no doubt thats true.
Musicians
playing for other musicians seem to be into this "look what I can do"
playing.
But technical prowess doesn't automatically equal music that touches
people emotionally. *I don't know who said it...but I read/heard that
it's often the note
not played that moves us most. *I agree completely.

Marc mentioned he like GYBE. *Their music is not technically
complicated
at all for the individual musicians. It's this layered minimalism that
starts slowly and simply but is built up into an intricate pattern
that can be deeply moving to some or just dark and depressing to
others.
But I don't hear any serious chops in any of the individual players
and if they did show it...it would be out of place and detrimental to
the music.

Anyway, I don't care if Jenn wants to be a fawning sycophant or not.
It's her priviledge to know these people and while the occasional name-
dropping
may be as much about her and who she knows rather than the people
she knows, *it's not as totally RAO centric as most of the BS going
on here.

ScottW

She is someone who's opinions I put little weight on,
given her lack of critical thinking.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 11:49*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Oct 3, 5:41*am, Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 3, 2:25*am, Jenn wrote:

In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:42*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:43*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 10:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 2:50*am, Jenn wrote:
In article

m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 5:36*pm, Jenn
wrote:
In article

s.co
m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 2:30*am, Jenn
wrote:
In article

grou
ps.c
om,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 29, 11:40*pm, Jenn

wrote:
In article

Jenn, not everything is equally excellent

Where did I say that?

Here, its the sum history of your postings.
You go gaga over eryone.

OK, let's try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vWQk47ROcw

This guy sucks. *If I played this badly, I'd start
doing
live
sound
at a
church for a living. *He should quit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ac4MsjQaEc

This should instead be "Blowin Chunks". *Can't he at
least
learn to
TUNE
fercryinoutloud? *This guy plays like Dylan presently
sings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2DC6S4i4wk

Are you kidding me? *Your Lowden is WAY outclassing
you.
*You're
killing
this beautiful arrangement. *And close your lips.

you gaga and fawn over everyone you know.

No I don't.

If you know someone, then that makes them the best ion
the
world.

No it doesn't.

You must know some mediocre,'or even just merely good
players!

Of course. *But why would I talk about them here?

I'm glad that we could clear that up.

When someone mentions *a name of a person
you kn ow, I never here you say that he is mediovre, or
even merely good.
He is always just fantastice!!!

I don't work with anyone you would name here who is mediocre.
*You
don't
understand how good you have to be to make it as a performer.
*I'm
BARELY in the professional performance scene in L.A. and other
places.
*
I've made other decisions (and interests) for my career. *I'm
very,
very
lucky that I can make a percentage of my income, around $20,000
a
year
the past few years, as a player of brass and trombone.. *So when
someone
whose style I share and understand gets mentioned here, they
are at
a
place in the profession where they are REALLY special players;
the
top
fraction of a percent of the people who are serious about
playing.
*If
you ask 100 people are really into this niche of guitar playing
(solo
fingerstyle acoustic) who their favorite 5 players are, the
vast
majority would name those players I shared YouTube videos of.

you shared more than five players. which of these are in 'your'
top five, and in what order?

In no order: *Smith, Juber, Huttlinger, Gerhard, McManus. *Based on
more
than these videos.

Probably based on the five you most are in fear of ****ing off!

Yep, that's it exactly. *Thanks.

as you said earlier, you don't want to offend
anyone that might advamce your career.

Nope, I've never said that. *You're imagining things. *Bad batch of
Thunderbird?

essentially, that is what you said.

No, it's not.

You don't want to rank them for fear of offending one or more of them.
there are people you work with/for in a competitive field.

I prefer to have good relationships with people who I work with in
already stressful situations.

Fine, then spare us you fawning sycophancies.
Stop telling us how great and wonderful is each and every
luminous presence in your professional life.
It comes off as all so insincere and Pollyanna-i

If you can't even give us a simple rank order showing
us the relative 'bestness' of all the "greats" for fear of
'offending one of them for the least slight , we know that
you are not willing to give us any believable
assessments, and when you give us your "oohs" and
"aahs" about this associate , or that associate, of yours,
it is colored by your unwillingmness to be the least
bit critical.

Follow this simple adage in reference to your peers.
"If you can't tell us anything bad
about of you peers, don't say anything
at all about any of them!"

* Reminds me of my feeling about lame ass advertiser funded
audio e-rags.


"At least" they will say that one ecellent item is better than another
excellent item.
Jen won't even do that.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 9:47*am, Boon wrote:
On Oct 3, 1:23 am, Jenn wrote:



In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:43 am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:39 pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

according to jenn, thay are all equally great.

Nope, I've never said that. You're making things up.

She won't tejj us which greats are greater
tah the other greats, out of fear of offending the not quite
the greatest of the greats.

Do you believe that there is a "best guitarist (or anything else) in the
world"?

yes to guitarist, yes to to other things
live or dead or currently incapacitated to some degree?

live, not incapacitated - B.B. King
live, of current limitation in capacity - Peter Green in his prime
dead, Roy Buchanon

combining all three, Peter Green

whatever you might think of them, and whatever you might think of
those
I excluded, or those in styles I excluded (classical, flamenco,
Hawaiian, Country, Folk, etc.), at least I stood
up, I have an opinion, and I told you what it is.

Well, bully for you. Here's my point: I never say that anyone is THE
BEST at anything. That's because of two factors:
1. I haven't heard everybody. Neither has anyone else. There's
probably a guy in the Kentucky hills who sits on his porch all day for
40 years and plays all day who is amazing.
2. We're talking about art. The evaluations are subjective. We've
shown that here. How can one say that there is a "best"?

Plus, do we really need to constantly rank everything in our lives?
Can't we just enjoy the things that bring us pleasure without
assigning a score to them? That's obnoxious.
You often express a preference for one item or performance
over another one. You have the courage to have
and express convictions, which is something that
Jenn completely lacks

[MiNe 109]

In article
,
Boon wrote:

This is not your finest day.

OTOH, he now has a magic word, 'fawning,' to use on Jenn in place of
honest argument, like Arny does with 'liar.'

Stephen

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 10:49*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Oct 3, 5:41*am, Clyde Slick wrote:





On Oct 3, 2:25*am, Jenn wrote:

In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:42*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:43*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 10:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 2:50*am, Jenn wrote:
In article

m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 5:36*pm, Jenn
wrote:
In article

s.co
m,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 30, 2:30*am, Jenn
wrote:
In article

grou
ps.c
om,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Sep 29, 11:40*pm, Jenn

wrote:
In article

Jenn, not everything is equally excellent

Where did I say that?

Here, its the sum history of your postings.
You go gaga over eryone.

OK, let's try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vWQk47ROcw

This guy sucks. *If I played this badly, I'd start
doing
live
sound
at a
church for a living. *He should quit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ac4MsjQaEc

This should instead be "Blowin Chunks". *Can't he at
least
learn to
TUNE
fercryinoutloud? *This guy plays like Dylan presently
sings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2DC6S4i4wk

Are you kidding me? *Your Lowden is WAY outclassing
you.
*You're
killing
this beautiful arrangement. *And close your lips.

you gaga and fawn over everyone you know.

No I don't.

If you know someone, then that makes them the best ion
the
world.

No it doesn't.

You must know some mediocre,'or even just merely good
players!

Of course. *But why would I talk about them here?

I'm glad that we could clear that up.

When someone mentions *a name of a person
you kn ow, I never here you say that he is mediovre, or
even merely good.
He is always just fantastice!!!

I don't work with anyone you would name here who is mediocre.
*You
don't
understand how good you have to be to make it as a performer.
*I'm
BARELY in the professional performance scene in L.A. and other
places.
*
I've made other decisions (and interests) for my career. *I'm
very,
very
lucky that I can make a percentage of my income, around $20,000
a
year
the past few years, as a player of brass and trombone.. *So when
someone
whose style I share and understand gets mentioned here, they
are at
a
place in the profession where they are REALLY special players;
the
top
fraction of a percent of the people who are serious about
playing.
*If
you ask 100 people are really into this niche of guitar playing
(solo
fingerstyle acoustic) who their favorite 5 players are, the
vast
majority would name those players I shared YouTube videos of.

you shared more than five players. which of these are in 'your'
top five, and in what order?

In no order: *Smith, Juber, Huttlinger, Gerhard, McManus. *Based on
more
than these videos.

Probably based on the five you most are in fear of ****ing off!

Yep, that's it exactly. *Thanks.

as you said earlier, you don't want to offend
anyone that might advamce your career.

Nope, I've never said that. *You're imagining things. *Bad batch of
Thunderbird?

essentially, that is what you said.

No, it's not.

You don't want to rank them for fear of offending one or more of them.
there are people you work with/for in a competitive field.

I prefer to have good relationships with people who I work with in
already stressful situations.

Fine, then spare us you fawning sycophancies.
Stop telling us how great and wonderful is each and every
luminous presence in your professional life.
It comes off as all so insincere and Pollyanna-i

If you can't even give us a simple rank order showing
us the relative 'bestness' of all the "greats" for fear of
'offending one of them for the least slight , we know that
you are not willing to give us any believable
assessments, and when you give us your "oohs" and
"aahs" about this associate , or that associate, of yours,
it is colored by your unwillingmness to be the least
bit critical.

Follow this simple adage in reference to your peers.
"If you can't tell us anything bad
about of you peers, don't say anything
at all about any of them!"

* Reminds me of my feeling about lame ass advertiser funded
audio e-rags.

Aw...don't have hurt feelings just because you're outside someone's
demographic.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 1:47*pm, MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
,

*Boon wrote:
This is not your finest day.

OTOH, he now has a magic word, 'fawning,' to use on Jenn in place of
honest argument, like Arny does with 'liar.'


Noi, I have given lengthy backup for my description
of her demeanor. When I see some critical
discernment out of her, I'll drop it.

[Clyde Slick]

On Oct 3, 1:28*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Oct 3, 10:21*am, Clyde Slick wrote:



On Oct 3, 1:09*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Oct 2, 11:31*pm, Jenn wrote:

In article ,
*"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote :

Juber is not a world class guitatrist, whatever that vague phrase
might mean. I have seen much better.
He is competent, but not musical.
Htere were others *posting here at that time who agreed.

Thanks for your opinion. *I suppose that the Hollywood contractors are
simply wrong.

We only have your assertion that Jubby is the most sought after session
guitarist in the world.

I didn't say that, but close enough. *If you don't believe me, call the
contractors. *Or go to Local 47 and check the date books. *Knock
yourself out.

No. You claim that your pen pal is the worlds greatest living guitarist.

No, I've never said that.

You
prove it!

That's pretty hard to do if you don't want to check with the union or
look at the date books. *Why don't you ring up the major contractors in
LA and ask them? *Do you know who they are?

Let's get something straight here right now : Hollywood contracts are no
measure of talent.

lol *Let's just say it's a pretty good indication.

No. Let's say that you say that, but you do not have the authority to do so.
In fact, the most revered guitarists in rock music history just give up
being regular session musicians once they have public recognition.. Why would
they compromise their art when they don't NEED to? Jubbles bucks that trend.
Obviously, he can't shift enough Jubble-product.

lol *Your depth of ignorance is huge. *The "most revered guitarists in
rock music history" aren't qualified to play the sessions that I'm
speaking of. *You probably don't understand why.

*I have no idea what goes on in selecting "session players" over
others.
Probably little different than any other job search where who you know
is
often as important as what you know.

But I do have an opinion on an aspect raised early in the discussion.
Juber certainly shows he has all the chops to play great guitar.
In session gigs he executes what someone else creatively directs.
His execution may be as flawless as anyone, I don't really know.

But when left relying on his own creativeness in the bits Jenn has
provided,
he gets a bit embroiled in demonstrating technical prowess which
doesn't lend itself
to creating that musical emotion that moves me.
It's amazing guitar playing but it isn't amazing music to me.

Stephen mentioned that the level of appreciation for his prowess
increases
with the level of musical training. *I have no doubt thats true.
Musicians
playing for other musicians seem to be into this "look what I can do"
playing.
But technical prowess doesn't automatically equal music that touches
people emotionally. *I don't know who said it...but I read/heard that
it's often the note
not played that moves us most. *I agree completely.

Marc mentioned he like GYBE. *Their music is not technically
complicated
at all for the individual musicians. It's this layered minimalism that
starts slowly and simply but is built up into an intricate pattern
that can be deeply moving to some or just dark and depressing to
others.
But I don't hear any serious chops in any of the individual players
and if they did show it...it would be out of place and detrimental to
the music.

Anyway, I don't care if Jenn wants to be a fawning sycophant or not.
It's her priviledge to know these people and while the occasional name-
dropping
may be as much about her and who she knows rather than the people
she knows, *it's not as totally RAO centric as most of the BS going
on here.

ScottW

She is someone who's opinions I put little weight on,
given her lack of critical thinking.

*A common problem in RAO. * I was playing kickin it at the Barn last
night.
That CD is really growin on me....except the mariachi track .
Somehow I'm nut sure if LJ could fit in those sessions.

ScottW

As of late, Shawn Murphy was bounced and Ritchie Hayward is dying,

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 10:58*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Oct 3, 6:52*am, Boon wrote:

On Oct 3, 7:41 am, Clyde Slick wrote:

Fine, then spare us

Speak for yourself. If you haven't noticed, you seem to be pretty much
alone on this one.

*Oh well that's just intolerable. *In a group of ...oh let's be
generous
and call it 5...someone has a different point of view than you.

Call out the ****ing brigade and ridicule them into conformance
before things just spiral out of your control.

This is so much more fun than OT current political events.
It's almost completely vacuous.
I suspect your goal is the pure vacuous discussion.
A discussion about nothing where the pure essence of prose
uncluttered and constrained by content can be fully exposed.

So you think it's okay for Art to insist that Jenn rank her friends on
talent? Or would you rather go back and find out what you're
responding to?

You're a rube.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 12:15*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Oct 3, 9:45*am, Boon wrote:





On Oct 3, 12:59*am, Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 3, 12:53*am, Jenn wrote:

In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:44*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:36*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 3:59*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Sacky burbled:

LOL!!!! That is what being a fawning sycophant is all
about!!!!

Um, no, Clyde, it isn't.

My dear SHhhh, yes it is

No, it's not.

yes it is

fawning·ly adv.
Synonyms: fawn1, apple-polish, bootlick, kowtow, slaver1, toady,
truckle
These verbs mean to curry favor by behaving obsequiously and
submissively: fawned on her superior; students apple-polishing the
teacher; bootlicked to get a promotion; lawyers kowtowing to a judge;
slavered over his rich uncle; toadying to members of the club; nobles
truckling to the king.

syc·o·phant *(sk-fnt, sk-)
n.
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering
influential people.

Gee, that would be just awful of me if any of it fit, which it doesn't.

b y your own admissiion, yes, it does.
your state of denial is no surprise to me
you already admited that you won't say even the least
negative thing here about your associates, for fear of loss of work.

No, you made that up. *Why?

Youare asking me why I did something that I did not do.
That is like me asking you why you molest children, I would
never ask you why you do something that yo9u do not do.

No, I'm not. *You said that I won't say anything negative for fear of
loss of work. *I didn't say that.

You said this:

“2. *If one of my friends looks themselves up on The Google and sees
that
I have called them "mediocre", it would hurt our relationship. *The
logical fallacy that you are committing is that you think that I
always
comment when a friend is mentioned. *I don't. *If I don't care for
what
they do, I stay quiet. *I have to work with these people.”

And then you said this:
“Let's say that you worked in a business that was super highly
competitive, and those people are part of a very small group of
people
who are qualified to do the work. *Further, several of those people
are
personal friends. *WHen you work together, it is often in high
pressure
situations in close quarters.
Now in that situation, would you rank the quality of those co-
workers,
based on a video of their work that captures one moment in time, and
post that opinion on the internet? “

Obviously, your reasons for not ranking tham are based upon
fears over your position in the workplace. That makes you appear to be
a
fawning sycophantic toady. It also means that you just broke
your most amazng streak on RAO. You WERE the only person
who never lied on RAO! Nos, we can't say that anymore.
And if you do, it would juet be a second lie, aded onto your
fisrt one.

This is a sad day, you have broken your cherry, you are now
a consumate liar, just like the rest of us on RAO.

You've gone all this way just to prove that Jenn doesn't want to hurt
the feelings of her colleagues by ranking them on the Internet.

This is not your finest day.

My target opportunites were way down during your abscence

My absence? Are you mixing me up with Scott?

I'm not saying you had no right to make your point. I'm saying the
fact that this thread ballooned to more than 400 posts because you had
to make the same point over and over, even though it was subjective,
was a bit ridiculous.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 12:25*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Oct 3, 9:47*am, Boon wrote:



On Oct 3, 1:23 am, Jenn wrote:

In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 2, 1:43 am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:39 pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

Jenn doesn't work with mediocre musicians!

Actually, with the exception of some of my students, you are very close
to being correct.

according to jenn, thay are all equally great.

Nope, I've never said that. You're making things up.

She won't tejj us which greats are greater
tah the other greats, out of fear of offending the not quite
the greatest of the greats.

Do you believe that there is a "best guitarist (or anything else) in the
world"?

yes to guitarist, yes to to other things
live or dead or currently incapacitated to some degree?

live, not incapacitated - B.B. King
live, of current limitation in capacity - Peter Green in his prime
dead, Roy Buchanon

combining all three, Peter Green

whatever you might think of them, and whatever you might think of
those
I excluded, or those in styles I excluded (classical, flamenco,
Hawaiian, Country, Folk, etc.), at least I stood
up, I have an opinion, and I told you what it is.

Well, bully for you. Here's my point: I never say that anyone is THE
BEST at anything. That's because of two factors:
1. I haven't heard everybody. Neither has anyone else. There's
probably a guy in the Kentucky hills who sits on his porch all day for
40 years and plays all day who is amazing.
2. We're talking about art. The evaluations are subjective. We've
shown that here. How can one say that there is a "best"?

Plus, do we really need to constantly rank everything in our lives?
Can't we just enjoy the things that bring us pleasure without
assigning a score to them? That's obnoxious.

You often express a preference for one item or performance
over another *one. You have the courage to have
and express convictions, which is something that
Jenn completely lacks-

As a reviewer, I went out of my way to avoid saying one product was
better than another because there are way too many variable to
consider. It never once occurred to me that Jenn was a fawning
sycophant because she brought an element of positivity to RAO. She
heard things, got excited about them and told the group. That's a long
way from Scott's constant bitching about the ****ty world we live in.

Now I don't expect RAO to be a haven for positivity and love, but I'm
against squashing what civility there is and replacing it with more
bitching. Jenn brings something positive to the group. Would you
rather have her or Jim Smith? PLF?

A lot of cool people used to post here. Let's not chase one of the
last of them away.