Megafaun — Real Slow
Album: MegafaunAvg rating:
Your rating:
Total ratings: 1390
Length: 4:50
Plays (last 30 days): 2
share
tweet
Rise up early and seize the day
Sing along, walk inside, get it before it goes away
To break your stride
They want to know
They tell you when to get here
They tell you where to go
Sing along, walk inside
Take a seat, watch the show
Take your time when everyone knows
If it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
Days of wine, windless road
People come from house
Just to take a seat and watch the show
And nobody leaves
Goes through the door
Songs that you sing
Are the songs that you've sung before
They broke your stride
They had to know
They told you how to get there
Then they told you where to go
Make a wrong turn and you end up
On the dead end road
Take your time 'cause everyone knows
That if it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
Take your time 'cause everyone knows
That if it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
It's gonna end real slow
It's gonna end real slow, real, real slow
Sing along, walk inside, get it before it goes away
To break your stride
They want to know
They tell you when to get here
They tell you where to go
Sing along, walk inside
Take a seat, watch the show
Take your time when everyone knows
If it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
Days of wine, windless road
People come from house
Just to take a seat and watch the show
And nobody leaves
Goes through the door
Songs that you sing
Are the songs that you've sung before
They broke your stride
They had to know
They told you how to get there
Then they told you where to go
Make a wrong turn and you end up
On the dead end road
Take your time 'cause everyone knows
That if it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
Take your time 'cause everyone knows
That if it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
It's gonna end real slow
It's gonna end real slow, real, real slow
Comments (143)add comment
Posters of such lengthy comments as can be found here should better redirect their texts to a peer reviewed journal.
Boring and repetitive.
Love it. If The Deadand Pink Floyd did a Tedeschi Trucks.
I thought the same. PS loved Nick Danger.
NickDanger wrote:
NickDanger wrote:
This is good. Reminds me of early Pink Floyd. This is one of the things I really like about RP - turns me on to new artists. Thank you, Bill and Rebecca.
They're huggin' and twirlin' again Bill! Thanks!
m_logie wrote:
Your entire post quite well explained the system. I give it a 9.
I also like the addition of labels to the numbers. Often, I have hesitated between two numbers, trying to decide if a given song is truly "most excellent" or merely "pretty good".
I give the system itself a 10.
This song I gave a 3. It's ok, it doesn't make me want to hit the "skip" button but it doesn't sound that interesting to my ears. I'm willing to hear more music from Megafaun.
> Applying a definition of "outstanding" to 9 also prevents the over-application of 10s, and a definition of ho-hum to 3 means we can even give songs 3s with relative impunity.
Your entire post quite well explained the system. I give it a 9.
I also like the addition of labels to the numbers. Often, I have hesitated between two numbers, trying to decide if a given song is truly "most excellent" or merely "pretty good".
I give the system itself a 10.
This song I gave a 3. It's ok, it doesn't make me want to hit the "skip" button but it doesn't sound that interesting to my ears. I'm willing to hear more music from Megafaun.
fredphoesh wrote:
scrubbrush wrote:
... or one might say the rant is sucko-barfo.
============================
Dear fredphoesh (if that is indeed your real name):
The Radio Paradise rating system has been functioning satisfactorily for a decade or more.
Your comment is timely and appreciated. I expect BillG will act on it as quickly as he acts on comments to remove certain songs from the playlist.
Have a nice day!
unclehud
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
scrubbrush wrote:
Unnecessary rant. One might even say puerile and annoying.
... or one might say the rant is sucko-barfo.
============================
Dear fredphoesh (if that is indeed your real name):
The Radio Paradise rating system has been functioning satisfactorily for a decade or more.
Your comment is timely and appreciated. I expect BillG will act on it as quickly as he acts on comments to remove certain songs from the playlist.
Have a nice day!
unclehud
fredphoesh wrote:
I agree that the words chosen, like most adjectives, are based on one's subjective opinion of one adjective versus another, but I think you've missed the point.
With this attempt to apply labels to point ratings, we are provided with some guidance as to what each score means. I am absolutely sick of ratings where anything less that 9 means crap. By saying "5 means pretty good" we are guided to give 5s and not feel like we're disparaging the song. Applying a definition of "outstanding" to 9 also prevents the over-application of 10s, and a definition of ho-hum to 3 means we can even give songs 3s with relative impunity.
Applying these adjectives to scores also removes some subjectivity on the meaning of numbers. I give ratings of 4 stars frequently on tripadvisor for good meals/activities, as to me 4/5 means very good. However, to most vendors, 4 stars can feel like a condemnation. I really wish they'd only let you give one 5 star rating for every nine other ratings you've given of 4 stars or less.
RP's system allows for a much greater range of scores and a much more meaningful scoring system, despite minor ambiguity in the selection of categories. I'll take this scoring system over the broken scoring system of tripadvisor or amazon any day.
P.S. Most excellent DOES NOT mean THE most excellent. It is a common construct in British and American English to say "most [adjective] [noun]" to mean "very [adjective] [noun]". See this discussion for guidance:
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/a-most-excellent-choice.68121/
Also, the word marginal in isolation lacks an adjective, I agree, but the etymology of the word is from the Latin margo meaning edge. Therefore I take it to mean on the very cusp of sucko-barfo - it is marginally better than the worst possible rating.
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
I agree that the words chosen, like most adjectives, are based on one's subjective opinion of one adjective versus another, but I think you've missed the point.
With this attempt to apply labels to point ratings, we are provided with some guidance as to what each score means. I am absolutely sick of ratings where anything less that 9 means crap. By saying "5 means pretty good" we are guided to give 5s and not feel like we're disparaging the song. Applying a definition of "outstanding" to 9 also prevents the over-application of 10s, and a definition of ho-hum to 3 means we can even give songs 3s with relative impunity.
Applying these adjectives to scores also removes some subjectivity on the meaning of numbers. I give ratings of 4 stars frequently on tripadvisor for good meals/activities, as to me 4/5 means very good. However, to most vendors, 4 stars can feel like a condemnation. I really wish they'd only let you give one 5 star rating for every nine other ratings you've given of 4 stars or less.
RP's system allows for a much greater range of scores and a much more meaningful scoring system, despite minor ambiguity in the selection of categories. I'll take this scoring system over the broken scoring system of tripadvisor or amazon any day.
P.S. Most excellent DOES NOT mean THE most excellent. It is a common construct in British and American English to say "most [adjective] [noun]" to mean "very [adjective] [noun]". See this discussion for guidance:
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/a-most-excellent-choice.68121/
Also, the word marginal in isolation lacks an adjective, I agree, but the etymology of the word is from the Latin margo meaning edge. Therefore I take it to mean on the very cusp of sucko-barfo - it is marginally better than the worst possible rating.
ImaOldman wrote:
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
I agree, no need to correct the dog with a sledgehammer. Such tools are often counterproductive. However, I too would prefer a simplified rating system. A five point system from "Hate it" to "Gotta have it" might do the job more efficiently.
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
I agree, no need to correct the dog with a sledgehammer. Such tools are often counterproductive. However, I too would prefer a simplified rating system. A five point system from "Hate it" to "Gotta have it" might do the job more efficiently.
fredphoesh wrote:
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
fredphoesh wrote:
Unnecessary rant. One might even say puerile and annoying.
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Unnecessary rant. One might even say puerile and annoying.
fredphoesh wrote:
Methinks that someone got up on the wrong side of bed, or is spending too much time in their head, or both. Just appreciating the great music mix on RP might very well be the cure for these ailments.
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Methinks that someone got up on the wrong side of bed, or is spending too much time in their head, or both. Just appreciating the great music mix on RP might very well be the cure for these ailments.
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Thought I heard Bill say the group's name was Mega Thong 
Yep, late on a Friday, gotta take this one to a 9. Lovely, thanks RP!
I liked this so much I tried to buy it but apple music and amazon don't seem to have this song/album...anyone have any suggestions?
Many thanks,
Amy
Many thanks,
Amy
Like others, I like it in a Dead kind of way.
This is good. Reminds me of early Pink Floyd. This is one of the things I really like about RP - turns me on to new artists. Thank you, Bill and Rebecca.
Very refreshing, Johnny likes it!
when is the "starts real fast" part?
Isn't there a Jenny Lewis song that sounds like this? Or was it Nekko Case?
nice sound to this. added to the Bearsville mix.
This is a really good studio tune. I've seen some live versions that just paled in comparison though.
Sounds like coming from the seventies, in a good way.
Way down down, down by the docks of the city...
dew34 wrote:
Me too....in fact I almost had an acid flashback during that trippy little meandering bit they did there :^ /
Reminds me of Dead songs sung by people other than Jerry Garcia.
Me too....in fact I almost had an acid flashback during that trippy little meandering bit they did there :^ /
This appeals to me.
Very nice.
Very nice.
Reminds me of Dead songs sung by people other than Jerry Garcia.
Before it breaks down.
pfreet wrote:
It reminds me of all sorts of things, which I can't point out exactly. Either they stole a lot of elements from everywhere, or it's just one of those unique songs with genuine catchy elements.
This sounds at first like a Ryan Adams song. Anybody else think that?
It reminds me of all sorts of things, which I can't point out exactly. Either they stole a lot of elements from everywhere, or it's just one of those unique songs with genuine catchy elements.
This is Cold Roses by Ryan Adams, right??
This sounds at first like a Ryan Adams song. Anybody else think that?
I only rate it a 3 but after hearing it late the other night around the fire I like it better. For me, late night song only.
ColdMiser wrote:
Dead Pink Phish
I like salmon.
Dead Pink Phish
I like salmon.
It's been a while - if EVER - that I've heard Megafaun on RP. Had no clue this is what the Dead sounded like; that's what I get for being young, I guess.
Whoa.... TOTAL early-seventies Floyd. (Not a bad thing!) Free Four, Fearless, etc...
LowPhreak wrote:
Dead Floyd?
Dead Pink Phish
Dead Floyd?
Dead Pink Phish
easmann wrote:
I like both. I'll give "Grateful Floyd" the vote though. : )
Dead Floyd?
I like both. I'll give "Grateful Floyd" the vote though. : )
Dead Floyd?
Grateful Floyd - cool!
Or Pink Dead. You decide.
Or Pink Dead. You decide.
Some of those sustained harmonies...were almost Floydian.
Love this. 8
LPCity wrote:
Stand in line.
Stand in line.
chinaski wrote:
Interesting because I immediately thought of "Wharf Rat" from the album, "Dead Set"
Follow Megafaun's "Slow" with Jerry Garcia's "The Wheel" and you've made my day...or night as the case may be. I rarely if ever post in here but after Bill played us some rather tasty Hot Tuna these past few days I finally have to voice my appreciation! Thanks Bill!
P.S. If you happen to be browsing around for info about Megafaun out of North Carolina know there is a similarly named band called Megafauna out of Austin. Both are cool bands and now you are aware.
Follow Megafaun's "Slow" with Jerry Garcia's "The Wheel" and you've made my day...or night as the case may be. I rarely if ever post in here but after Bill played us some rather tasty Hot Tuna these past few days I finally have to voice my appreciation! Thanks Bill!
P.S. If you happen to be browsing around for info about Megafaun out of North Carolina know there is a similarly named band called Megafauna out of Austin. Both are cool bands and now you are aware.
thought this was chris robinson brotherhood for a bit. they're also truly carrying the dead torch. 
This IS So Dead-like! Just saw Warren Haynes symphonic tribute to Jerry! Was interesting and very different.
DEAD since '68, and yeah, it does remind me a lot of the DEAD. Good stuff. 
Thought it was a cover of Wharf Rat for a second.
BBoyes wrote:
Yeah it sure does! Like it...
Almost sounds like Gratetful Dead, if they were starting in now?
Yeah it sure does! Like it...
Almost sounds like Gratetful Dead, if they were starting in now?
Ag3nt0rang3 wrote:
I can't imagine a set more likely to drive me to the PSD.
Then go PSD off!
I can't imagine a set more likely to drive me to the PSD.
Then go PSD off!
It's exactly how i feel right now..
jchap5 wrote:
I can't imagine a set more likely to drive me to the PSD.
Roxy, Fleet Foxes, Megafaun - nice set
I can't imagine a set more likely to drive me to the PSD.
"They told you how to get there and they told you where to go...", isn't that the truth.
still stinks of patchouli... 
Roxy, Fleet Foxes, Megafaun - nice set
LPCity wrote:
I'm in line with you ....
Stand in line.
I'm in line with you ....
Been grooving on this one for a while now-Just checked out some of their live performances on YouTube. I think they are using, like Triple auto tune on this recording!
scraig wrote:
Stand in line.
Stand in line.
stegokitty wrote:
and they say that baby is kinda slow...
also, that band logo looks like that of some snow ski area....
It's like Grateful Dead and Pink Floyd had a baby.
and they say that baby is kinda slow...
also, that band logo looks like that of some snow ski area....
Krispian wrote:
With Paul McCartney on bass
Yeah, thought it was Phish at first.
With Paul McCartney on bass
Yeah, thought it was Phish at first.
I'm going to check out more of Megafaun's music.
Fine song on it's own legs but.... sure does start like "Wharf Rat" to my ears. Not a bad thing...
stegokitty wrote:
With Paul McCartney on bass
It's like Grateful Dead and Pink Floyd had a baby.
With Paul McCartney on bass
stegokitty wrote:
i was just wondering, 'is the only PF song that sounds like GD?'
It's like Grateful Dead and Pink Floyd had a baby.
i was just wondering, 'is the only PF song that sounds like GD?'
It's like Grateful Dead and Pink Floyd had a baby.
Has GD written all over it.......very nice.
RIP Jerry. 08.09.1995
RIP Jerry. 08.09.1995
Great song, excellent recording ~> 8.
Well, that sounds like Sam Roberts …
Delicious bass line.
This music is really sloooooow! Ráaaaaaa.. 
BBoyes wrote:
so very Dead-ish that i had to check who it was...
I was hooked just by the intro. Shades of the Dead... that lilting synchopation.
so very Dead-ish that i had to check who it was...
I was hooked just by the intro. Shades of the Dead... that lilting syncopation.
Only caught the end of that..want to hear it again and again....think I have fallen in love with it
This song is merely the tip of the album's iceberg--an amazing collection of very different and very compelling songs. You will not be disappointed.
daedalus wrote:
I agree! It's like Barefoot Jerry vocals with the Grateful Dead backing them up. Could be Mother Nature's Way Of Saying High?
The harmonies remind me so much of Barefoot Jerry - Wayne Moss & Mac Gayden's band from the 70's.
just not as exciting!
just not as exciting!
I agree! It's like Barefoot Jerry vocals with the Grateful Dead backing them up. Could be Mother Nature's Way Of Saying High?
Great Sunday Morning Pick!!
The Dead meet Ryan Adams in the tradition of great NC guitarists: Jamie Hoover and Mitch Easter.
amazing love this
loe this
this sounds up on sun met puppetsl oooove his
gvan wrote:
Agree with the album cover comment, but not with the eager hope of song ending; kind of enjoyed this this evening.
Wish this song would end real fast. And their album cover looks like a logo for a consulting corporation.
Agree with the album cover comment, but not with the eager hope of song ending; kind of enjoyed this this evening.
The harmonies remind me so much of Barefoot Jerry - Wayne Moss & Mac Gayden's band from the 70's.
just not as exciting!
just not as exciting!
Wish this song would end real fast. And their album cover looks like a logo for a consulting corporation.
Shades of the Dead....
kysmet wrote:
Yup. Me too!
I think I like this...a lot.
Yup. Me too!
Derivatively Delicious!
or the Band....
4 —> 3 I think I like this...a lot.
Jammi' Jam!
Could use some whipits......6
Thank you Bill, great track, suitably laid back for a friday afternoon
martinc wrote:
I, too appreciate the vocals, very much a Dead song, but a llittle bit of Avett Bros, like it, clean harmonies.
Intro sounds like the Kinks - living on a thin line. Nice vocals and I like the guitar noodling.
I, too appreciate the vocals, very much a Dead song, but a llittle bit of Avett Bros, like it, clean harmonies.
lily34 wrote:
same exact thing for me.
i hear the dead and pink floyd influences, but that's not why i like it. there's just something calming about this one.
i want to hear more.
A bit more Floyd and a lot less Dead would be optimal IMO. As it stands this is snoozeville
same exact thing for me.
i hear the dead and pink floyd influences, but that's not why i like it. there's just something calming about this one.
i want to hear more.
A bit more Floyd and a lot less Dead would be optimal IMO. As it stands this is snoozeville
Intro sounds like the Kinks - living on a thin line. Nice vocals and I like the guitar noodling.
ch83575 wrote:
same exact thing for me.
i hear the dead and pink floyd influences, but that's not why i like it. there's just something calming about this one.
i want to hear more.
I have been really enjoying this one... each time it comes on, I stop to listen. Does that mean I should bump it up from 8 —> 9?
I particularly like the little half-step in "you had to know"
I particularly like the little half-step in "you had to know"
same exact thing for me.
i hear the dead and pink floyd influences, but that's not why i like it. there's just something calming about this one.
i want to hear more.
Someone give these guys some coffee.
I have been really enjoying this one... each time it comes on, I stop to listen. Does that mean I should bump it up from 8 —> 9?
I particularly like the little half-step in "you had to know"
I particularly like the little half-step in "you had to know"
oHHH mAN!!!! pUTTING ME TO SLEEP, SHOOT ME NOW. -mECHANC2
tHESE gUYS ARE HIPPIES. gUHGHG. -mECHANIC 1.
i like it.
Pretty nice, but if you don't follow it up with Pink Floyd's Fearless, you've wasted a golden opportunity for a great playlist.
Growing on me : )
sirdroseph wrote:
Yes there is, I even uploaded one which they accepted but apparently the song got lost. However, I have found that once a group gets a song added unless it is one of their favorite groups they generally will only have one or two representations from them and that's it! Very dissapointing and one of the main reasons I do not listen to this station, way too much repetition.
You have to consider that you are not the only one listening to RP. I am a junkie for the new just like you are. Radio stations come in all shapes and sizes, but they always cater to a specific market. They are a business, you know. If they don't have income, then they cannot provide your ears with beautiful music. I feel RP has a very good balance of the new and old, and there is usually not too much repitition. For younger listeners, a lot of the stuff you and I have heard many times before is quite new to them. I don't want them to miss out on the great old music that they won't hear anywhere else but here. RP needs to attract new listeners and one way to do this is by playing the best music. Period. Do you think it's a good idea to stop playing good music, just because a few elder listeners have heard it already a lot?
The main reason I listen to RP is the quality of the selections, which cover a mind-boggling range of styles and performers. I don't think you will find a station anywhere else that has as good of a selection. Of course, this is quality to my ears. Some listeners may have different tastes. For me, the only thing I don't like about RP are some of the really old, stuffy tunes. But I respect those that like that stuff, even though I can be a grouch about it.
Thanks for this upload, Sid. Well done!
Yes there is, I even uploaded one which they accepted but apparently the song got lost. However, I have found that once a group gets a song added unless it is one of their favorite groups they generally will only have one or two representations from them and that's it! Very dissapointing and one of the main reasons I do not listen to this station, way too much repetition.
You have to consider that you are not the only one listening to RP. I am a junkie for the new just like you are. Radio stations come in all shapes and sizes, but they always cater to a specific market. They are a business, you know. If they don't have income, then they cannot provide your ears with beautiful music. I feel RP has a very good balance of the new and old, and there is usually not too much repitition. For younger listeners, a lot of the stuff you and I have heard many times before is quite new to them. I don't want them to miss out on the great old music that they won't hear anywhere else but here. RP needs to attract new listeners and one way to do this is by playing the best music. Period. Do you think it's a good idea to stop playing good music, just because a few elder listeners have heard it already a lot?
The main reason I listen to RP is the quality of the selections, which cover a mind-boggling range of styles and performers. I don't think you will find a station anywhere else that has as good of a selection. Of course, this is quality to my ears. Some listeners may have different tastes. For me, the only thing I don't like about RP are some of the really old, stuffy tunes. But I respect those that like that stuff, even though I can be a grouch about it.
Thanks for this upload, Sid. Well done!
paraclete wrote:
Absolutely! Is the rest of their stuff like this?
Some of it is. This is the best cut on the album. They are rather poly-genre in their music and don't classify well. Definitely accomplished musicians.
Absolutely! Is the rest of their stuff like this?
Some of it is. This is the best cut on the album. They are rather poly-genre in their music and don't classify well. Definitely accomplished musicians.
sirdroseph wrote:
Yes there is, I even uploaded one which they accepted but apparently the song got lost. However, I have found that once a group gets a song added unless it is one of their favorite groups they generally will only have one or two representations from them and that's it! Very dissapointing and one of the main reasons I do not listen to this station, way too much repetition.
Awwww, don't take it personally, even if it is.
Yes there is, I even uploaded one which they accepted but apparently the song got lost. However, I have found that once a group gets a song added unless it is one of their favorite groups they generally will only have one or two representations from them and that's it! Very dissapointing and one of the main reasons I do not listen to this station, way too much repetition.
Awwww, don't take it personally, even if it is.
Sounds more like Violet Sedan Chair to me. Their only album is available for download from this location:
https://soundcloud.com/search?q%5Bfulltext%5D=violet+sedan+chair
Sounds real good for a band that never existed!
https://soundcloud.com/search?q%5Bfulltext%5D=violet+sedan+chair
Sounds real good for a band that never existed!
scraig wrote:
Yes there is, I even uploaded one which they accepted but apparently the song got lost. However, I have found that once a group gets a song added unless it is one of their favorite groups they generally will only have one or two representations from them and that's it! Very dissapointing and one of the main reasons I do not listen to this station, way too much repetition.
I thought it was a new Phish song as well. Is there nothing else good from these guys?
Yes there is, I even uploaded one which they accepted but apparently the song got lost. However, I have found that once a group gets a song added unless it is one of their favorite groups they generally will only have one or two representations from them and that's it! Very dissapointing and one of the main reasons I do not listen to this station, way too much repetition.
I thought it was a new Phish song as well. Is there nothing else good from these guys?
Man, I like that too, Bill!
joelbb wrote:
Absolutely! Is the rest of their stuff like this?
This is much better post-Garcia Dead than Phil & buddies.
Absolutely! Is the rest of their stuff like this?
Dave_Mack wrote:
Reminds me of Ryan Adams' "Cold Roses" which, in turn, ...you get the picture. It's funny that it's called "Real Slow", cause it sure is. When the dead played a song like this, I'd head for the restroom.
ETA: Bill is playing "Cold Roses" now. Hah!
Drums —> Space —> head for restrooms
Reminds me of Ryan Adams' "Cold Roses" which, in turn, ...you get the picture. It's funny that it's called "Real Slow", cause it sure is. When the dead played a song like this, I'd head for the restroom.
ETA: Bill is playing "Cold Roses" now. Hah!
Drums —> Space —> head for restrooms
skyguy wrote:
LOL
Chinafaun Sunflower
LOL
Chinafaun Sunflower
Bocephus wrote:
Guitarist is a dead ringer for Jerry. Thought the same thing.
Reminds me of Ryan Adams' "Cold Roses" which, in turn, ...you get the picture. It's funny that it's called "Real Slow", cause it sure is. When the dead played a song like this, I'd head for the restroom.
ETA: Bill is playing "Cold Roses" now. Hah!
Guitarist is a dead ringer for Jerry. Thought the same thing.
Reminds me of Ryan Adams' "Cold Roses" which, in turn, ...you get the picture. It's funny that it's called "Real Slow", cause it sure is. When the dead played a song like this, I'd head for the restroom.
ETA: Bill is playing "Cold Roses" now. Hah!
I can almost smell these guys' body odor.
This is much better post-Garcia Dead than Phil & buddies.
Simply wonderful. I love these guys. They are 10 times better live as well.