puntiniCAZpuntini

<< What does it take to record and release three live albums? >> People have to buy the first one, then the second, and then the third. Not new material, just live performances. Clearly, it doesn't seem like a big deal to some. Find me some shitty band that has released three live albums, come on. One that "nobody knows," as you say.

"If I had written: 'that little disk, you know'... no, you brought out Morrison and Barrett!" Your problem is that you read in bits. I wrote "if that day Morrison," meaning the day he died, beautifully drunk and high as a kite, had entered the room with Barrett (who that day was already thoroughly under treatment, full of every wonderful thing that pharmaceutical companies produce), they would have come out with a CD like this. But your little head reads "Barrett & Morrison" and thinks "better than the Floyd plus the Doors with a dollop of cream!" I, however, wrote something else, very specific, but your neurons keep banging their heads and repeating "Pink Floyd! Pink Floyd! Riders on the Storm!...". No, there's no Riders On The Storm here, nor Echoes. I don’t think Opel is an album that has sold like crazy at the top of all charts, despite having had forty times the publicity of this one. And after just two albums, Barrett was done. Morrison didn’t even make one, just think about it. Two little tunes then, on planet Geenoo.

"These guys are practically dead": you wrote that. And you didn't understand what I was referring to, nor the mood of the comment that meant "too bad, now the band is focusing more on Low-Fi stuff." "It's weak because if a group or project can't even release one album..." They have put out 7, plus three live albums (pressed and everything), plus two cover EPs. They've all sold enough to allow them to live off music for 15 years, and a scene (the Danish one, since they are among the first) that is dedicated to these sounds. But you haven't even heard the album, you don't even know who On Trial are, and you talk. For you, a project that releases THREE live albums is weak? A project that has performed multiple times at festivals around the world is weak? A project that spawned another 4/5 bands still active is weak? Yes, for you it is weak because the singer and the first guitarist got fed up. Well then. The planet Genoo offers this and much more.

"You wrote that they are dead and no longer around." No, both because it’s not true and because I wrote something else; then I also explained it to you again, but you’re being stupid and insisting. "You were way off, that project was arietta." And how do you deduce that? You didn’t hear it, you didn’t understand the references, you didn’t grasp what I said... it was arietta because they’ve exceeded the age where you spend a lot of time and money making records? Was it arietta because they don’t do like AC/DC who keep releasing the same album since the '80s? Was it arietta because they don’t go on MTV? Why Arietta? Explain to us.

You didn't answer my question, and you keep asking more.

Don't distract Bartle, he's thinking. And you know how much effort it costs him.

Tell me, I won't answer what you're asking if you don't answer first, it's not just you who asks questions. You started the conversation with a rather incomprehensible question, so don’t ask for explanations from others: why do you think they should still be around? On the planet geenoo, do bands never get old?

Yes, change the subject. << having exaggerated a bit >> The confirmation that you didn’t understand my references at all. In my opinion, you’ve never listened to a Barrett album, nor have you ever bothered to try to understand what the hell Morrison was actually doing in the Doors. If I had written "Pink Floyd + Doors," but I wrote something else. It's just that, as usual, you can’t grasp it. And you change the subject.

Moreover, it's obvious that you haven't understood what’s inside here, having calculated a "pink floyd + doors" instead of what I wrote, which is quite different. I don't think Syd Barrett has ever sold that much, and the songs favored by Morrison are usually the less famous ones of the Doors. But that's another story; first you have to tell me how bands age on Planet Geenoo.

Aside from the fact that it took me at least a minute to understand what the hell you were asking, if the question is "why isn’t this big group around anymore?", the answers are various. First of all, your brain combined with your ignorance in the matter hasn’t processed the comment well. “These” was meant as “On-Trial project,” since this is one of the many projects of a bunch of Danish stoners who release records in various “ways,” and for every “way” they have a “project,” and the elements that change from project to project are really few. So the "dead" referred to the "On-Trial way," but as musicians, they're still around with a slightly different project, more "13th Floor" and less "Doors," called "Dragontears." If you want to know why the "On-Trial project is dead," I BELIEVE it’s because the two who spent the most time on it have gotten older. The first album is twenty years old and they were almost thirty then, so do the math. Then, I don’t know where you live, but on planet Earth in 2011, if you want to live off revival music, you have to do a lot of live shows, and at a certain age, combined with a youth you can’t imagine (since a friend of yours smoked a joint and disappeared, while you’re still in the cellophane at 40), it’s tough. So older people find jobs and only play in their spare time. Cases of people playing music without a significant financial return into old age are few, and they’re all people with fried brains who can’t do anything else. This is what’s told on planet Earth, while on planet geenoo, how does it work?