Growing up and living in Southern California, left of the dial meant KCRW(Santa Monica College), KXLU(Loyola Marymount University), and KPCC(Pasadena City College). There was also a radio station out of San Diego or Tijuana called 91X...but their signal was weak so you'd only hear it at night. Anyhow, in the 80s, Suzanne Vega was like Ms. KCRW, they played her so often.

Babysitting my nephew.

Yes, it was videotape, but you can still crop the image whether it's film or videotape.

Before Ticketbastard, there was Ticketron...and we bitched about them just like we bitch about Ticketmaster. As the Who said...meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

At least the Lakers won...Derek Fisher rises from the dead yet again. But though it may appear the Mavs and Lakers are toast, I'm not ready to write them off just yet. Let's wait til the playoffs, where the game changes, before writing team obituaries.

You're going down a rabbit-hole, Taro. It's really very simple...the reason for the difference in visual quality between the 1973 MSG concerts filmed for TSRTS and the video feeds of 1975 Earl's Court and 1979 Knebworth, is the simple fact that film is always going to look better than videotape. Especially back in the 70s when videotape was primitive. The 1973 MSG concerts were filmed using 35mm panoramic cameras. Of course it's going to look better than a videotape feed(75 Earl's Court, 77 Seattle, 79 Knebworth) from a clunky video camera. End of discussion.

You're correct, greenman, that's what they did.

Last time I checked, this was the Ask Jimmy thread, not Ask Taro...just sayin'.

This is only my opinion, but I don't think the press reaction, negative or positive, had any effect on Led Zeppelin's musical path. The only thing I see that might have changed if Rolling Stone and others were more receptive to the band, is that there probably would have been more interviews, and possibly more tv/radio appearances...and Zeppelin would definitely been on the cover of Rolling Stone more than once, and before 1975. But whatever the band may of felt about the early reviews, I cannot fathom them allowing it to interfer with their music. Led Zeppelin II would have sounded the same even if Rolling Stone had praised the first album to the heavens. The same goes for Led Zeppelin III, and so on. For one thing, even if a few stuck-in-the-mud critics hated the band, the response from the fans on those first early tours was enough to show Led Zeppelin they were on the right path. For another, and most important, Led Zeppelin made the music and the albums THEY wanted and didn't release anything they weren't satisfied with. Led Zeppelin didn't pander to anyone...not to the fans and certainly not to the press.

Happy birthday to you, indeed! See, BD has his good qualities after all.

Holy crap! He's got bigger boobs than Kate Moss. Is this real or Photoshop?

You guys are on an Escher stairway.

1. Can I please hear the other two takes of the Stairway to Heaven solo? 2. Will you please put me in charge of your archives?

They were a great band, a meld of punk, country, funk, you-name-it, and the band could seriously play...and on top of all that you had the gloriously skewed harmonies and dynamics of the two dynamos up front: brunette Julie and blonde Gretchen. Tragically, they were one of the examples of how soul-sucking the music industry could be...Morgan Creek records fucked them over. The LA Weekly ran an excellent piece on the whole Mary's Danish thing back around 1999. I don't have the link handy but if you do a search, I'm sure you can find it...it's a real horror-show. The other thing that made it difficult for me back then, is that I was a fan of both Thelonious Monster and Mary's Danish, and Bob and Julie started seeing each other. When the relationship ended, it ended ugly and spectacularly...both of them ended up writing songs about each other. It was an uncomfortable situation, as I liked both of them. Most of the time, I'm not that excited about reunions...but Mary's Danish is one I would definitely be sweet on.

Do yourself a favor and get Mary's Danish "Circa" album...and "There Goes the Wondertruck...".

Loved me some Mary's Danish back in the 80s-90s...a sadly forgotten band...Julie and Gretchen were HOT!

Don't know if you consider Lone Justice alternative country...they might have been too early...but they surely were one of the influences of the alt.country scene of the 90s. http://youtu.be/_50-ZmoUWlU

They STILL are! The Simple Minds...before John Hughes RUINED them with that stupid Breakfast Club song. http://youtu.be/MWXZ_YK5jYc

Another thing that I've been meaning to post was this very in-depth 4-part series on the issue of Autism that the Los Angeles Times ran in December. Because the article includes photos and graphs, which are helpful to illustrating and understanding some points of the story, I am just going to post the link to the LA Times story. That way you can just click on the link and see everything there. A reminder: it is a four-part series, so it is a very lengthy read. Part one - An epidemic of disease or of discovery?: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/autism/la-me-autism-day-one-html,0,1218038.htmlstory Part two- Services go to those who fight hardest: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/autism/la-me-autism-day-two-html,0,3900437.htmlstory Part three - Families chase the dream of recovery: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/autism/la-me-autism-day-three-html,0,3438178.htmlstory Part four - Finding traces of autism in earlier eras: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/autism/la-me-autism-day-four-html,0,6403471.htmlstory

I read this article in the Los Angeles Times last month, and kept forgetting to post it here...finally remembered. I think it's worth discussing. Life choices dwarf pollutants in breast cancer risk, report finds A comprehensive study says women are better off focusing on everyday choices such as healthful eating and alcohol use than on environmental pollutants to reduce breast cancer risk. By Melissa Healy, Los Angeles Times December 7, 2011 There's an environmental link to breast cancer — but chemicals in the air and water may be the least of women's worries. A comprehensive study released Wednesday finds that substances to which women voluntarily expose themselves every day — fattening foods, alcohol, cigarettes, oral contraceptives and hormone replacement drugs — are far clearer drivers of risk than industrial chemicals such as bisphenol A and phthalates and a long list of feared additives and environmental pollutants. The study, "Breast Cancer and the Environment: A Life Course Approach," was produced by the Institute of Medicine, a panel of independent medical experts most often tapped by government agencies for authoritative advice. This time, however, the wide-ranging look at possible environmental contributors to breast cancer was requested and paid for — to the tune of about $1 million — by the organization Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the patient advocacy giant that has made pink ribbons synonymous with support for breast cancer research. Its findings are likely to perturb some environmental advocates, who have warned that the burgeoning industrial use of "endocrine-disrupting chemicals" has set the stage for a plague of breast and other hormone-related cancers in humans. But though the expert panel concluded that many such chemicals have a "biologically plausible" role in promoting invasive breast cancer, it cautioned that research has so far failed to establish a clear link between these omnipresent chemicals and the new breast tumors found in more than 230,000 women each year in the U.S. Instead, the team of toxicologists, epidemiologists and clinical cancer experts focused on the immediate role that women's decisions about diet, exercise, medical care and prescription drugs may have on their risk of developing breast cancer. Although such influences may not fit popular notions of disease-causing environmental factors, the panel defined "environment" in the broadest possible sense, including all the factors other than genes that shape a woman's health prospects. Despite many women's fears of environmental culprits over which they have little control, research linking breast cancer risk to the factors highlighted in the report is far stronger, said breast cancer specialist Dr. Patricia Ganz, who conducts research and clinical work at UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center and was not an author of the report. "Everyone thinks there's an easy fix, that there was something they put in the drinking water" that can be removed to prevent breast cancer, Ganz said. But the truth about cancer prevention, she said, "is closer to home. … This would be exactly the way I would counsel my patients." The report, 20 months in the making, acknowledges there are many unknowns. It calls on the Food and Drug Administrationto require better proof from drug makers, before and after market approval, that their products do not increase women's risk of breast cancer. It also cites clear evidence that high exposures to ionizing radiation increase breast cancer risk, and says that physicians and patients should carefully weigh the potential benefits of diagnostic imaging scans such as computed tomography, or CT, scans before ordering them. (Because mammograms use low-dose radiation and can help detect tumors, the report's authors urged women not to avoid them, but to discuss their frequency with a physician.) And it urges future research to focus on pivotal moments in women's development — in the womb, at puberty, during childbearing years and at menopause — when even small exposures to suspect chemicals or to everyday choices such as alcohol consumption might have an outsize effect on breast cancer risk. But the surest ways to drive down breast cancer risk, researchers concluded, lie with women themselves. The report cites mounting evidence that obesity and body fatness — and particularly weight gain at menopause and after — raise a woman's risk of developing invasive breast cancer, as well as a welter of research linking breast cancer to a woman's alcohol consumption, from young adulthood through after menopause, when invasive breast tumors are most likely to appear. It also notes that numerous studies find exercising drives down a woman's risk of breast cancer, and that women who use oral contraceptives or hormone replacements containing estrogen and progestin for several years are more likely to develop breast cancer than those who do not. But after conducting an exhaustive review of suspect chemicals used in industrial, agricultural and consumer-goods manufacture, the panel was far more circumspect. Though established links do exist for many industrial chemicals, including benzene, ethylene oxide and 1,3-butadiene, risk of any significance appears limited to small numbers of women whose jobs expose them to significant quantities of the chemicals, the report says. As for other chemicals in wide circulation that are the subject of intense scrutiny and activism — including parabens in cosmetics, growth hormones in livestock, phthalates in plastics and bisphenol A in food and drug packaging — evidence of danger is too scant to recommend avoidance, the panel said. UC San Francisco's Robert A. Hiatt, one of the report's authors, said "the ideal study" would follow a large population of girls and women from before birth to the grave, precisely measuring environmental exposures at every age. But "we can't really do that efficiently with humans at low cost," said Hiatt, who is director of population research at the university's Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. There may be simpler ways to detect breast cancer hazards that have been overlooked, Hiatt said, including measuring chemical exposures in more precise ways. The report's sponsors said the findings pointed the way forward "to gain a full understanding of what substances can be definitively linked to breast cancer." Komen for the Cure President Elizabeth Thompson told The Times that the report's recommendations for future research would be key in guiding the foundation's $5-million research budget next year. Despite its focus on life choices, the report may not deflect environmental groups from focusing on synthetic chemicals. "It is essential to minimize and prevent these exposures," said Olga Naidenko, senior research scientist for the Washington-based Environmental Working Group. melissa.healy@latimes.co Copyright © 2012, Los Angeles Times

+1 THIS!

Hmmmm, I seem to recall an Alternative Country thread here somewhere... Two of the greatest videos of the 80s were Van Halen's "Jump" and The Replacements "Bastards of Young". Not just because they were great songs...but because they showed you could make an entertaining video for peanuts. At a time of multi-million dollar Michael Jackson videos-cum-pepsi ads, it was refreshing to see. I LOVED the image of the tapping foot and the throbbing woofer of the speaker...GENIUS!!!

Wilco is coming to LA next week for three shows, and while in town, it looks like Jeff isn't content to just play concerts, as I got this notice from the Largo club recently: Jeff Tweedy (Wilco) will be the guest on the next Jeff Garlin In Conversation with... on Monday, January 23. Click here to purchase tickets. Grab them while you can as this show is sure to sell out. More guests will be announced soon for future Jeff Garlin In Conversation with... shows. Past 'Conversations' evenings included guestsLarry David, John Waters, Michael Moore, Henry Rollins & Judd Apatow among others. More of these fantastic shows will be announced for the coming months on Largo's online calendar. Stay tuned! Monday, January 23: Jeff Garlin In Conversation with Jeff Tweedy. Seats will be assigned beginning at 6pm, Doors open for drinks at 7pm, Showtime 8pm, Tickets $30. Click here to purchase tickets. For more detailed information about Largo at the Coronet please find us our website, www.largo-la.com, on Facebook, or on Twitter. Click here for Largo's Seat Assignment/Will Call/Ticket Purchase Policy. Stay tuned for more announcements and thank you for your support. Cheers, -Largo Luckily, I got my fix before it sold out!

I love the soundcheck for the Chicago show...for years they were mistakenly believed to be from a 1975 Minneapolis soundcheck. You can hear it on the cd "Tribute to Johnny Kidd and the Pirates" or the 4 cd set "Atrocity Exhibition" has both the Chicago 73 show and soundcheck. They run through a number of old classic rock and roll songs "Shakin' All Over"(hence the Johnny Kidd reference), "Round and Round", "School Days", etc., as well as "Night Flight" and "The Rover", which explains why many people assumed it was from 1975. Get it Walter...it's a MUST-HAVE!

Why am I not surprised. As you can see, Wayne and the Flaming Lips are constantly creating and doing a million things at once, things are loosey-goosey and spontaneous. With Jimmy, it appears you have to sit down with lawyers and sign contracts and hem and haw and ruminate for eons before making a decision. Such a shame, as I think Jimmy would flourish in a situation like the Lips...it might have reenergized him.