Entertainment For Lively Minds
The Jo Whiley Music Show
Posted by simontyler on 21 October 2011 - 10:21pm.
15 mins in and I feel slightly queasy. Why not interview Just Noel G. Julian Lennon has said four words. Oh and the host of a music show hasn't heard of Keith Jarret.Maybe Im too harsh but that feels wrong
Nice bit with Butch Vig though.
lets see how it ends it may get better
edit: er no it didn't get better
- More from simontyler.
- Login or register to post comments
-
She's rubbish
Bring back Radcliffe and Maconie
Who's Keith Jarrett?
Is he that Welsh taxi driver that Rob Brydon used to do?
I have never heard of him.
Who is he?
erm....the taxi driver from that rob bryden thingy
yes that's who it is. AKA one of the worlds greatest Pianists, the doyen of ECM records and one of Miles Davis old sidekicks!
Oh, HIM!
(Nope. Still never heard of him.)
Me neither
Clearly another new musical avenue to explore?
give him a go
Not for me. I have listened but...
The second track is fine as a piece of classical music.
The first one is awful in my opinion.
ah well
I love his stuff, but its not compulsory,one of my friends call it a Hamster walking across a keyboard! my original point though was that someone who hosts a music chat show, should at least of heard of him. He is not "obscure".
Fair enough
The Koln Concert by Keith Jarrett
It's still the biggest selling jazz album of all time isn't it?
And didn't BBC Radio 4 (Heard of them Jo?) recently do a documentary about it?
one of the best pieces
of music ever made.
Jesus H Christ.
Everyone
should own this. Even if you can't stand jazz. It's that important.
Lor' save us...
...from "important" records that "everyone should own"!
It's your choice
So you're sitting at home thinking what album to play. Should you play the important one that you can't stand or the one that you just love that everyone else seems to hate? I know what my answer is and it will be the same every time so there's not much point in the important record being in my collection at all!
Yeah. My record collection positively bulges...
...with "important" records that I never play but which I bought because people said I should. I'll take a heartfelt recommendation every time, but if someone tells me that a record's "essential", or "one of the greats" or "I cant believe youve never heard X." or - worst of all - "Call yourself a music fan, and you don't own X", or anything else implying a sense of duty, these days I'll likely just skip it, I'm afraid. Bitten. Shy.
Oh, and modern jazz? No ta, in general. I've tried. *shudders at the memory*
Define modern jazz
Most people mean stuff that was recorded in 1959. That first piece I think is wonderful BTW. Mind you I like jazz. And agree the Koln Concert is wonderful. But then I can't stand Lady Gaga. Horses/courses, etc.
One of my favourite pieces of music....
Should a pop DJ know more about other styles of music?
Yes, she bloody well should!
We've given Jo Whiley a good kicking on this website several times before, but she is kind of asking for it. There have been numerous instances of her ignorance - and I can think of some of the daft comments she would make sat beside Peel on the Glastonbury set.
Oh....and she annoys the bejesus out of me. I can't quite identify what it is about her TV/Radio persona, but it gets under my skin.
Personally, the whole radio landscape would improve if someone with eclectic and wide ranging tastes like Andy Kershaw was let loose on primetime radio. Rather than pandering to a narrow definition of popular music, the public might be exposed to other stuff that might just catch the imagination.
And as for Keith Jarrett, the bloke is a genius. My CD collection and my life is much the better for his work.
Well fair call...
...but surely you'd agree that just about everything is, at least, worth a try? Once? That said, I suppose it being two hours of improvisation on an allegedly wonky piano isn't the greatest sales pitch of all time.
I find it transcendent and utterly unique, but understand entirely that OO may well be A.
Sure.
As I've said before, I've given tons of jazz a go. I've got Miles, Coltrane, Mingus and Gillespie records in my collection. Don't care for them one bit, despite - as a youth - thinking I really ought to learn to appreciate them. Then, gradually I just gave up. Not remotely my thing. My good and valued buddies El Hombre and Pencilsqueezer - both avowed jazz heads - recently tried for a late conversion. Nothin' doin'.
I like some jazz, but we're talking Goodman, Bechet, Armstrong, Django and Charlie Christian. Later than that, I'm generally not interested. I'm not completely closed off: maybe one day I'll get it. Sure don't at the moment!
I've genuinely never heard of Keith Jarrett, and the clips above aren't about to convert me, sadly. He's not a household name and I see no reason why someone with Jo Whiley's remit should be expected to have heard of him either. Sorry. Jazz isn't compulsory! (Just as an adjunct question: would the OP expect her to have heard of Buxtehude, Lassus, William Walton or Judith Weir?)
(FWIW, I'm the same with prog: heard a lot, even own some. Never yet met a (nominally) prog album that didn't make me go "OH FUCK OFF!")
Here we go with the labelling of music again
I was given The Koln Concert about 30 years ago and was completely blown away by it. Up until then I'd never heard of Keith Jarrett and since then the only other Jarrett album that's made any impact on me is The Paris Concert which is similar to Koln but not as good.
The thing is I don't regard them as being jazz. Like most people I have a preconceived notion of what jazz is and these albums just don't fit it.
These albums are (IMHO) just a genius playing the piano. If it wasn't for the fact that they are both completely improvised I'd label them under "classical music" (where improvisation is a major no-no I believe).
Only finding these albums in the "jazz" section is as strange to me as only finding the likes of Lucinda Williams or Steve Earle in "country".
correct
it's more 'loose form' classical / jazz hybrid.
I don't consider it jazz - a genre I don't really much enjoy.
Re the OP - Jo Whiley should know Jarrett and she should have heard the Koln recording ffs. I'm guessing she was taking the piss, right?
"just about everything is, at least, worth a try?"
Sorry, no it's not. There is simply too much music for any one person to do more than scratch the surface of much more than one or two thousand albums. Even ignoring all the tat, was it Emmylou Harris who said that "the world has enough 'quite good' "?
2000?
I completely agree with your sentiment but I think that even 2000 may be too higher figure. If you start your album listening at about 15 and give one album a week a go, you'll be well past your 53rd birthday before you notch up your 200th album... it may be different now but at 15 I was in no financial position to absorb anywhere near that figure.
OK maybe I was hasty
(look at the time I posted it, on a Sunday too!). 1,000 may be nearer the mark, on the basis that I'm middle aged and have something like 400-500 albums that I'm fairly well acquainted with.
I would add that maths clearly isn't my strong point, but given that it's what I did my Honours Uni degree in ....
But how do you tell what's worth a try?
Personally, I'm always open for personal recommendations of new stuff and always try and give it a fair go but, increasingly, I find that I listen to something 'new' only to come to the conclusion that it sounds like something 'old'.
Consequently I'm far more inclined to try 'old but new to me' rather than 'absolutely new' (if that makes sense).
I often scan the new album reviews in Word without recognising a single artist - how can I give those a fair listening? Obviously I can't, so I don't bother unless people I trust - in person or on here - are raving about something.
Conclusion? There's too much new stuff around - largely as a result of the ease of access to recording and distribution facilities. In the past the whole record company/studio system meant that only the best songwriters/players managed to get a record released. Obviously some quality music slipped through the net in this process but I'm increasingly convinced that it provided a good first level of quality control.
It was Mary Gauthier
It was something along the lines of "There's an awful lot of "good" music being made. "Good" is not good enough, it needs to be "Exceptional" to stand out." It was on a Word podcast some time last year (or possibly the year before).
I can't be arsed chasing the New in music anymore. That's a young man / woman's thing and far too much of it isn't really new at all, just tarted-up retreads of things I've been hearing for years. I haven't lost my curiosity, I reckon if something's really exceptional and new it'll reach my ears sometime. Meanwhile there's loads of Old that I've never heard.
Someone above cited Andy Kershaw as the sort of open-minded DJ that should be all over the radio. I recall Andy Kershaw expressing his absolute loathing of Jazz on many occasions. I find a lot of the African stuff he championed derivative and samey. We all have our musical blind spots.
If everyone loved everything in music we'd have nothing to talk about in here, for a start. I used to "hate" country music, like most UK males of my generation, now I find I love the stuff. A few good friends will still dismiss it out of hand. C'est la vie.
It was me
You're right, Andy Kershaw detests jazz (and pulls no punches about it in his autobiography - but the sheer vehemence of his dislike did make me chuckle when I read it). This is one area where my taste really differs from his, but over the years I've had my ears opened by Mr Kershaw to many types of new music, so I thought he was a good example of someone with catholic tastes (even if he has a major blindspot!).
It is wishful thinking on my part to believe that the BBC would ever stray far from the formulaic for their daytime output on R1 or R2. To me, Jo Whiley represents music that is often stilted and dull and I am sure I'd consume more music radio (which for me usually means listening whilst in the car) if it could be more eclectic. 6 Music is not really an option for me as it is digital only.
I still want to chase the 'new', but it doesn't have to be new to the world, just new to me. In many ways, the radio is an increasing irrelevance for me. Word covermount CDs, Songlines covermount CDs, KCRW's 'Morning Becomes Eclectic' podcasts, NPR 'Tiny Desk Concert' podcasts, Later with Jools, etc all turn up something every few weeks to excite me.
Kershaw and new music
For around ten years I was like a sponge. I had endless capacity for new music. Most of it came from Andy's radio show.
I'm digitising my collection of hundereds Kershaw C90s and it amazes me just how much music he introduced me to. By no means was it all world music; it was a wonderful mixture of stuff.
I just don't have the same musical openness now. Not for brand new stuff anyhow. I prefer to dig back the way into the roots.
And if Andy doesn't like jazz - no big deal. I got my jazz fixes elsewhere.
Sounds like
some of these 'important' records may well also qualify as 'Unlistenable Classics'.
Total genius.
That really hit the spot for me.
Must go and see him if I can afford the £75.00 next time he's in London.
is it worse than her 90's
Channel 4 show - that was arse wiping bad
As opposed to
finger-lickin' good?
She may be a very nice person
and she's easy on the eye but she's a load of auld shite on the telly.
she's not much better on the radio
I really tried giving her godawful Radio 2 show a go after she replaced Radcliffe and Maconie, but there's only so many "really great" sessions from the likes of Will Young, The Kooks and Scouting For Girls etc. any sane person can endure
Not this again...
Why should Jo Whiley be expected to have heard of Keith Jarret? She presents a general music show on R2, not frigging 'Jazz Club'.
Here we go again
I'm pretty sure this is at least the second thread on this blog this year specifically aimed at slagging off Jo Whiley. For someone so patently decent, about whom I've never read a harsh word - as far as her personality is concerned - and who does her job pretty well, I'm at a loss as to why she attracts such opprobrium.
I think she should,
in the ad for this particular show, the blurb says we can expect "intelligent and lively debate" so one would reasonably expect a degree of musical knowledge beyond the Blur V Oasis battle and what's your favourite cover version. So OK then, if she doesn't know of Keith Jarret, when Julian Lennon in response to the question,says the Koln Concert is a record that inspires him, surely she should then, ask a few questions about it , rather then say it goes straight over her head!
Not slagging off JW
I'm really not, she may well be a decent person and I wish her nothing but good times, ice cream , happiness and success. However I would like someone with a wider musical knowledge or at the very least thirst for knowledge, to host the program as advertised on Sky Arts.
It's astonishing that she hasn't at least heard of
Keith Jarrett, even if she's never heard a single second of his work. Articles about Jarrett are hardly restricted to the specialist jazz press. Does the woman never pick up a newspaper? If you were to do a search of the website of any of our broadsheets you would find that Jarrett is frequently featured in them, all his albums and UK concerts being regulary reviewed, sometimes on the same page as the latest indie flavour of the month.
Nothing against her as a person
- sure she's nice enough - never met her. Nothing to do with her sex either, as that accusation can crop up. She's just a bit rubbish as a presenter - never says anything of interest. She's blandness personified and rather robotic in her 'enthusiastic' introductions to the likes of The Kooks live, for example, as if she doesn't quite believe in it. Takes up valuable broadcasting space that could be better filled by more talented, knowledgeable, curious individuals - like those who feature on 6 Music. She's just more T4 than BBC4.
Was this perhaps one of
Was this perhaps one of those rhetorical device type never-heard-ofs: "So, Keith Jarrett then… for the benefit of listeners who've never heard him, who is he and why we should care"?
Wasn't that what was decided last time this came up? She's not actually ignorant, she's a professional broadcaster who's just allowing a bit of space for her guests to speak sort of thing?
The Koln Concert
Rather than cram my post down the right hand side of the thread I thought I'd post here.
The Koln Concert is an important record. To me. It is not a jazz record. It is not jazz music. To call it "jazz" is like saying Michaelangelo "decorated" the Sistine Chapel. I first heard it on my CD Walkman sat halfway up Helvellyn watching buzzards drifting on aerials.
It is a piece of largely improvisational solo piano music. It is also remarkably accessible and engaging despite the preconception that improvised music is difficult and cerebral. It is beautiful from start to finish.
It is an important record beyond my personal preference because it is music that demonstrates how wonderful human beings can be even when working under duress. By all accounts Jarrett was unwell, chronically tired and possibly most difficult of all, to his artistic credibility at the very least, he was given a duff rehearsal piano to play in front of an audience of 1400. He nearly didn't perform.
So he had to improvise, not just in the notes he played but also in the physical manner in which he played. He compensated by overemphasising the bass notes and avoiding the higher range of the piano to avoid the awful sound it made. All this compromise and the music still sounds wonderful and natural in tone and delivery.
Bob's right. No-one should own an important record if they don't like it. That's just stupid. But sometimes important records really are just that despite our aversion to being told so. Even if I didn't like The Koln Concert I could respect the simple fact that it is an important record because of the circumstances in which it was made and the artist's commitment to giving a performance.
Superbly said
and I'd like, if possible, to have my earlier lazy jetlagged crowbarring of the record into the contentious "jazz" category stricken from the record, as m'learned friends Bisto and Aging Hippy are absolutely correct, and have broken it down so beautifully. (It's also a hell of lot shorter than two hours.)
Do you offer a money back guarantee?
Because based solely on your passion for the record I've ordered it from Amazon. On vinyl.
Yikes
..and there's no way you're taking a record deck up the side of Helvellyn for heightened ambience!
Your money is safe Sir Bisto!
I should really be paying you for inspiring me to investigate this record. Seriously, thank you once again. Can't understand how it had passed me by but that's the great thing about music, there's always something new to discover even if it is over 35 years old!
Report back
Do let us know what you think! **impressed**
I don't have the way with words that Bisto has am afraid.
I tend to swear a lot when I get passionate about music so suffice to say, ****, this is bloody brilliant! Its often said of the Internet that kids today don't have to put any work into finding music these days it's all just 'there'. Well, I'm no kid (49 next BD) but without this blog this fantastic record may have passed me by forever. I did buy it on vinyl rather than illegally download it though so I guess that marks me out as no longer a young man ;-)
I know feck all about jazz
but was lucky enough to be tipped off about the Jarrett live album about ten years ago. It's blissful and very listenable - easy on the ear.
The fact that Whiley doesn't have time to listen to it in between her wall to wall Snow Patrolling Wombat Aural Orgies makes it even more delicious. My pleasure in hearing it has gone up a notch knowing that it's another classic that clueless chancer doesn't care about.
What people forget
Remember, people who read the Word and who post on this site represent a tiny fraction of the listening population. The same is true of any specialist website - people who read and post know (and care) far, far more about the subject than 99% of the rest of population.
Jo Whiley is a presenter. She presents programmes about rock and pop music. Never mind the debate about whether this Jarrett chap is jazz/classical/whatever - what he isn't is pop or rock. Why should she know?
I've never met a single person
in my life who looks upon Whilet with anything more than disdain. If anything, this website's out on a limb having people stick up for her.
I'll look out for the return
of the "Jo Whiley doesn't know as much about a certain genre of music than me and therefore is shit" thread in a couple of months then. It seems to be a series.
Yep. As I said above...
...I'm guessing the same opprobrium wouldn't be heaped upon her for not being familiar with an obscure qclassical composer or performer as is being heaped upon her for not being familiar with this chap, who - given that most people won't even have heard of John Mcwhatsisface or Mingus - definitely qualifies as obscure.
Oh. No. It would, because it's her. If Andy Kershaw hadn't heard of Judith Weir or Raphael Wallfisch I'd bet my top set that nobody who's outraged in this thread would bat an eyelid.
Yes but
Andy Kershaw got a lot of goodwill for being obviously knowledgeable and enthusiastic generally, so if he were to not know something then it would have been more easily forgiven, whereas Jo Whiley is clearly a rather crap presenter in slots previously frequented by comparative music 'connossieurs' on shows that are meant for a more music knowing audience than your average one - whether that's a good or bad thing, actually I am in favour of those who know obscure stuff. Hence she receives a less tolerant response, and this lack is just a stick to have a go with. The OP slags off the whole show as well. She doesn't really fit where she is placed. Anyway what does it matter since she is a crap presenter or do you rate her?
See below!
Our posts crossed. I don't rate her - she's super-bland - but she seems nice enough. Whereas Andy Kershaw knows tons about music but strikes me as a royal tosser. OOAA, YMMV etc.
I just don't think she deserves this very specific twice-annual kicking, and I can't quite see what motivates it.
Biannual Whiley-bashing
Well you might be right about AK but he was good at what he did I think, though I never listened as I have a bit of an unjustifiable prejudice about 'world music'.
The fact that twice this year we had this topic with much agreement just shows there a lot of people who feel the same. Yeah sometimes vitriol can be excessive but that is not restriced to this individual. It's been said before but this sort of bile is kind of panto mock intended isn't it - in a hyperbolic attempt not to be dull fashion? Her presence on shows we Word types watch just grates. Were she out of sight, well then no bother. Not sure where I'd put her though - out to grass I think, her rule as indie landfill queen should be over and where else would she fit? Whassername on 6 Music would do much better - Lauren Laverne I mean.
I will say again, possibly for the last time,
I'm not saying JW is shit because she doesn't know something i do. I am bemoaning that fact that I was excited by a TV show which was going to put some interesting people in a room talking about popular music but within the first minutes couldn't follow the path of the conversation when Keith Jarret was brought up, she didn't say "I don't know that LP tell me about it", she said ..that goes right over my head.
Im lucky that I've heard it and know it, and yes I like it very much. I would have been intrigued to know how it inspires Julian Lennon. If I didn't know KJ, as a viewer , I would like a program that at least of it is going to mention an album that inspires its guest at least spend some time on the topic.
Maybe the fault is not with JW but rather the shows editors and producers.
Fair enough, Simon.
That's a reasonable criticism, but wasn't your original one, nor the criticism of some others in the thread. Sure, maybe she should have been a bit more curious, but, again, if James Naughtie said that Lady Gaga went straight over his head or that he wasn't interested in hearing her work, I can't see people being quite as cross, because that's who he is and Gaga isn't in his sphere of interest.
I'm not even a fan of Jo Whiley's! I don't listen to or watch her because I find her pretty dull. I just find this while phenomenon of outrage at her, in particular, for stuff like this a bit extraordinary.
She defines dull mate.
Actually, I reckon even you - the world's greatest arguer - would find it hard to argue with her as she has nothing to say about anything. Even her gushing is mild.
Haha
A challenge! Nah, I reckon I could get on her nerves somehow! ;-)
Flapping
the unflappable? Well, I'd be cheering you on in that one!
Twice!
Your repetition
will probably grate on her after a day or two.
No it wouldn't
it would go right over her head
Jo Whiley Show
Oh look, a new music show on the telly. What with Jools as well that means I'll have two regular shows about music to watch a week. I am thinking to myself this can only be good news.
Keith Jarrett - isn't he the bloke who interrupted one of his concerts because someone in the audience coughed? KJ was apparently irritated by this because by coughing it meant they weren't concentrating on his music.
It's not just coughing
He's even more paranoid about cameras. I went to his recent London concert and there were frequent warnings about taking photos, even during curtain calls. It's like a phobia with him.
I Don't Beliiieeeve It!
Why do people waste their time listening to radio DJs they don't like and then waste more of their time griping about them on blogs?
Answers on a postcard...
I don't listen to either JW or KJ
Am I on the wrong website?
JW Show
I enjoyed it! New music, plus some comment and chat.The Butch Vig segment was interesting, however it would appear that many of you seem to find JW sadly lacking in one respect or another. Give the lady a break! Just because most of you can blow her out of the water with your "superior" musical knowledge this doesn't make her a bad person or any less committed to her obvious love of music. "You can please some of the people........" Maybe some of you bitchy, opinionated whingers who tend to be very quick to slag people off but rarely offer praise should listen to yourselves? Elitist snobs is a term that comes to my mind. The very fact that the name Keith Jarret came up is surely sufficient for those of you who had heard of him to acknowledge the mention and those that hadn't to do a little research.
Blimey...
have you read the thread? I'm not coming from the stand point of "superior " musical knowledge... I'm not being Bitchy or an elitist snob. Yes I am being opinionated. My opinion is, as I've already stated, that if a host of a "chat show" ask someone a question about which album has inspired them , and they don't know the album which is offered as an answer , then as a viewer I would expect some discussion about the album rather then the comment "that is over my head". I want more from my "lively discussion".
You may not, want any more than was offered in the show , that's cool, I'm not being a dictator , I'm just expressing my opinion which is no more or less worthy than yours.
Love and peace
Acknowledged !
Your point is valid and accepted. In all honesty my criticism which was perhaps a more general one was incorrectly focused on you personally for which I apologise.My perspective is that the new show was at least an attempt to produce a contemporary music programme with a little more depth than we have been used to since the start of the MTV era. With the possible exception of JL maybe the depth of conversation is in direct proportion to the depth of the guests intellects. Love and peace back.
I hate modern jazz
... and even *I've* heard of Keith Jarrett. Can I have her show?
Whiley annoys me
Jo Whiley annoys me not so much for her lack of musical knowledge of various strands of modern jazz, more for her sneering, indier-than-thou attitude.
I remember on her Radio 1 show Travis once did a cover version of Britney Spears 'Hit Me Baby, One More Time' and she said, in all seriousness, that was better than the original. So a bunch of journeymen, Scottish Brit-Pop also-rans did a better version of one of the best pop records of recent times (no I'm no Spears fan, but that is a great POP record).
Her TV chat/music show from a few years back was dire as well.
She could have been right!
... but she wasn't. I agree that Britney Spears' version of 'Hit Me Baby..." is a fine pop record but that's mainly because it's a fine pop song. It is possible to better her version and I feel that Fountains Of Wayne managed it. I don't think Travis did but a big Travis fan might disagree. Neither of the reworkings is a straight cover so I suppose your preference would depend on which style you prefer.
Another example...
A fine song performed by a fine singer :-)
(RT/Oops, I Did It Again)
It's not so much....
....the cover as her attitude. She came from the position that the pop version could never be as good as that by a 'worthy' indie band.
As I said, indier-than-thou.
Richard Thompson is superb though. She's probably never heard of him either.
had missed this discussion
so headed over to the Sky Arts site to watch some clips. I don't think that JW is a particularly fantastic interviewer but let's face it it's Sky Arts so we are talking dumbed down Murdoch territory here and she is no worse than many (every watched Jools Holland "interview" a musician? Or heard Mark Lawson's powderpuff interviews on Radio 4? And much as I enjoy Stuart Maconie, some of his radio interviews are painful to listen to).
I'm sorry but I do think that there is an element of sexism in the regular kickings she gets on this blog. She's not a particularly great DJ but neither are many of the current crop of BBC Radio presenters. The difference is she's female (the fact that we can all probably name all the female DJs on the BBC speaks volumes).
Sky Arts 'dumbed down'?
With the exception of BBC4 (and Radios 3 & 4), I can't think of any channel which produces *any* arts coverage, let alone high quality. Sky Arts certainly doesn't seem 'dumbed down' in comparison to much if the stuff out there.
Preditable cry of sexism denied
Jools Holland and Stuart Maconie have the bruises to show from regular and prolonged Massive kickings. Maconie a bit less perhaps but then I would say he is a capable broadcaster who gets equal praise and criticism here. Possibly more praise.
Equally Predictable denial of sexism
If you can point me to the numerous and specific threads where Jools Holland and Stuart Maconie have received the same degree of abuse and personal criticism as Jo Whiley then I'll happily retract and apologise. But this is the third debate in around 12 months where the Massive has had "a go" at JW.
As I said before, I'm no great fan of hers, but neither do I think anything she has done merits the vitriol directed against her here.
No I'm not going to do that
It's just my perception or experience. Why does it have to be sexism - why don't we say that when there's so much negative comment about Bono or Sting? Maybe there is sexism at work but not in the way you mean. Do certain women get jobs because they are easy on the eye and pushed forward despite their lack of ability whereas for men this is not such a concern? I just think you are wrong about this.
Um, sorry, Sven.
Could you run me through your last two sentences again? Not sure I quite get what you mean. Thanks.
OK
All I mean is that you could argue that there is sexism in TV, say, because the women presenters get picked on looks rather than on what they know about their subject whereas with blokes get where they are more through their expertise. I don't think when we have a go about some annoying woman popstar or presenter here it is necessarily sexism and that shouldn't be raised without good reason. This has happened with disussion on Florence (her what has that machine) but there is plenty of mockery of the king monkey Ian Brown. It irritates me that this gets said.
Jools's interviews are awful
- surely that's a given here? But - he has the Tube days to fall back on where he was wittier. Also the acts chosen on LWJH are fairly broad and innovative. I'm pretty sure he's heard of Keith Jarret - for whatever that's worth - plus again he was in a top band.
Mr Maconie has written loads of stuff in books, the NME and magazines. I don't agree with everything he says but he's obviously knowledgeable and a decent cove and was very good value with Radcliffe.
Whoa Blimey is a bloody nincompoop. I've never heard her criticize anything in my life (and 'I've never heard of them/him/it' is NOT a valid criticism). She's sat around and praised 'indie' at it's lowest ebb, foisting no end of dire shite on an unsuspecting audience. Her gender is as irrelevant as the wombats she adores.
Exactly
Said far better than I could.
Jools acts "broad and innovative"?
Sorry, have to disagree with that. The fact that having Mastodon on provoked some discussion (quite justifiably) as to how often Metal and it's many diverse subgenres have appeared on LWJH (i.e.Never) said volumes. If it's something to go with your cocoa, then Jools is your man.
On the sexism claim - I agree with your judgement on JW. Can I redress the balance and say that Richard Bacon unceasingly impresses with his neverending twattery, be it on TV or radio?
Yes you can
say Richard Bacon is a twat because he is. (And Im not just saying that because he is a man.)
"I'm not the only one looking blank..."
I saw a repeat of the show last night and in context it didn't strike me as a particularly outrageous concept to have not heard of Keith Jarrett. No more so than recycling some old 'Classic Albums' footage of Butch Vig or Noel Gallagher professing that he doesn't know what a producer actually does.
has anyone listened to 'spy vs. spy' by John Zorn?
It's fucking shit, although very disciplined shit. Good attempt though, at doing Ornette Coleman hardcore. Hang on, I'm in the wrong thread here aren't I?