Marketing/was letter from Double Trouble

chuck n. cnevitt@HOTMAIL.COM
Mon Mar 5 09:16:34 EST 2001

PW FENTON writes:
<<I disagree.  In the same post he said about the success of people like
Tedeschi and Lang... "these kids (considering they are selling more music to
the lemmings due to their company's superior marketing efforts) should be
bringing in huge numbers of younger people to the blues fold. I don't see

I don't see, or at least that I can tell, a lot of younger people coming
into the blues fold. Do you?

<<He attributes their success not to the quality of their work, but to the
marketing efforts of Tone Cool Records,>>

Yep, I agree to an extent....but you really should
get your facts straight, as I never mentioned Tone Cool
by name...and I don't think Jonny Lang OR Kenny Wayne
Shepard are on Tone Cool, are they? (do you reckon that's why I didn't
mention that label by name--since two of the three aren't on it?)

<< and calls people who bought those recordings "lemmings".  There is
nothing "tongue in cheek" about that.>>

Ok. I was wrong. They are chumps. You are, as I think
you have said or at least implied, trying to interest at least one (or both)
in songs that you have written. You have, on several occasions, championed
Susan Tedeschi, so for you to jump to her defense is to be expected. I find
her singing just ok (it has improved since her last album, but I can still
think of many female vocalists who sing the blues much better....even if you
can't), her guitar playing is not even that good. She is, IMO, way over
rated. Just because the marketing forces behind her have successfully filled
the marketplace with her product and presence, and have successfully helped
her move a lot of records means about as much to _me_ as when the same thing
happened on a much larger scale with Milli Vanilli. Let me guess, you also
think their success was warranted? Back Street about them?

<<I think that attitude is typical of fans of any genre who inflate their
own sense of self worth by declaring their tastes to be superior by virtue
of their preference for the unpopular.>>

You mean like you did when you were trashing that homeboy of yours (Sean
?....who was on the road backing up Hubert Sumlin)) because at one point in
his career he was bent
on capturing the SRV feel/style....but I guess Tedeschi trying to do the
same thing with her Joplinesque thing doesn't bother you? ALL I said was
just because it sells
a lot, is crammed down our throats as the latest and greatest, doesn't mean
I'm buying into it, or that is any better than anything're the
one saying that my stance means my tastes are superior to yours. (ok, if you
say so ;).

<<The concept that music is of a higher quality the more unpopular it is, or
the more cheaply or crudely it is
produced is fallacious.>>

Show me where I said that, instead of where you think that's what I mean.
(god help us) GO AHEAD, WE'LL WAIT. BTW, I still think that just because you
(well, you never have, so that's a bad example) spend a lot on production
and that the end product might be more popular than sliced bread, does NOT
mean it is better. No matter how many Handys or Grammys it wins (except
Taj). Sorry, but IMO anyone who buys into _that_ notion is practicing what
is essentially lemming mentality. Lemmings can't help it.

<<Just as fallacious is the idea that marketing
efforts are inversely proportionate to quality.>>

Fallacious? Did you get you a new Thesarus for xmas...or
do you and Bush both learn a new word everyday, then use it (and over
pronounce each syllable) too much for the next two days?

***Your serve...and as I have it scored, we're about even, so how about
taking it off list at this point, unless an audience is what you're

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

More information about the Blues-l mailing list