Good interview with Lisa White AKA Twanggirl on here

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/artsdesk/music/2014/01/22/talking-shop-with-ex-930-club-booker-lisa-white/

Finally someone mentions the fact that too much internet hype can be detrimental to a band.

wow I did not realize Lisa White was twanggirl


way to "out" her Az!

I didn't think it mattered since she left. I also didn't think it was any kind of secret.

I don't know why people need to trash the old 930 club. How is the new 930 club better than the old one except being bigger? 

Also, no matter if they are found on the internet or signed to a label a band has to at one time play live.  I guess the difference is the number of people who see them.  Seeing awful god-awful performances in the 80's by band such as Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Replacements, Bon Jovi,  Flipper etc… I don't think the Internet is to blame.

I would say overall the quality of live performances these days is much higher than it was in the 80's. 

atomic wrote:
I would say overall the quality of live performances these days is much higher than it was in the 80's. 

That is because the 80's was the worst decade ever for new bands/music.  80's music as a whole is petty much garbage.


Case in point:
U2
Guns And Roses
Bon Jovi

RatBastard wrote:

atomic wrote:
I would say overall the quality of live performances these days is much higher than it was in the 80's. 

That is because the 80's was the worst decade ever for new bands/music.  80's music as a whole is petty much garbage.

I wouldn't say that….. its not the music that is the problem but the production… the 80s production ruins so much great music…

90's were the worst

one word reason: GRUNGE

A former board member used to think her screen name was pronounced twan-girl. The alt-country reference totally went over his head.

RatBastard wrote:

atomic wrote:
I would say overall the quality of live performances these days is much higher than it was in the 80's. 

That is because the 80's was the worst decade ever for new bands/music.  80's music as a whole is petty much garbage.

hutch wrote:
I wouldn't say that….. its not the music that is the problem but the production… the 80s production ruins so much great music…

Actually that is the problem with some music today.  It is so over produced, shined and polished to within an inch of its life.  Protools is the worst thing that ever happened to music.  I much prefer to hear music that a human being actually played and recorded rather than a track that was tweak so that every millisecond is perfected to the point that no human could ever play that way.

Also, there was precious little GOOD music in the 80s let alone anything great!

RatBastard wrote:

atomic wrote:
I would say overall the quality of live performances these days is much higher than it was in the 80's. 

That is because the 80's was the worst decade ever for new bands/music.  80's music as a whole is petty much garbage.


Case in point:
U2
Guns And Roses
Bon Jovi

That's just ridiculous.  You can pick sucky bands from any decade.  That doesn't make the whole decade sucky.

Shemp wrote:

RatBastard wrote:

atomic wrote:
I would say overall the quality of live performances these days is much higher than it was in the 80's. 

That is because the 80's was the worst decade ever for new bands/music.  80's music as a whole is petty much garbage.


Case in point:
U2
Guns And Roses
Bon Jovi

That's just ridiculous.  You can pick sucky bands from any decade.  That doesn't make the whole decade sucky.

These are arguably the biggest and supposed best bands form the 80s.  I could have gone on and on.  Even bands that technically formed in the mid to late 70s but first 'made it' in the 80s suck (Journey, et al).  Even the best music from the 80s pales in comparison to music form any other decade.  Most of it would not have made a blip on the radar had it had to compete against the music pre or post 80s.

RatBastard wrote:

Shemp wrote:

RatBastard wrote:

atomic wrote:
I would say overall the quality of live performances these days is much higher than it was in the 80's. 

That is because the 80's was the worst decade ever for new bands/music.  80's music as a whole is petty much garbage.


Case in point:
U2
Guns And Roses
Bon Jovi

That's just ridiculous.  You can pick sucky bands from any decade.  That doesn't make the whole decade sucky.

These are arguably the biggest and supposed best bands form the 80s.  I could have gone on and on.  Even bands that technically formed in the mid to late 70s but first 'made it' in the 80s suck (Journey, et al).  Even the best music from the 80s pales in comparison to music form any other decade.  Most of it would not have made a blip on the radar had it had to compete against the music pre or post 80s.

The fact that Pylon was from the 1980's pretty much destroys that whole theory.

bearman wrote:
The fact that Pylon was from the 1980's pretty much destroys that whole theory.

Their youtube vids sound like the average vanilla 80s punk/garage/grunge band.  If you are into that sort of music then I imagine you like them, but truth be told groups with music like theirs were a dime a dozen.

The B-52's put Athens on the map. REM was the scene's biggest success. But Pylon was its heart and soul.

The Smiths.  REM.  The 'Mats. The Cure.  XTC.  The Clash.  The Cars.  C'mon.

And that is scratching the surface.
You can pick great music and shitty music from every decade since the 20's if you want.

Great interview, thanks for sharing azagh.  I couldn't imagine taking those calls about my band's better than the band you booked crap. 

hutch wrote:

RatBastard wrote:

atomic wrote:
I would say overall the quality of live performances these days is much higher than it was in the 80's. 

That is because the 80's was the worst decade ever for new bands/music.  80's music as a whole is petty much garbage.

I wouldn't say that….. its not the music that is the problem but the production… the 80s production ruins so much great music…

How could production ruin live music. I think the 80's and this naughts had the best music for decades. It is the live performances that weren't as good.

vansmack wrote:
Great interview, thanks for sharing azagh.  I couldn't imagine taking those calls about my band's better than the band you booked crap.   

I will have to say that the opening bands at the Ottobar have been better than the opening bands I have seen at the 930 club over the years.  The Ottobar seems to be focused on getting the best local bands as openers instead of worrying about how many fans the opener will bring in. 

I liked that twangirl asked for input from boardies:

http://forum.930.com/index.php?topic=5572.0

I understand the package deal thing but on nights that have two-band bills (maybe 75% of shows?), there typically is 60-90 minutes of nothingness between doors and the first band. Why not put a local band on those bills? It would have zero effect on time, get a local band some good exposure and cost next to nothing (I doubt the bands I am thinking of would ask for much of a paycheck). I have wondered this for years. No other club in town has as much downtime between doors and show than the 930.