new Dashut blog - Truth & Consequences (My Times with FM)

[snroxman]

Very sad. I'm sorry to see Richard and his blog go.

[reebokandlace]

Originally Posted by nicole21290

Not a screenshot, actually. You can embed the tweet/s, using a code that twitter itself supplies.

@RichardDashut I always tell interviewers at the outset of an interview that when I say I , I always mean Dashut and I. I haven't seen it

— ken caillat (@kencaillat) May 16, 2015

Thank you (i have no idea what that means, "embed the tweet" but I appreciate you doing that!)

I just feel fortunate i that know how to bold my text...that is the extent of my computer skills. I have no idea how to change my avatar, a teenage relative set that up for me a decade ago...lol...


.

[elle]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

Me personally, I just take the perspective that if you want your story told, don't wait on others to tell it, YOU tell it, if you feel that strongly about it.

see, i understand what you are saying, but it's sometimes frustrating that you not only do great work but if you want that work to be acknowledged then you also have to be the one to toot your own horn and boast how much you did. sometimes you'd like others to acknowledge and thank you for what you did without having to remind them.


kinda like LB seemingly thinking that the band should have seen how much producing work he did from early albums on and not him having to ask for producer's credit in order to actually get it. (of course now when he's talking about how much he did people are complaining about him boasting about it - one can never win! ) -

"I mean, if you were to ask Richard (Dashut) or any of those guys, “Who produced Rumours?” they’d all say, “Lindsey was the guy with the vision.” I didn’t ask for a production credit on Rumours and I didn’t get it. Richard feels bad about that. There were band politics involved in that. Even on Tusk, you may notice, it says like “special thanks for....” Come on! I don’t think I had any less of a hand in what you could call production on Rumours than I did on Tango.
Guitar World, September 1997"
(taken from http://www.buckinghamnicks.info/madness-experiences#80s, where many great LB quotes originally from Madness-Fades LB site are currently preserved, so thanks for that Nicole! )

[nicole21290]

Originally Posted by reebokandlace

Thank you (i have no idea what that means, "embed the tweet" but I appreciate you doing that!)

I just feel fortunate i that know how to bold my text...that is the extent of my computer skills. I have no idea how to change my avatar, a teenage relative set that up for me a decade ago...lol...

LOL. It's not too difficult. Whenever you see a YouTube video or tweet on here, it's usually been embedded. That just means that you can see or watch the media without having to follow the link to the source. If you don't have the direct URL of the tweet, that's what you need.

1. Go to the person's twitter account: https://twitter.com/kencaillat

2. You will note that you can only see tweets he has made, and not replies at the moment. There are three options for what you can view - 'tweets', 'tweets & replies' and 'photos & videos'. Click on the second. You'll now be at this URL: https://twitter.com/kencaillat/with_replies

3. The very latest tweet (at the top of his timeline) is the tweet we want to embed into a forum post. When you hover over a tweet, you'll see a thin box with a coloured line which indicates which tweet you're about to click on. Click on the tweet you want, in this case the top one.

4. You'll be taken to the URL of Ken's tweet here: https://twitter.com/kencaillat/statu...23382301192192

5. Under the tweet is information such as his location, the date and time of the tweet, as well as four more options. The backwards facing arrow allows you to 'reply', the arrows chasing one another allow you to 'retweet', the star allows you to 'favorite' (all of which can only be done if you have a twitter account), and the three dots bring up some other options. Click on the three dots.

6. You will see options to do several things, but the one you want is 'embed tweet'. Click on it.

7. A pop-up will appear, with a box containing a code (it just looks like text). All you need to do is click on that box and the code will become highlighted. Copy the code and then paste it into your post on The Ledge or another forum.

8. On this occasion, you'll see a ticked box under the code which says 'include parent tweet'. If you just wanted to insert Ken's tweet and not Richard's (which he was replying to), you just need to untick that box. The preview shows you what it will look like when embedded.

-

As for changing your avatar, again, it's not too tricky. When you're on The Ledge, you'll see the menu bar thing up top which has options like 'User CP', 'FAQ', 'Members', etc. Click on User CP. That's your control panel, which allows you to make changes to your account.

You will now see a sidebar on the lefthand side of your screen with various headings like 'Settings & Options', 'Private Messages' and 'Subscribed Threads'. Under 'Settings & Options', there are links to where you can edit your signature, your avatar, and other account details. Simply click on 'Edit Avatar', the fifth option down.

You now have the option to change your avatar. If there's an image you want to use on the internet or on your computer, you first need to get it to the correct size. You'll see that the instructions say that it cannot be bigger than 75 by 75 pixels, or 19.5kb. I use Photoshop to edit something but I don't know if you have or use that software. If you do, simply open the image and crop it to the correct size.

If you don't already have an image on your computer, find one and save it. You need it to be a SQUARE so double-click the image, and it should open up into software which previews the image, and allows you to edit it. You need to crop it so that it's a square. Then go to this website and click browse. Add your edited image.

https://transloadit.com/demos/image-...esize-to-75x75

Scroll down the page to the heading 'Result Files', and it will have made your file the correct size. Click 'download' and save it to your computer. Now go back to where you were on The Ledge.

There are two boxed sections, the bottom of which says 'custom avatar'. Go to the 'browse' button and click it. Locate the image you just downloaded and click on it. This will upload and change your avatar for you. When that's done, click 'save changes' down the bottom. Then you can go back to the forum proper.

[teedeerocks]

Just a thought-since Richard didn't go to the FM show,maybe he got some sort of letter or notice from their lawyers demanding that the blog be discontinued or a lawsuit could be pursued,and maybe even a gag order was placed on Richard to preserve the band's reputation.Nothing surprises me with this band.I don't think the members of the band could even be bothered with a face-to-face confrontation with RD.They pay people to deal with all that BS.......

[jbrownsjr]

Originally Posted by teedeerocks

Just a thought-since Richard didn't go to the FM show,maybe he got some sort of letter or notice from their lawyers demanding that the blog be discontinued or a lawsuit could be pursued,and maybe even a gag order was placed on Richard to preserve the band's reputation.Nothing surprises me with this band.I don't think the members of the band could even be bothered with a face-to-face confrontation with RD.They pay people to deal with all that BS.......

That is very possible.

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by michelej1

Well, some of Ken's comments are new, but some are lifted straight from his book. The book is 96 pages, lots of them pictures, but still Ken's comments are sprinkled throughout. Like you have a song by song analysis of the Rumours tracks and comments are in there and then you have summaries and Ken and Keith comment through those.

Michele

thank you Michele

Originally Posted by teedeerocks

Just a thought-since Richard didn't go to the FM show,maybe he got some sort of letter or notice from their lawyers demanding that the blog be discontinued or a lawsuit could be pursued,and maybe even a gag order was placed on Richard to preserve the band's reputation.Nothing surprises me with this band.I don't think the members of the band could even be bothered with a face-to-face confrontation with RD.They pay people to deal with all that BS.......

That's possible, but it would imply issues with the band- even if it didn't come directly from the band.
The whole point of Stacy's blow-up on twitter is that she's making the point that there is no issue with the band. There must be other reasons.

[aleuzzi]

Originally Posted by WildHearted

Did ANYONE read the dang Life article?

From the tweet it sounds like they may have had some quotes from Ken in there, and he left out any mention of Richard & his hand in the production when asked questions about it and I guess it rubbed Richard the wrong way, as if Ken was taking all the credit and he was being erased from the history of it all. That's what I interpreted the tweet to mean....

But I haven't read it, so I don't know. I'm just speculating, as we all are.

Whatever the cause, I'm sad the blog is gone. I enjoyed it.

You can get a more detailed breakdown of the problems in this very same forum, the one specifically about the Life article.

From my perspective, the pics are fantastic but the copy is crap. The author relies heavily on biased sources (Carol Ann Harris and Ken Caillat) that paint a pretty negative picture of the band. Ken calls Mick, Stevie, and Christine "crazy coke heads" and dismisses Tusk as a failure artistically and commercially. His opinions are, of course, valid, but they are opinions, not undisputed facts. The real trouble is with the author, who relied entirely on other sources, either wasn't able or was too lazy to get direct confirmation from the band on any piece of information. The author also has an unclear tone, alternating between awe and derision, at once holding these people up as rock gods and then knocking them down for being rock gods.

The only new perspectives I got from the article were from Ray Lindsey and Keith Olsen.

[bombaysaffires]

I only went through the mag once, but don't they say in a couple places something like "we attempted to contact representatives for the band" or something at a few points in the text?

[aleuzzi]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

I only went through the mag once, but don't they say in a couple places something like "we attempted to contact representatives for the band" or something at a few points in the text?

Yes, but that doesn't give the writer carte blanche to paint an uneven picture, especially since the writer approaches such incidents with a decided slant going in. (I'm thinking in particular of the portrait of Lindsey-as-abuser.) Also, plenty of sources out there assess Tusk differently than Ken Caillat does, so why not quote them for more balance? It reads like the writer had his own views and selected what he wanted to support them.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by elle

see, i understand what you are saying, but it's sometimes frustrating that you not only do great work but if you want that work to be acknowledged then you also have to be the one to toot your own horn and boast how much you did. sometimes you'd like others to acknowledge and thank you for what you did without having to remind them.


kinda like LB seemingly thinking that the band should have seen how much producing work he did from early albums on and not him having to ask for producer's credit in order to actually get it. (of course now when he's talking about how much he did people are complaining about him boasting about it - one can never win! ) -

"I mean, if you were to ask Richard (Dashut) or any of those guys, “Who produced Rumours?” they’d all say, “Lindsey was the guy with the vision.” I didn’t ask for a production credit on Rumours and I didn’t get it. Richard feels bad about that. There were band politics involved in that. Even on Tusk, you may notice, it says like “special thanks for....” Come on! I don’t think I had any less of a hand in what you could call production on Rumours than I did on Tango.
Guitar World, September 1997"
(taken from http://www.buckinghamnicks.info/madness-experiences#80s, where many great LB quotes originally from Madness-Fades LB site are currently preserved, so thanks for that Nicole! )

totally agree that it's better if people give credit where credit is due. And I've always thought Richard seems like a total team player. He ALWAYS gives credit to others, and has a self-deprecating, joking sort of tone about his own work. Alas, others aren't usually like that. (I work with a BUNCH of them).

You're right about LB of course.... and you're right that he finally decided he did sort of have to 'toot his own horn' over the last decade or so. And notice how the press, who are generally lazy and never do their own work but rely on past articles, have started writing more about his work on Tusk, his being the chief architect, the visionary, etc. Because, I think, they go back and read previous interviews etc with him and he's made it a point to talk about those things. Business is ugly sometimes and it's cutthroat and you have to self-promote. You can do it in a classier way or you can be totally crass and crude about it, but expecting others to just notice doesn't seem to work. I can see how Richard would expect to be recognized as part of the team because they were a TEAM, but....clearly it hasn't played out that way.

[michelej1]

Even when Lindsey left in 1987, the press was giving him credit for the band's sound. That's why Chris was saying, "but I was right over his shoulder" and such, because the media was wondering where the band would be without him and the band wanted to stress that they could still go on. So, I think he has always been credited for shaping their sound. He just wasn't called a "visionary" because, heaven help me ... in those days maybe Providence was more sensitive about preserving my sanity than it is today.

Michele

[aleuzzi]

Originally Posted by michelej1

Even when Lindsey left in 1987, the press was giving him credit for the band's sound. That's why Chris was saying, "but I was right over his shoulder" and such, because the media was wondering where the band would be without him and the band wanted to stress that they could still go on. So, I think he has always been credited for shaping their sound. He just wasn't called a "visionary" because, heaven help me ... in those days maybe Providence was more sensitive about preserving my sanity than it is today.

Michele

Yeah, that visionary stuff...yikes.

Lindsey's role in the production of those albums is obviously central. But Christine's role, if not as forceful, was as crucial to the band's sound. One need only hear some of her songs pre BN to see she was working out aspects of the vocal formula in advance of Lindsey. The thick background vocal textures on the Heroes title track, for example, sets the stage for YMLF three years later. The song Why, though classic balladry, is as offbeat and idiosyncratic in places as anything on Mirage.

Lindsey complains that the whole band took credit for production, and he was probably right to complain. But if he got credit, Christine would have to get an assist credit--or at least co-arrangement credit.

Side note: Danny Kirwan was pretty much the producer on Bare Trees and Future Games. Christine has even credited him as being a top-notch arranger. Mac tradition has always seen the lead guitarist as musical architect.

[elle]

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

Danny Kirwan was pretty much the producer on Bare Trees and Future Games. Christine has even credited him as being a top-notch arranger. Mac tradition has always seen the lead guitarist as musical architect.

interesting. looking through the article on the evolution of the music producer role, the trend of a band member(s) taking on a role of uncredited producer has a long history starting from from the 60s, so apparently not that unusual. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Record_producer

so producer is "the person who creatively guides or directs the process of making a record, like a director would a movie. The engineer would be more the cameraman of the movie".
while
"Arranging is the art of giving an existing melody musical variety" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrangement

[DauphineMarie]

Apparently the blog has been deleted...