|
<< prev | goto page
|
|
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:31 pm 
Maybe I was being a bit too sensitive to all the negative comments as Eisley is easily my favourite band, I mean, they are the only band that I bother to check up on every hour or so(though I honestly don't feel like I am a friend of the band). I may not completely agree with everything being said, and maybe I should've read more of the thread instead of just skimming the things that were being said, but I understand where everyone's coming from and why these things are being said. I guess I sort of jumped the gun? _________________ Downey, is this guac too lemony? |
|
|
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 | Posts: 50 | Location: ninezerothree, texas
|
|
  |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:48 am
wilsmith wrote: You know, how many of you have had to go through a Divorce while promoting and preparing for a tour where you had to sings songs that have direct emotional ties to LOVING the person who was severing ties with you?
Seriously, under those circumstanses I wouldn't be myself, personally or musically, I'd have to just let it come out, and whatever it sounded like, if I felt it I would go with it. That's catharsis for you. So bare that in mind when considering your barbs, there's more to it than just performance quality. Not saying you can't be critical and be "justified" I'm just saying as far as live performances, as well as new writing, there may be more factors at play besides technical execution. Sometimes the last thing a songwriter wants to do is write another one of their songs, the way they normally are praised for, in the name of someone who broke their heart. Not saying that's reality in this case, just saying, it's food for thought. So which is it? Is it "Growth" or is it "They weren't themselves"... I've been arguing the latter. |
|
|
Joined: 06 Jan 2008 | Posts: 1759 | Location: Dallas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:06 am
roosevelt! wrote: And as much as you guys are all like, "Oh, we love Sherri, and Eisley, we aren't nitpicking, we're just giving criticism." I don't want to start a war with any of you guys, but I feel like that's a load of BS. I feel like criticism should be expressed to the band or the person being criticized themselves, not on some forum that the band hardly ever checks. I get what you're saying, and you're free to call it BS, but in my experience the band and their family do read this forum quite often, particularly in relative downtime like now, when they're not touring. Sherri has responded to things posted here before, either in threads or in her journal. I think it often comes off the wrong way because we're talking about Sherri and the rest of Eisley in third person, rather than addressing our posts directly to them since we know they'll see them at some point. Situations like that tend to produce an effect of talking behind a person's back even when we're in Eisley's "virtual living room". I try to word my posts in a way that balances tact with the fullest and clearest possible impact of the point I want to get across. (In this case, I was trying to encompass my dissatisfaction with Sherri's sound live and in some recordings, as well as my concern for her voice.) It's not easy, which has earned me a reputation here of often brutal bluntness. I'm comfortable enough with myself that I have no problem with being known as a heinous beyotch in the real world or on the Internet, but I prefer that people at least read what I have to say with an open mind before they conclude that I'm just being mean. I like the way you posted your thoughts and gave us less-than-flattering posters an opportunity to respond civilly. I don't think you jumped the gun. We're all very attached to Eisley, in large part because they make this forum available to their fans and participate in a kind of openness not often seen in the music world. It's natural to get defensive, but it's important to accept that while everyone has differing opinions, we're all here because we love Eisley. I think you get that, and I'm not trying to preach to the choir--I'm just rambling in an attempt to make myself clear.  _________________ INTELLECT AND ROMANCE OVER BRUTE FORCE AND CYNICISM Smokemonster |
|
|
Joined: 24 Sep 2003 | Posts: 14510 | Location: Alone on an airplane, fallin' asleep against the windowpane...
|
|
   |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:34 am
inorbit wrote: wilsmith wrote: You know, how many of you have had to go through a Divorce while promoting and preparing for a tour where you had to sings songs that have direct emotional ties to LOVING the person who was severing ties with you?
Seriously, under those circumstanses I wouldn't be myself, personally or musically, I'd have to just let it come out, and whatever it sounded like, if I felt it I would go with it. That's catharsis for you. So bare that in mind when considering your barbs, there's more to it than just performance quality. Not saying you can't be critical and be "justified" I'm just saying as far as live performances, as well as new writing, there may be more factors at play besides technical execution. Sometimes the last thing a songwriter wants to do is write another one of their songs, the way they normally are praised for, in the name of someone who broke their heart. Not saying that's reality in this case, just saying, it's food for thought. So which is it? Is it "Growth" or is it "They weren't themselves"... I've been arguing the latter. We'll find out in Fall 09'. In the end, we won't know what growth is until we know what Eisley's ambition with this record is. And there are times when you have to take a few steps back before you can move forward. Who knows? Good old George Harrison said it best, "If you don't know where you're going, any road will lead you there." _________________ yup, that's my name. FOR YOUR RATING PLEASURE: 4 LIKE Buttons, 1 NEUTRAL, 1 VEXED, 5 DISLIKE buttons. LC > FB           
= personal fave  = Eisley fans should dig it
|
|
|
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 | Posts: 9641 | Location: Greater St. Louis Area
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:08 am
The lyrics are what I think defines them. Is how you can make your own little storie out of every song, even when they wrote it with another meaning. Those lyrics leave your mind wandering through imagination. |
|
|
Joined: 21 Aug 2009 | Posts: 28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laughing City Forum Index -> eisleyBlog -> What's the true essence of "Eisley"?
Page 9 of 9 << prev | goto page
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
|
|
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
|
|
