I've always loved this! I know this album wasn't a big hit, but I liked a lot of covers on it.

This is from when the original 5 got back together a few years ago.

MickyDolenz said:

This is from when the original 5 got back together a few years ago.

Whatever your opinion about DD, god at least they are playing and singing up there on stage! Why is it that the real performing is left up to the 45/50 years old and over set?

artist76 said:

Why is it that the real performing is left up to the 45/50 years old and over set?

Probably because many of them played in clubs/bars/juke joints for years before getting a record deal. They had to be able to get the attention of people getting drunk or trying to pick up a date. If the audience didn't like you, be prepared to get stuff thrown at you like on the Blues Brothers movie.

MickyDolenz said:

artist76 said:

Why is it that the real performing is left up to the 45/50 years old and over set?

Probably because many of them played in clubs/bars/juke joints for years before getting a record deal. They had to be able to get the attention of people getting drunk or trying to pick up a date. If the audience didn't like you, be prepared to get stuff thrown at you like on the Blues Brothers movie.

^^ Yes, I've heard this before, and it's true that artists from decades past had good live performances under their belts before getting record deals. DD did lots of clubs and smallish local concerts, they've talked about that. And I noticed a tendency for newer acts to be thrust into the limelight, have hits, and be expected to perform on stage w/o lots of prior experience. BUT, there are still clubs/bars/juke joints, and people still play in them - why aren't more of them having hits and airplay? I've heard people say that record companies want instant hits, but why can't we get "instant" hits from an artist/band that can perform?

I keep thinking about that 14 year old girl I was showing music videos from the '80s and she remarked, "wow, why does every video have instruments in them?" It's just weird nowadays.

Totally off the topic of "White Lines," but I found this quote attributed to Nick Rhodes in 2000, which reminded me of Wendy calling Prince a "fancy lesbian" --

"One of my gay friends calls me a lesbian, actually - she says, 'You're just a
girl who likes girls.' I've got a lot of empathy for the gay world, always have
had, I think a lot of the most creative people are gay. And a lot of my dear,
dear friends, but as for my own tastes, it just doesn't work like that.
Genetically it didn't go that way."

artist76 said:

BUT, there are still clubs/bars/juke joints, and people still play in them - why aren't more of them having hits and airplay? I've heard people say that record companies want instant hits, but why can't we get "instant" hits from an artist/band that can perform?

Pre-1970's, many of the old acts played 2-6 shows a day often 6 or 7 days a week, for little money. An act was bound to get their chops up playing that much. Today the musician unions regulate that sort of thing. Also back then there was no programming, computers, etc. You had to play an instrument or sing. There was only 2 or 4 track consoles, so everything had to be recorded live. With technolgy today, you don't need an instrument at all to make a song. Just get a program like Reason and make a song on a computer. You don't even need a studio, so it's cheap. Many clubs now just hire a DJ to play records, so that's cheaper for the club owner than paying singers /band.

MickyDolenz said:

artist76 said:

BUT, there are still clubs/bars/juke joints, and people still play in them - why aren't more of them having hits and airplay? I've heard people say that record companies want instant hits, but why can't we get "instant" hits from an artist/band that can perform?

Pre-1970's, many of the old acts played 2-6 shows a day often 6 or 7 days a week, for little money. An act was bound to get their chops up playing that much. Today the musician unions regulate that sort of thing. Also back then there was no programming, computers, etc. You had to play an instrument or sing. There was only 2 or 4 track consoles, so everything had to be recorded live. With technolgy today, you don't need an instrument at all to make a song. Just get a program like Reason and make a song on a computer. You don't even need a studio, so it's cheap. Many clubs now just hire a DJ to play records, so that's cheaper for the club owner than paying singers /band.

Oh, new information. Thanks. And yes, of course there were no or less programming, computers, etc. That reminds me of DD's drummer talking about how they recorded those extended club versions of their songs in long takes in the studio - so he'd be drumming straight through the entire 10 minute (or however long) extended song - because they didn't having looping back then!

artist76 said:

MickyDolenz said:

Pre-1970's, many of the old acts played 2-6 shows a day often 6 or 7 days a week, for little money. An act was bound to get their chops up playing that much. Today the musician unions regulate that sort of thing. Also back then there was no programming, computers, etc. You had to play an instrument or sing. There was only 2 or 4 track consoles, so everything had to be recorded live. With technolgy today, you don't need an instrument at all to make a song. Just get a program like Reason and make a song on a computer. You don't even need a studio, so it's cheap. Many clubs now just hire a DJ to play records, so that's cheaper for the club owner than paying singers /band.

Oh, new information. Thanks. And yes, of course there were no or less programming, computers, etc. That reminds me of DD's drummer talking about how they recorded those extended club versions of their songs in long takes in the studio - so he'd be drumming straight through the entire 10 minute (or however long) extended song - because they didn't having looping back then!

I don't know about that. Maybe there wasn't a machine to loop, but there was manually looping tape reels. The Beatles did this on songs like Tommorrow Never Knows and Revolution 9. There were also mixers during the disco era that would make a short song longer like Tom Moulton. Early hip hop DJ's like Grandmaster Flash mixed/scratched breakbeats on 2 turntables to extend them.

MickyDolenz said:

artist76 said:

Oh, new information. Thanks. And yes, of course there were no or less programming, computers, etc. That reminds me of DD's drummer talking about how they recorded those extended club versions of their songs in long takes in the studio - so he'd be drumming straight through the entire 10 minute (or however long) extended song - because they didn't having looping back then!

I don't know about that. Maybe there wasn't a machine to loop, but there was manually looping tape reels. The Beatles did this on songs like Tommorrow Never Knows and Revolution 9. There were also mixers during the disco era that would make a short song longer like Tom Moulton. Early hip hop DJ's like Grandmaster Flash mixed/scratched breakbeats on 2 turntables to extend them.

OK, so perhaps I mis-remembered the interview, looping existed, but DD didn't loop - I swear I watched an interview with Roger saying how he played through the whole many minutes of those extended ("night") versions, and how he had to go back and do it again if he made a mistake, but I can't find that interview clip now. Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia (search "Duran Duran night versions"):

Unlike many of their contemporaries, Duran Duran didn't just extend the intro or loop the bridge section of a song to pad out a dance track for a 12-inch single. As Allmusic explained, "According to Nick Rhodes' liner notes, they recorded extended versions of their singles to be used in night clubs. Rather than have the master tapes cut and taped into remixes, Duran Duran went back into the studio and recorded longer versions of the songs with more instrumental breaks."