Gig review of Jon Gomm

D McFarlane wrote...

Dear reviewer, your piece on Mr Gomm contains the following....'How does one go about analysing and discussing something they struggle to even comprehend?'.......YOUR words.

How then can you justify the vitriol you've poured out regarding the folk music you witnessed?
End of story on that account.

However, for your information, Mr Barber's accent is quite distinctly Norfolk in origin, the other members of his band all hail from Yorkshire.
Strange then you feel compelled to offer the world naive and factually incorrect comments about a form of music you profess to have no knowledge or interest in.

I am not 'related to' or 'friends' of the Demon Barber Roadshow people, merely have made their acquaintance along the way, being very much part of the West Yorkshire folk scene myself.
I am also aware that one of the Roadshow's aims is to provide an opportunity for new and young artists, from a variety of backgrounds, to perform to a new and mixed audience.
Most of us are acutely aware of the problems folk music has had due to stereotyping. Your apparent lack of knowledge merely exacerbates this.
I sincerely hope your future reviews will stem from a far more informed standpoint rather than display ignorance and a certain lack of maturity.
Does that sound harsh? Well, certainly no more damning an effect than your negativity could possibly have.

Good luck to you, D. McFarlane

Siglacken wrote...

Sorry son but it looks like you've got a little confused here. this comment:

"How does one go about analysing and discussing something they struggle to even comprehend?"

isn't me being igonrant about folk music or slagging off folk music, the simple fact is that jon gomm plays guitar in a way i've never seen before. I don't understand how he does it and none of my friends did either. Also I'm pretty sure Jon Gomm does not class himself as folk music.

With regards to the Demon barber sessions you will notice that i did not review any other act that night mainly because:

1) I only went to see JG
2) I had no desire to see anyone else so left after he had finished. infact i only witnessed 2 songs by the demon barbers (which did leave me feeling bored by the way). Though I did want to set the backdrop to the show so gave them a quick mention.
3) My mum says I have to be in bed by 9pm or i won't get any desert.

Finally I can only apologise for claiming that Mr Barber was infact Irish. I just happened to think he was. Some people think i sound irish when i answer the phone but i don't get to offended. Anyway sorry for being responsible for the downfall of folk music.

So in conclusion. Jon Gomm isn't folk music. Mr Barber isn't irish. i didn't give folk music a band name because I didn't review any folk music. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, See you next time, Ye all come back now.
If you have any more problems please do not hesistate to contact points of view and i'm sure Terry Wogan will get on the case.

Siglacken wrote...

Just one last thing about your comment on stereotyping:

"Most of us are acutely aware of the problems folk music has had due to stereotyping."

If i can try and recall the quote by Mr Barber before he played a song

"This song is about a man from Norfolk who for a bet morris danced his way accross the country in 1849"

Then two girls came out and danced in front of the band.
It was like the folk music equivalent of going to a hip-hop show and seeing a pimp pull out a gun and shoot someone.

D McFarlane wrote...

>>> There's no confusion this end. Your comment "How does one go about analysing and discussing something they struggle to even comprehend?" was placed in your article in direct reference to Mr G's guitar playing, that's not in question. However, if that is your philosophy and applies there on the one hand, my point is, why do you not apply it to yourself in regard to something YOU struggle to comprehend?

"isn't me being igonrant about folk music or slagging off folk music"

>>> You need to re-read your review. Your line "one must first endure some traditional folk music" would certainly sound like a put down to anyone else. (Nice spelling of 'ignorant' by the way)

"the simple fact is that jon gomm plays guitar in a way i've never seen before. I don't understand how he does it and none of my friends did either Also I'm pretty sure Jon Gomm does not class himself as folk music"

>>>No reference was made by me concerning Mr Gomm's style or playing. Your comment there is totally irrelevant to my piece.
(Though if you really fancy yourself as a writer, you might try and get a grasp on appropriate use of capital letters)

"With regards to the Demon barber sessions you will notice that i did not review any other act that night mainly because:
1) I only went to see JG
2) I had no desire to see anyone else so left after he had finished. infact i only witnessed 2 songs by the demon barbers (which did leave me feeling bored by the way). Though I did want to set the backdrop to the show so gave them a quick mention.
3) My mum says I have to be in bed by 9pm or i won't get any desert. "

>>> Perhaps you would have been better leaving them out altogether rather than spouting forth about something you clearly know NOTHING about. (Hmm, more capital letters missing, a new word for my dictionary 'infact' - which you use again below - and I believe you might mean dessert rather than desert, young fellow. Are you sure you're cut out for writing?)

Finally I can only apologise for claiming that Mr Barber was infact Irish. I just happened to think he was. Some people think i sound irish when i answer the phone but i don't get to offended.
>>> Who said anyone was offended? Now you're just making things up.

Anyway sorry for being responsible for the downfall of folk music.

>>> Do you really think you are?

So in conclusion. Jon Gomm isn't folk music.

>>> Who said he was? Is there a point to your mentioning it now?

Mr Barber isn't irish.

>>> Glad you finally grasped something. (Hint: Capital I for Irish in future)

i didn't give folk music a band name because I didn't review any folk music.

>>> Once again I must refer to "one must first endure some traditional folk music" (and the need to begin sentences with a capital!)

Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, See you next time, Ye all come back now.

>>> Oh no. Is that a 'Country Music' reference there? Do you mean 'Y'all come back now' by any chance? If so, then the confusion is yours. Surely you can't confuse the two genres and their terminology?
No, wait a minute; I'm sure you could.

If you have any more problems please do not hesistate to contact points of view and i'm sure Terry Wogan will get on the case.

>>> So why would I do that? Not terribly productive in this specific case.
(There goes your latest 'capital' gaffs by the way - and an interesting spelling of the word 'hesitate')
Now a quick glance at the website a few minutes back (to check something - a practice I feel YOU could benefit from!) revealed you'd already had a second bite.
Keep going, son. I'll not be posting anything further. I'll graciously leave you the last word if you want it. It's yours.
You've shown yourself up enough already.

Siglacken wrote...

Sorry about the poor spelling by the way. I'm from the generation that was brought up on Microsoft word's spell check. But with regards to punctuation please do not come down on me like my English teacher. This is an internet discussion forum and the majority of visitors are guilty at one time or another of not using capital letters or missing out commas. I'm not saying that it is right but it happens. However just for you I'm going to demonstrate why I got a C in English Literature. That's right, a C. Prepare to be amazed by my correct use of capital letters, apostrophes and commas.

After listening to the Demon Barbers for 2/3 songs my overall impression was one of emptiness. Musically they were dull and uninspiring but alas I could not leave the establishment that was tucked away deep in the bosom of Bradford centre. Instead I had to "endure" them otherwise risk missing the act that I, along with my fellow comrades had travelled across town battling the elements of rain and wind to see. My negative comments were aimed at what I witnessed that night and not the whole genre of folk music. Apologies if it came across that I was poking fun at the following:


Billy Bennett
Bain & Anderson
Dave Swarbrick
Bob Davenport
Jack Elliott
Voice Of The People
The Radio Ballads
Martin Carthy
Watersons
June Tabor
John Tams
Dick Gaughan
Christine Collister
Harry Cox
Silly Sisters
Lal Waterson
Nic Jones
Shirley Collins
Ewan MacColl
Joe Heaney
Sam Larner
A.L. Lloyd
Michael Gorman
Albion Band
Colin Reid
Blue Murder
Battlefield Band
Bob Fox

I can't recommend John Tams enough by the way. If you would like to talk further then please pm me.

dumbshoes wrote...

Simon,

Your review quite frankly amazes me, although unfortunately (with regard to your erroneous writing style, baseless comments, staggering inaccuracies and also all too evident lack of musical breadth/listening) not in a good way.

I think Mr McFarlane has more than adequately exposed you as the musically stunted, flippant, non-comprehending 'flavour of the month' dullard that you obviously are, who is in no way placed to comment on a performer, band or music that in both cases you have more than ably in your review demonstrated to know nothing about.
Furthermore, the fact that you obviously lack the inclination to broaden your musical horizons and take an hour of your precious, and obviously expert, musical reviewing time, to listen to some different music you've not heard before only goes to demonstrate that you're hardly placed to comment on any music or performer quite frankly.

With regard to your what might be called a review in some special circles, we're given further evidence of your lack of reviewing authority on pretty much anything musical that went on that night.
Jon Gomm is a fair player and a decent singer, however, he is not the God you want to make him out to be.
I suggest you have a listen to Michael Hedges, then Preston Reed and Eric Roche to name just a couple of great exponents of the style of guitar playing Jon has chosen and is coming from. Background research generally stands you in good stead in most journalistic scenarios to make comment. If you had done some, doesn't take much to find a few names on the web as you've demonstrated with your stock Folk Music list, then maybe you'd realise what a pile of pish your review actually is.
Rhapsodical and flowery comments do not a good review make. This site, having read a good few of the other 'reviews' you've submitted is evidently just a vehicle for your wildly misplaced, scarily angsty and whiny rhetorical outpourings and negative comments in most cases.

"Songs like "Stupid Blues" and "Clock Work" go down a storm and are a showcase for the man's undeniable talent. Ranging between moments of pure emotional heartache and then turning the tables to churn out absolute insane solos unlike anything these eyes have seen before. "Hey Child" is dark and delightful and JG seems to revel in the atmosphere that this epic gives off. He's also not alone as the audience are equally lost in the sheer mystery of this performance."

Sorry, were you at a different Love Apple? I must have missed that.
I didn't see any lost people in the audience or a storm for that matter.
There were loud cheers and much appreciation for a fine performer, nothing more.
The crowd, although seemingly for the most part liking Jon, were hardly wild and stormy for it..

Having read the majority of your review it is fairly evident that your head has obviously disappeared somewhere up your arse, why not take these comments on the chin, take your head out of your behind, put your gilded verbosity and inane similes on the back seat and do yourself a favour, listen, not just hear, research the music you're reporting on and put yourself in a position where you can speak with some authority.

Also, before you say it, it goes without saying you have a right to an opinion like anyone else and that is not in question. You can say you like or didn't like it on a website or anywhere else for that matter, fair enough, but to attempt to pick something apart, comment so blindly and be so dismissive when you are so poorly placed to is not right. You're not just playing with words in a public review; you're playing with people, their lives and livelihoods in some cases so watch your mouth and bear that in mind in future.

As a reviewer you have a responsibility to report accurately. Your 'review' wasn't faithful to Jon's performance that night. Audience reaction is massively misreported, trust me I know them better than you and also I was one of them.

Fallacy and big-upping = disappointed next audience.
Not helpful to Jon or music.
God help anyone who takes or leaves a gig based on your reviews.

Night.

Dave LMS wrote...

Very amusing. It's just like the vitriolic rubbish we get from young immature kids who have had a criticial review of their demo.

And this in response to a very positive review too, which makes a change.

I find myself in almost entire disagreement with your opinions, "dumbshoes".

I did write more to explain why I disagree, but I couldn't find myself clicking send. Broadly speaking I was trying to write how I thought your views seemed quite antiquated. Sorry for not elaborating further.

That's all from me.

CatherineT wrote...

what with all the personal attacks?

the gig was great, i really liked the demon barbers and thought the "flailing legs" were really impressive - infact it would have been nice if they fitted on the stage because then we could have seen what the feet were actually doing!

I also enjoyed JG's performance although i would have to agree with dumbshoes that he was perhaps not the god he has been made out to be, but nevertheless an impressive performance.

Those of us that stayed around until the end will also have seen the fabulous singing of Laura Hockenhull who sang like an angel and who really did reduce the room to silence aswel as the superb guitar/singing skills of Denny Bartley (who actually did have an irish accent) which was again a very enjoyable performance.

i personally thought that it was great to see such a range of music in one night and while i can accept that tastes differ i think credit should be given to all the artists who created a brilliant night of music both in musicianship and entertainment and if all Demon Barber sessions are to be like that - long may they continue!

ct

dumbshoes wrote...

Re: Dave LMS reply..

Vitriolic, interesting choice of previously used word in deference to your so called
'reviewer'.
Suggest you review your reviewer.

Positive review? As already put forward, was he asleep at the gig?..
Were you there? As to this I surmise probably not.
Unlike certain opinions of the whole
night mine isn't biased either way and I have no vested interest in the success of any artist that evening.
I had heard of Jon prior to the gig and also knew of the Demon Barbers. I listen to and judge both with open ears and knowing where both styles of music are coming from and having heard their peers feel more than able and qualified to comment, unlike Mr Glacken seemingly.

"which makes a change"? I
rest my case.

Antiquated? I find that quite amusing seeing as i'm a 26 year old male with a nounce more sense and musical breadth and experience than likely any of your reviewers from what i've read thus far.
And please Dave do elaborate further, I am very interested to see exactly how any of the comments I made as to Simon's review are antiquated and i'm also dying to see some vitriolic rubbish from one of your rejected demo kids that is akin to the comments put forward by myself. Please provide some examples to back up your accusatory remark.
I am not being personally attacked here nor am I defending myself, merely highlighting a very poor, detrimental and glaringly inaccurate review of a great all round night of a wide variety of music that the majority of has been slated in a tuppeny, 2 minute, thoughtless and slap-dash review.
With regard to CatherineT, I totally agree with you, the stars of the night for me were indeed Laura Hockenhull and Denny Bartley.
Two great performers with bags more passion and performance than the man Gomm came out with. Shame ol' Si' missed them isn't it.
Why not come down from your Ivory Tower and see for yourself Dave.

Siglacken wrote...

Sorry Dave but it seems like I've opened the gates to some middleclass hell. Sadly I haven't got time to respond to the upper class argument as I've got exams to revise for. It's a lot like other "discussions" but this time those that are having a go have more money and are probably retired.

My only comment is that I dare anyone to go to a Jon Gomm show and not be impressed. Except maybe someone like Steve Vai who may just watch and say "meh".

In all honesty though, these comments have little effect on me. It's the equivalent of arguing with my father that Godspeed! You Black Emperor, Ryan Adams, Boards of Canada and Tool are infact better than Garth Brooks. When it is obvious that Mr Brooks rocks.

I do enjoy the banter though.

Michael Q wrote...

"Antiquated? I find that quite amusing seeing as i'm a 26 year old male with a nounce more sense and musical breadth and experience than likely any of your reviewers from what i've read thus far."

Everyone has been quite nice so far. But to be honest I think you're a pompous twat Dumbshoes. You see yourself fit to judge others and hold yourself in such high self esteem. Have you actually read some of the other reviews here? Tom Goodhand and Lauren Strain give away a fair few years to you and show more intelligence, passion and musical nous than your self-loving posts have thus far proposed.

andy fsor wrote...

i think what mr q is trying to say i-

who gives a folk?

(had to be done, all apologies)

Siglacken wrote...

you are sick

andy fsor wrote...

moi?

Siglacken wrote...

That comment was low. I think you should just folk off!

dumbshoes wrote...

Exactly what are you wittering on about? Middle class? Upper class argument? Are you reading another forum here?
You couldn't be further off the mark fella, working class background boy here, far from retired, not rich by any stretch of the imagination and nothing class related at all mentioned anywhere. You have chosen to go off on a quite frankly bizarre tangent and ignore the criticism of your guttersnipe effort of a review.
I went to the Jon Gomm concert, I was not impressed, I have seen and heard much much better. You raise him on a platform as you have nothing to compare him to. Where's the basis for any kind of review? Are you really that monumentally stupid that you fail to grasp the basics that any reviewer worth his or her salt would take to investigate?
In all your replies you've only served to demonstrate your immaturity.
If the review was for a Jon Gomm gig then why the need to take uneducated, and as already established baseless, comments about other acts/music you know nothing about nor even have the inclination to listen to.
They were uneccesary comments, wholly inaccurate and that is where the gripe is here, with nothing else.
Take your sorry ass to school, finish your exams and grow up.
As a final word from me, expect no more, in case you're in any doubt, you're no writer or reviewer so if you had any plans to attempt to follow such a career path I wouldn't bother.
Don't give up your day job mate.

andy fsor wrote...

oh right. for a moment there i thought you were some sort of psychic, for i have indeed been struck down by illness of late.

damn critics. aint one of em got a sense of humour - even a bad one

Michael Q wrote...

God has spoken.

So what exactly makes your the authority on all of this? Why is your opinion better than Simon Glacken's? Oh that's right, because it is YOUR opinion and the fact that someone disagrees with it disgusts you.

dumbshoes wrote...

MichaelQ, I assure you that word originally read "reviews" not "reviewers"
Whether someone on this site has conveniently changed it or MSWord and it's ever studious grammar check did the honours I can't say as I don't have the original doc anymore.
I was referring to Simon's other efforts and in no way to anyone else or their reviews on this site.
The only issue here is Simon's offhand and unnecessary remarks. I've no doubt at all Tom and Lauren's reviews are spot on.
As for "self loving posts"
Well if you can infer that from anything i've written there's something not right with you.

dumbshoes wrote...

Moot comment Michael. My opinions matter not. To me Simon's opinions matters not, he is entitled to it, whatever it is. As i've already said and you've obviously failed to comprehend, the issue here is his baseless and unnecessary dismissals of artists unrelated to his 'review'.
Simon's 'review' is not a review, it's a poor comment over-egged with inaccurate rhetoric written by someone who, by his own admission, has no comparison and has done no research into the act he was 'reviewing'. Answer me, where is the value in his review with all the facts you've hopefully already read?He has no basis for a review, merely comment on what he chose to pay attention to from what was put in front of him.

No amount of embellishing makes it valid as a review.
You can't polish a turd.



"Michael Q - 07 January 2005 13:23God has spoken.

So what exactly makes your the authority on all of this? Why is your opinion better than Simon Glacken's? Oh that's right, because it is YOUR opinion and the fact that someone disagrees with it disgusts you."

andy fsor wrote...

ive seen this kind of conversation before...

it'll be freedom of speech next...

Siglacken wrote...

"Simon's 'review' is not a review, it's a poor comment over-egged with inaccurate rhetoric written by someone who, by his own admission, has no comparison and has done no research into the act he was 'reviewing'. Answer me, where is the value in his review with all the facts you've hopefully already read?He has no basis for a review, merely comment on what he chose to pay attention to from what was put in front of him."

Wow I'm qualified to right for the NME

Siglacken wrote...

and my editor would of course change right to write

Michael Q wrote...

It may be rather gushing but nether the less, it is a review.

I'm not quite sure what your problem is, unless you have some personal vendetta against Simon or Jon Gomm.

Why not submit some of your works to this site and show us all how it is done?

Siglacken wrote...

Almost everyone involved in this discussion is on-line. We should find a nice chat room and share the love some more

dumbshoes wrote...

I already have, all I need to submit to show up shysters like Simon is already in this thread in black and white.
Research, valid and reasoned comment.
No vendetta to either. The problem myself and Mr McFarlane also has, if I have read his comments correctly (apologies if I haven't), has already been outlined over and over and over again, here it is again for the hard of reading: baseless and damaging throwaway comments.
Maybe if you'd put more effort into reading before firing your mouth off you'd have got that bit.
And maybe if Simon had put more effort and thought into doing his reviewing job in a public spirited, true and faithful way he wouldn't have attracted adverse comment.
Those unsubstantiated, incorrect and inaccurate comments are the only reason I've made comment in an effort to provide a truer picture of a whole evening of good music, an evening so indifferently dismissed by a supposed music reviewer with a public forum, to attempt to undo any damage this sites flippant reviewer may have caused to a regular night of eclectic musical performances that people have worked selflessly and extremely hard to get going and perpetuate. Evenings that are put on that give people like Simon something to do of an evening.
Least that could have been done is to show a little respect and give the evening as a whole a chance if you are going to comment on it or any of the other acts.
Simon had absolutely no basis to make the rude and wrong throwaway and thoughtless comments he made, and in doing so offended a lot of people.

Siglacken wrote...

But they were crap

Michael Q wrote...

He had every basis. When will people grasp the fact that reviews are opinions, not the gospel. Your opinion differs to Simon's, get over it.

Your remarks just seem extremely petty and childish.

dumbshoes wrote...

Yeah, great response.
Fucktard.

Siglacken wrote...

What I saw of the Demon Barber's as in the band not the whole "sessions" was crap. I didn't see the mother, daughter act later on so didn't mention them. I didn't see the charming old man with his guitar either so he wasn't mentioned. Just JG and the Barbers. My opinion JG = good. Demon Barbers = Crap. As in crap I mean rubbish. Not because I'm ignorant and only listen to music that is in the NME but because it was crap and no amount of research or drink or drugs would make them good. Well maybe drugs.... Anyway that is my opinion so please stop this nonsense. I like lots of music, old and new. But what I saw was boring and dull. Now that's not because I'm a young chap who likes loud metal or pounding trance music. It was rubbish.

So please stop abusing me as I'm very upset now and may cry. Also for the benefit of Mr. D. McFarlane I've tried my best to use correct spelling and punctuation.

What the hell is a fucktard?

Big Stu wrote...

Hey, Dumbass, what's a "Fucktard"

dumbshoes wrote...

Your good self sir. Figure out you wordsmith you.

Big Stu wrote...

"Fucktard" - "Fucked Hard"? What I did to your mother last night?

dumbshoes wrote...

Yes.
Have a smartie.

Siglacken wrote...

Come on now let's not go down the mother road.

Big Stu wrote...

Sorry

Siglacken wrote...

What I want to know is why hasn't Dave come down from his Ivory Tower?

Big Stu wrote...

Sorry, can I get told off for that sort of thing on here? I'm used to the anarchy of the other forum.

I was merely attempting to bring the level down to that of Dumbass who, despite all of his pomposity, is clearly an arsehole. Having spent the best part of 4 pages waxing lyrical on how only he is qualified to judge music and pass opinion thereon, he finally has to resort to making up a [rather juvenile] word to slag someone off.

I promise to behave in future.

Maybe.

Sam Saunders wrote...

I thnk Dumbshoe's original comments were accurate, and his opinion was cleary expressed and carefully justified. So I think some (not all) of the reaction to his observations has been too strong.

Where I think he has misundestood the situation is (perversely) to the general credit of LMS. He has, in effect, applied professional standards to an amateur website in a very exacting way. Most writing on popular music would have to pack up and go home if those standards were to be met in every review. I know that the reviews I write suffer from the same weaknesses that Dumbshoes complains about in Si's writing - less than exhaustive research and glib comments are par for the course I'm afraid. It would be nice if it wasn't - but the real alternative is no reviews at all, and the artists (if not the readers!) would hate that even more.

Intelligent reading is needed of course - there's a relationship between writer and reader and the reader has to come part of the way. It should be obvious that enthusiasm is the general motivation for writing on LMS - not practice for a full time career in journalism.

Siglacken wrote...

Sam Saunders the voice of reason. I bet you'd never say fucktard

Big Stu wrote...

I agree with you (to an extent) Sam, however I would say that going by Dumbshoe's writing here, should he ever actually interface his money with his mouth and write a review I would probably slash my wrists before the end of the second paragraph.

Sam Saunders wrote...

I would if I had thought of it first.

Dave LMS wrote...

Sam - exactly ! Ooohh I love you No seriously, young shoulders old head, or vice versa. I really shouldn't write any more, Sam pretty much nails my points to the ground.

What does age have to do with anything? That's directed to your earlier comment, "dumbshoes". There was no reason to tell us your age. You can still hold (in my humble opinion) old fashioned opinions, even if you are young of age.

Age has nothing to do with it.

I stand by my view that the world is different to that you wish it to be, and I welcome the fact it is so. Sam explains it better. It is wonderful that LMS is as Sam explains, not as you wish. I desire it to be so. It doesn't mean you are "wrong", it just means that several people here don't agree. I will stand alone here actually if needs be, I still totally disagree with your sentiments.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and you can, if you like, disagree with Simon and our many other writers that state Jon Gomm is "excellent" (sorry to paraphrase 'n' reviews into one word) but what really pisses me off is your personal 'hollier than thou' attack on Simon (one of many with the same opinion it should be said). How dare you be so personal?

Yes, you can have an opinion on a band/musician, yes, you can disagree with Simon's opinion, but express it in a mature manner please, don't be so personal about it. This isn't a playground. In so doing your response is no better than the juvenile tripe we occasionally get. No one appreciates a "I'm better than you" type character. Well, not me.

dumbshoes wrote...

Age has nothing to do it, I totally agree with you. Nothing to do with this thread, with opinion and as i've already stated, Simon's opinion is as valid an opinion as the next persons.

Dave, yourself and your literary buddies in this thread have chosen to sidestep all the points I have raised here. You've commented on, homed in on and separated out of context the
ones that best serve you to attempt to place yourself as some kind of on the fence holier than thou type and shift the focus.

*You* were the one who brought age into this, "I thought your views seemed quite antiquated.

Sorry for not elaborating further."
My apologies for inferring that your 'antiquated' sentence might be a somehow chronologically related comment.

"How dare you be so personal?"

How dare I? How dare I attack someone who knows nothing about where they are, who they are watching (in both cases by his own admission) yet feels qualified to make the following comment? How dare your reviewer?

"As a guest at the "Demon Barber sessions" one must first endure some traditional folk music involving Irish accents and leg flailing dancers at the front of the stage. But I won't go into detail about these bands mainly because I had no desire to see them and felt slightly out of place, like an Iron Maiden fan at a Corrs show."

Of course!! I forgot that electric bass, drums, modern arrangements *are* the staple
instruments and style of Traditional Folk Music, and those obviously very practiced, together and skilled dancers we saw on the night with their tight synced routines to the music were just 'leg flailing' and are commonplace at all Folk music performances. I see such things all the time when I visit Folk music events, how silly of me.

Well summed up there Mr Glacken and really helpful in reporting the night as something it isn't to your readership. Yes it's not your job to promote the night and you were reviewing Jon, point is the comment wasn't accurate and wasn't helpful.


If Simon knew what he was talking about he would know that the Sessions are not just about Folk Music and are far from limited to it. They are in fact an attempt to bring Folk and other more specialist genres of music to a wider and younger audience.
That well known Traditional Folk Music band the Pipers, who hail from your native Keighley, were there last month I believe..

Everything I stated up until the point I chose to reply in the one sentence/paragraph smart arse style that seems to be 'par for the course' stock answer in this thread from Simon, and a few others here or there, was stated in a mature manner.

As i've said, and i've lost count nor have the inclination to go back and count how many times i've tried to make the point, the gripe here is not per se with Simon's or anyone elses opinion, offence was taken at his throwaway comments. Defence of the night could come from no other place than showing the 'review' and 'reviewer' up for what they were/are. Inaccurate, having no basis for comparison or value judgements for any act that night and slapdash.

If he knew what he was talking about, neither myself nor Mr McFarlane would have commented and simply accepted the statement, only we can't because it's blatantly and completely wrong and unsubstantiated.

"No one appreciates a "I'm better than you" type character."

I do apologise for having heard similar music and musical peers of all the performers I was listening to that night.
With that comments in mind, for the record Dave, no one I know appreciates a bullshitter either.

I've nothing more to say to any of you.

Dave LMS wrote...

"I've nothing more to say to any of you" - sounds like a good plan. You can repeat your views as many times as you like, but you won't convince me to agree with them.

Age? Well you'll find you wrote your age. I said your views were antiquated, I had no interest in how old you are. I even explained this point again in my second reply, after your first misinterpretation.

Well, it was nice talking.

jpdfan1 wrote...

man, this is like that Cribs thread from last year. now there's something i'd like to forget...

Siglacken wrote...

fucktard

Ty_1984 wrote...

dunbshoes said that the other performers were more passionate than Jon Gomm!!

I wasn't at the gig but Jon Gomm has more passion than any performer I've seen!

The other ones must have burst into flames on stage to be more passionate

aadwgt1 wrote...

You've got to say that D.McFarlane and Dumbshoes have really done more damage to the acts that were reviewed (or not if that's your opinion) than Simon's review ever did in the first place.

Big Stu wrote...

So, Dumbshoes, what you're basically saying is that nobody is allowed to like an act unless you do and positive reviews are, by their very definition, poor reviews?

Fucktard

rpc loqui wrote...

In the interests of fairness and definition, below are some examples of baseless, staggeringly inaccurate, ill-informed comments:

1. Dumbshoes likes to wear women's clothing at the weekends
2. Big Stu can run 100 metres in under 10 seconds
3. I regularly pay Si Glacken and Tom Goodhand in cash, crack and prostitutes to say nice things about me in the press
4. Dave LMS is in fact a tyrannical, plotting, evil genius with grand designs on taking over the world with Simon Cowell
5. Mr. Neil and Tmith are in fact great friends who regularly spend evenings in together playing bridge, roasting chestnuts and chatting about old times
6. Sam S has just celebrated his 24th birthday
7. Jon Gomm has great hair and has been known to temporarily blind people with his bright Technicolor clothing
8. The Scaramanga Six sight Snow Patrol as one of their biggest influences
9. Big Stu is admired by his colleagues for his hard work and dedication whilst in the office and is rarely distracted for anything trivial
10. Mike Q is secretly a massive fan of some truly dreadful music including Bon Jovi and the Stereophonics... Oh, hang on a minute...

andy fsor wrote...

OMG! LMFAO! LOL!

ahem. in english i found that most entertaining

Big Stu wrote...

LOL - Laugh Out Loud - I've only just worked that out!!!

11. - RPC has severe breathing difficulties caused by his abnormally small nose.

rpc loqui wrote...

Fair cop guv!

Pkelly wrote...

This is the funniest thing I've seen in ages. Dumbshoes you are a dumbass and really should take to writing your 'essays' somewhere of use. You'll get no Astars on this board.

'Fucktard' is also the best put-down I've ever heard and expresses what you are more eloquently than any of your 2,000 word ramblings.