In a message dated 11/15/99 9:46:32 PM Eastern Standard Time,
reynolda@sas.upenn.edu writes:
<< this release is a major disappointment: childish, amateurish and puerile.
this used to be a good thing, but this noisy copy of a copy of a copy of
mike+rich is simply excrutiatingly painful to listen to.
i am seriously considering mailing this record par avion to andy maddocks
with a message, saying he can have his crappy records back and that i won't
buy another skam release until he starts publishing worthwhile, heartfelt
music, like he used to. i'm sick and tired of getting ripped off by these
marketing assholes.
my two cents,
alex >>
What, you don't think paying $10 for a bad
record every couple months is funny?
Remember, the label is called _Skam_.
Worthwhile, heartfelt music?
Skam 1 = bad
Skam 2 = listenable
Skam 3 = listenable
Skam 4 = NO!
Skam 5 = listenable
Skam 6 = very good
Skam 7 = the best
Skam 8 = the best
Skam 9 = very good
Skam 10 this = listenable +
Skam 10 that = bad
Skam 11 = bad
Skam 12 = bad
SkaLD1 = the best
SkaLD2 = listenable +
Kmas1 = bad
Kmas2 = listenable +
0161 = listenable
Skampler = varies
Mask 1 = bad
Mask 2 = excellent
Mask 3 = MUST.STOP.RECORD
Mask 4 = bad
Mask 5 = funny bad
Frisbee = stylus destruction
Although, may I say, I do love you list
members: thank you for saving me from
buying yet another record I'd just turn
around lose $3 on second hand. Just wish
somebody had warned me about Schematic.
Matt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org