The "bad guy" in the band: who are the other Mike Loves in music?

yes

Relative weak-link in the band

I'm sure you think Freddie Mercury was the weakest link in Queen too.

ftr Christine McVie was most skeptical of Buckingham's experiments but because all the big hits post-Tusk are hers she was served well by them.

i figured that description of stevie nicks was so bizarre and delusional that it didn't even need to be commented on.

The penultimate Mike Love would be the guy who fired the creative genius and then got fired himself, like if the guy who kicked Robert Wyatt out of the Soft Machine got booted himself a few albums later.

penultimate
"ultimate"
/nitpick

Some heavy-duty developments in Mike Love Studies theory here. Intheblanks has identified one of the key weaknesses in first wave Mike Love theory, and I am finding it hard to find inconsistencies in the refined 2-point Mike Love paradigm as put forth by Fact Checking Cuz.

No, I meant "penultimate," fcc, because such a figure would be replaced by the later, "ultimate" Mike Love.

I thought somebody was going to get me for adding the unnecessary "the" before the band name.

who is the mike love of ilx

I meant "penultimate," fcc, because such a figure would be replaced by the later, "ultimate" Mike Love.

but if such a figure had serious mike love skills, he'd worm his way back into the band and fire the guy who fired him. as the student becomes the master, so does the penultimate becomes the ultimate.

I don't think Mike Love Theory can be applied to more equal partnerships like Lennon/McCartney or Mould/Hart. McCartney and Mould may have been marginally more Mike Love than Brian Wilson - but both have too much Brian in them to be Mikes.

there are basically almost no mike loves, and just as well

Also there are too questions being asked in this thread. One is "Who is the Mike Love of (insert band)?", while the other is "Is (musician) a Mike Love?" The former has a lot of latitude, as it is simply identifying the most Mike Love-like figure in a group of people, while the latter is trickier and harder to pin down.

The first question is probably better, or at least more fun in the long run.

two, not too

as long as it's acknowledged that lots of bands (probably most of them) have no Mike Love figure at all (xp)

^^^mike love of western blot

if only we could get mike love himself to join more bands. if he replaced any of the three singers in fleetwood mac, for example, he could become an even better mike love than he already is.

true, without the essential "is x a mike love" it degenerates into "who's the biggest dick?" pretty quick

ignore my last post, it sets Mike Love theory back by hours

how about in other realms? Is Larry Summers the Mike Love of the Obama administration (or was it Rahm?)

rahm is a lump of the purest mike love

Rahm Emmanuel is definitely a Mike Love type, but politics may be so Mike Love-heavy it might be impossible to apply this.

my glove is the Mike Love of my winter clothes, it's always going rogue and getting lost in the closet when it's snowing

this thread is amazing

Can managers count?

Matthew Katz of Moby Grape

Penultimate may have been a poor choice of words. My train if thought was that if mike love is the ultimate mike love , Johnny ramone is a close second. Cummings owns this thread.

this thread is amazing

― i also enjoy in line skateing (spazzmatazz), Friday, May 23, 2014 10:24 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Agreed. It's tasty.

this thread inspired tonight's karaoke rendition of "Kokomo"

*gasface*

I have been super-enjoying this thread, but probably a bit too much, as last night I very earnestly asked the singer in my band if I was the Mike Love. I think I might be the Mike Love. Nooooooooooooooo!

Thinking about this thread, it's amazing how many of my favourite bands are helmed by a single, unchallengeable creative genius, with loyal satellites in fealty, rather than a democracy of shifting power.

I suppose that if you have a powerful creative vision, you'll surround yourself by those who'll help you realise it, not those who'll distort it. Am now trying to think of counterexamples.

Uhhh... the Beach Boys?

amongst his faves, i think he means

or that haven't been mentioned here yet

I suppose that if you have a powerful creative vision, you'll surround yourself by those who'll help you realise it, not those who'll distort it.

This is just such a weird thing to say. Like, of course nobody sets out to play music with other people who are going to fuck up your shit. It's like saying "I suppose if you want friends you'll surround yourself with people who you get on with, not people who punch you in the face".

imago - not a fan of jazz?

I should have said - not those who'll potentially distort it (by imposing their own vision, which might lie at odds with one's own)

I like certain jazz-style groups, like Soft Machine, who've already been mentioned, although the artists involved were largely all so good that creative differences were transcended

yet still plays with them sometimes?

he's played a total of 80 minutes with them, in one 25-hour period, in the last 26 years (ie one section of two three-hour concerts)

I'd actually argue that bands are better with some friction between competing interests and aesthetics

Problem with the visionary and minions view is tons of corny motherfuckers w medium talent think they are geniuses but 1 in 10 million are.

oh, sure it's good to have players who synergise in interesting ways that abet the vision, and occasionally add to it, but I'm just saying - most of my favourite acts tend to have one principal songwriter who is usually regarded as the band's enduring totem

yes yes you mainly listen to rock music we get it

Miles Davis seemed to balance the tyrannical band leader/nurturer of creativity thing perfectly for decades. But I suppose it helped that he had a shrewd talent for recruiting nothing but the most exceptional musicians and he was actually a genius.

"I like certain jazz-style groups, like Soft Machine, who've already been mentioned, although the artists involved were largely all so good that creative differences were transcended"

weirdest soft machine albums are the late 70's ones where none of the original members are in the band. that's one way to work around the creative geniuses of a group.

Have we arrived at a single non-Mike Love Mike Love yet? Feel like the definition keeps getting more and more specific and now nobody can be considered for the position.

frank zappa has some definite mike love qualities.

How about Pink Floyd? You could say Syd was the main creative force behind it and everything past that has been a power grab?

lol, M@tt.

There is more to Miles Davis's leadership than just picking the best musicians. There is some quote to the effect that "maybe a guy could only play two notes, but if Miles LIKES those two notes..."

Yeah, totally. And to use one example, he recruited Keith Jarrett who had not only never played electric piano before, but was vocal about his hatred of the instrument. So Miles says, "Hey, you know that thing you hate? Do that."

Ha, it was Keith Jarrett who said it: http://downbeat.com/microsites/ecm-jarrett/post_3-inner-octaves-of-jarrett.html