off off topic....

[farrokh747]

to get our minds off elec buses...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnwWEb4ZdD8

due thanks to shiv for the link...

[Hardy Heinlin]

Great performance.


If this is your kind of humor, you may also want to try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BrLEuzVCVQ


Also very recommended:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89zM9pZzt0U&feature=related

[farrokh747]

that sounds like me on my old squire....

as far as fails go, i was given the task of driving John Mclaughlin to the Shakti concert in Bombay in "84 from his hotel to the stadium and my car (old fiat, pre india global) totally stalled with him and L Shankar inside..... i eventually had to ask both of them to push the clunker to get it started again....

no video/images of this i'm afraid... but now part of bombay legend....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Padmini

[the mad hatter]

what Farrokh failed to tell you was that he "IS" one of the band members and he wears his underpants on the outside of his shorts :-))))))

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BzU1sYPjzo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__s4OMTVyhI

try these  the 2nd one played  in the OM  very funny

[Hardy Heinlin]

... and L Shankar inside..... i eventually had to ask both of them to push the clunker to get it started again....

So romantic.

Hilarious :-)

[Shiv Mathur]

Great performance.


If this is your kind of humor, you may also want to try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BrLEuzVCVQ


Also very recommended:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89zM9pZzt0U&feature=related

I guess this is where different people can have very different things
that appeal to their funny bone.

Maybe I'm missing something, but these two links were of contrived
performances  ... and rather belaboured in their (attempted) humour.

The video Farrokh linked to was, on the contrary, not trying to be funny.

I guess with humour, we shall have to agree to disagree.

(All just my opinion, of course ... open to disagreement)

[farrokh747]

one more...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z4m4lnjxkY

[the mad hatter]

Farrokh, you just have too much time on your hands where do you find this s&(*&
 too funny still laughing here but catchy tune :-)

Bernard

[Hardy Heinlin]

I guess this is where different people can have very different things that appeal to their funny bone.

Obviously not everybody's taste :-)

Maybe I'm missing something, but these two links were of contrived
performances  ... and rather belaboured in their (attempted) humour.

The video Farrokh linked to was, on the contrary, not trying to be funny.

Are you sure they wanted to do a correct and serious performance? I guessed and expected they were intentionally going to perform a comedy.

But this question isn't relevant anyway, I think. I found all links funny, your link and the Shreds. What they have in common, to me, is this: Contrast. On one hand the great guru (e.g. Zarathustra, Santana, Paco de Lucia), on the other hand enourmous dilletantism and minimalism.

If these opposite properties are paired in a subtle way with unexpected nuances and original details, some people will find it funny, I guess.

The greater the guru, the bigger the fall. If there's no fall, there's no comedy.

If they had replaced Zarathustra by, say, a child song, the song itself would already be minimalistic and simple. So, additional mistakes in the performance wouldn't add any contrast. Similarly, Shreds, for instance, don't work with punk music, in my opinion. Punk per se is already Shred. It can't be shredded further. No contrast, no fall.

(For this reason, I really like only a few Shreds. Some are sloppily made, without any ironic details, done in five minutes probably. Some others are rich of ironic quotes, with dramaturgical gimmicks, and with a remarkably realistic picture-audio synchronity.)


Cheers,

|-|ardy

[Shiv Mathur]

Are you sure they wanted to do a correct and serious performance? I guessed and expected they were intentionally going to perform a comedy.

Well, of course I cannot be sure that they wanted to do a correct performance.
But I certainly got that impression.  (Maybe partly from the hapless look on
the trumpet player's face when he decided he'd rather opt out of trying to
hit the high notes ... let the keyboard handle them !!)

If it was intentional, then it's merely slapstick ... not so good.

In fact, if intentional, not funny at all.  Damnit, Hardy, you've ruined it for me now !! :lol:
Cheers,
Shiv

[Hardy Heinlin]

After some intensive analysis, I come to the following hypothesis:

Funny to me is, how they fail.

Funny to you is, that they fail.

I expect failure, so I'm not disappointed that there's no surprise when they fail. I'm surprised about the way they fail.

You don't expect failure, so you're not disappointed because you get surprised when they suddenly fail. The way they fail is irrelevant for you.


Correct me if I'm wrong :-)


Cheers,

|-|ardy

[Shiv Mathur]

The way they fail is irrelevant for you.

I'm not sure if that's absolutely right.  
I think that their whole look, their obvious embarrassment, their whole
body-language - so typical of young music students deciding to
go busking - was an important part.

(I remember doing similiar stuff - with more success, I hope! - in Karlsplatz
in Wien ... a mere 30 years ago!)

Good fun!
Cheers,
Shiv