Secret revealed: http://donewaiting.com/oh/index.php#001513

Awesome. They have paid their dues and they are a kick ass live band.

The letters L and A scare me though.

I hope they find an opportunity that doesn't fuck them in the end. They rarely 'develop' artists out in sunny socal these days.

84 nash? i guarantee nothing will come of this. they have some very weak vocals. maybe if they can all sing in tune, something might work out for them. AND, i don't consider, even for a millisecond, 84 nash as being "the columbus music scene" representative. i'm not bitter, i just think they are lacking in many avenues a band has to have in order to make it, or even keep a fan base.

fan base? i've seen them a few times and i am surprised at how many people are usually there. i don't get it. the music really isn't that tight, yet people eat them up? what then defines a columbus fan base? is this city all about amature wanna be's or cliques? where is the truly good music? and where are the crowds during these performances?

hmmmm. good point charlie. maybe i'm being too critical in my opinions. i just think that there are many better acts in columbus than them. they were compared to the sun earlier on in this post. i've seen the sun a bunch and love their energy, as with 84 nash. the sun actually were tight in their songs, yet the songs all sounded pretty much the same. as is the way with most "alternative" music today. IT ALL SOUNDS THE SAME. 84 nash follows nicely in that category. where is the originality? and is this originality being backed up by good players? or, does that not even matter when going to a rock and roll show?

Okay, here's my $0.02.

There are bands in this town that are original like you wouldn't believe. Denovo, Kopaz, Miranda Sound, Pretty Mighty Mighty, Tiara and Tom Foolery & the Mistakes all come to mind. Many of these bands bring along a large fan base. It depends on the night and venue, just like all local music.

As for 84 Nash, I'm not a fan, but I appreciate the fact that they're out there doing what they do. I'm not up on the stage, so I have no reason to complain. I just don't go to their shows. The music doesn't really do anything for me (although I dig that drummer). But the main reason I don't enjoy 84 Nash is the lead singer's 'stage attitude' - that Mick Jaggerish-swagger and obnoxious-esque routine. I know a lot of people dig that, and that's what they like about rock and roll (the whole 'other personality' thing), but to me, it's like he's trying too hard to prove he's a rock star.

Anyway, like I said, I really don't have any reason to complain or whine. There are other bands in the city that I'd like to see make it big, but to twist a famous American's words: that's one small step for 84 Nash, one giant leap for Columbus music.

I don't know musicfan1, I think originality is overrated. At least it's not a useful means of guaging a bands merit. I mean, if you were to dismiss any music on the basis of originality what would you be left with? I can't think of a band that isn't standing on the shoulders of someone who came before. As a matter of fact, I think it's more interesting to critique a band based on their taste in music and how they are able to creatively build on whatever they heard that made them want to play in the first place.

Shit, anyone who ever picked up an electric guitar and dared to dream of the spotight owes everything they'll ever do to a young Muddy Waters who had the singular genius to plug in his acoustic and transform the Delta blues into Chicago blues. If he hadn't turned audiences on to that fine electric sound, how would Chuck Berry have stepped up to the mic with Maybellene? And if there were no Chuck Berry where would John and Paul have turned? Would the Beatles have sounded like Glen Miller?

I am not an expert in rock history, but I know enough to know that it's all relative. As long as a band isn't covering Jeremy or Dave Mathews then they have the original thing down pat.

On the whole originality thing:

I have never heard a record that sounds like the new Radiohead record, and I can count many that sound very similar to the new Jayhawks album. I'd rather listen to the Jayhawks album any day.

Again, I think that you need to listen to their album. I don't think Kevin can't hold a tune that well live, but on record, his melodies really shine, and I think their new record is a really great piece of work. If you listen to it and still don't like them, well, that's just like, your opinion- man.

originality overated? i can see your point about every band owing their original songs to their influences and what makes a band interesting is their prestentation of what they do and how they've bridged the gap between themselves and their influences. fine. but what about the presentation. wouldn't you hold in highest of regards the talent level of said group? look at gil mantera's party dream. sure, they might be brilliant, but not on the music level. they are nothing more than a gimmic show. musicality? there is none really, yet they pack the fuck out of every place they play. is it because they are a joke? everyone goes to have fun? where's the inspiration? or, is the ability to think at a rock show not possible. i agree with what was said about the frontman of 84 nash, he does try too hard. there are a lot of cats in this town who try too hard. yet they try so hard because they are lacking the natural ability to entertain. to connect to the crowd. what do people want to see? i think i"m beginning to see a pattern here in columbus and it seems typical to the whole mid west kind of life style. bold statement, i know...

From what I've heard on their latest CD, I think that 84 Nash have a good chance to break. I agree with Atomic Ned that they have a unique sound.

I want to thank everyone at the site for turning me on to them. I'm looking forward to going to one of their August shows.

For what it's worth, I've bought more local CDs this year than any other and I've been living here for over 15 years.

first off, i just wanna say this:



now, with that said (no offense, really just a joke in poor taste, i know...)
i'd like to add something. 84 Nash and our band have had it out on a few
occasions and i never really liked what they were doing musically. i always
heard it as very GBV wannabe, and that is only made more evident by their
personal connection with said band. don't get me wrong, i like the early GBV.
so we have since resolved these silly rivalries between our bands and i just
want to say, if they are getting 'the big record deal' then good for them. i'm sure
alot of people like them, and there's no doubt that they've worked hard to get to
where they are. they definitley fit into what's 'hot' in the more popular underground
music circles right now with the whole garage thing. i say, let them eat cake.

but good luck with that shit. this music industry of ours will swallow your soul.
hope that doesnt happen.

eric

Ok - I will be the first to say this:

For some inexplicable reason, I like Gil Mantera's music as much as the spectacle... It's really not that bad, and as an occasional maker of electronic music, I can say that it's not just pushing buttons, that it takes a certain amount of skill and practice - their music is actually pretty tight and interesting, even if simple. It has elements of/comparisons to other bands like Fischerspooner, but it's really not bad. Sure, it's not rock (which I know is a sin in this town...), but it's fun, it's well made, it's tasteful (ok, I lied on that one....), and they are finally getting recognition after playing that stuff to empty houses for a while.....

so kudos to Gil and Donny! I like your music! Your stage show is awesome! Rock...er....um....tweak on!

I liked Gil Mantera's music as well. It suprised me how much fun it was to listen to. It wasn't bad! It was good!