« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990  (Read 7659 times)

sundaygal

  • The Core
  • kiloposter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2464
    • View Profile
24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« on: January 23, 2012, 07:11:47 PM »
Great music year for me!

HAMMERTIME!

Wouldn't mind hearing Jane Child's "Don't Wanna Fall In Love".  Haaaayy!

Uh-oh...The FBers are requesting away:  Traveling Wilburys, TMBG, Phil Collins...

I NEED BACK-UP!
« Last Edit: January 23, 2012, 07:30:25 PM by sundaygal »
Logged

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #1 on: January 23, 2012, 07:45:09 PM »
Quote from: sundaygal on January 23, 2012, 07:11:47 PM
Great music year for me!

HAMMERTIME!

Wouldn't mind hearing Jane Child's "Don't Wanna Fall In Love".  Haaaayy!

Uh-oh...The FBers are requesting away:  Traveling Wilburys, TMBG, Phil Collins...

I NEED BACK-UP!

I just posted:

Quote
Some desperately needed "HAAAAY!":
Lisa Stansfield, "All Around the World"
Bell Biv Devoe, "Poison"
Prince, "Thieves in the Temple"
Biz Markie, "Just a Friend"

But I can do without MC Hammer  -- that would merit an "uber-LN" from me.
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round

Big Fingers McGee

  • The Core
  • Heavy Duty
  • *****
  • Posts: 3376
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2012, 08:35:19 PM »
Who TF is requesting Phil Collins and the Wilburys? Jebus!

EDIT: The individual who used to always like their posts requested "Hang In Long Enough", which would certainly qualify as a "Haaay" moment. Someone else requested the Wilburys, and that can not be forgiven.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2012, 08:42:38 PM by IntellectualElitist »
Logged

urth

  • Moderator
  • Transcendent Typist
  • *****
  • Posts: 15274
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #3 on: January 23, 2012, 11:51:37 PM »
Whoever mentioned last week (IE?) that there seemed to be a pattern developing in how the years were chosen was definitely not wrong. Just looking over the last couple of weeks, it seems like they're selecting years at 10 or 20 (and rarely 30) year intervals on successive days. Like last week, after the MLK set, we got '85 and '95, then '79 and '89. And the week prior, the years were '84, '74, '66 and '86, with '98 being the odd year out. Now this week we're off to the same formula with '70 and '90 leading off the week. Based on that, I'll venture we'll hear two of either '83, '93 or '03, and maybe '87 later this week.
Logged
Let's get right to it.

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2012, 09:06:43 AM »
Quote from: urth on January 23, 2012, 11:51:37 PM
Whoever mentioned last week (IE?) that there seemed to be a pattern developing in how the years were chosen was definitely not wrong. Just looking over the last couple of weeks, it seems like they're selecting years at 10 or 20 (and rarely 30) year intervals on successive days. Like last week, after the MLK set, we got '85 and '95, then '79 and '89. And the week prior, the years were '84, '74, '66 and '86, with '98 being the odd year out. Now this week we're off to the same formula with '70 and '90 leading off the week. Based on that, I'll venture we'll hear two of either '83, '93 or '03, and maybe '87 later this week.

of course '89, '90 and '95 all happen to be '49er Super Bowl-winning years too. I'm sure AL was counting on them winning Sunday --  be interesting to see how many Super Bowl clips we hear today.
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round

Alicat

  • The Core
  • Super Scribe
  • *****
  • Posts: 5456
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2012, 09:50:12 AM »
Quote from: RGMike on January 24, 2012, 09:06:43 AM
Quote from: urth on January 23, 2012, 11:51:37 PM
Whoever mentioned last week (IE?) that there seemed to be a pattern developing in how the years were chosen was definitely not wrong. Just looking over the last couple of weeks, it seems like they're selecting years at 10 or 20 (and rarely 30) year intervals on successive days. Like last week, after the MLK set, we got '85 and '95, then '79 and '89. And the week prior, the years were '84, '74, '66 and '86, with '98 being the odd year out. Now this week we're off to the same formula with '70 and '90 leading off the week. Based on that, I'll venture we'll hear two of either '83, '93 or '03, and maybe '87 later this week.

of course '89, '90 and '95 all happen to be '49er Super Bowl-winning years too. I'm sure AL was counting on them winning Sunday --  be interesting to see how many Super Bowl clips we hear today.
I'm still sort of mourning the Niner loss and the SB that is not to be. NHL makes me feel better but the Niner loss was tough.
Logged
Sharks bleed teal.

Lightnin' Rod

  • Administrator
  • Heavy Duty
  • *****
  • Posts: 4504
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2012, 09:52:07 AM »
Bah, not feeling it at all today.  Not even gonna tune in.
Logged
and any fool knows
a dog needs a home
a shelter
from pigs on the wing

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2012, 09:57:21 AM »
Quote from: Lightnin' Rod on January 24, 2012, 09:52:07 AM
Bah, not feeling it at all today.  Not even gonna tune in.

ah feel yer pain. Not expecting much -- dunno why I bother to make "suggestions" any more, frankly.
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2012, 10:05:36 AM »
Sinbad O'Connor, doing her big hit "Mandingo"  -- actually it's "Emperors new Clothes" but that woulda been a funny line.

ETA: a newish, annoying FB-Foghead (initials AB) calls this a "deep album cut". Oy.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2012, 10:09:56 AM by RGMike »
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2012, 10:10:56 AM »
VHM Mr Simon -- an "Obvious" choice tho' it may be.
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2012, 10:15:42 AM »
Lightning Seeds is borderline-LN1. DC's fingerprints loom large.
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round

Tinka Cat

  • The Core
  • Master Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 8080
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2012, 10:20:51 AM »
this sounds like eno.
Logged
~CPL593H~

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2012, 10:22:01 AM »
Eno (?) gets a BOSFRA.

But again I ask, why is something as obscure as this OK to play but not an obvious pop hit (*cough* Lisa Stansfield *cough*) that everyone would know?
« Last Edit: January 24, 2012, 10:23:54 AM by RGMike »
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2012, 10:24:15 AM »
LN2: Midnight Oil.
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round

RGMike

  • The Core
  • Eight Miles High
  • *****
  • Posts: 79493
    • View Profile
Re: 24 Jan 2012: It's... 1990
« Reply #14 on: January 24, 2012, 10:30:07 AM »
BOS2 U2's contrib to Red Hot + Blue. 
Logged
You spin me right 'round, baby, right 'round
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »