Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

'Bee Gee Stans of Detroit' it says on the label - but isnt Bee Gee from Va? Think I read this somewhere / listed by Greg Haynes on his online resource. Anybody know anything about the origins of BG Stans or the label?

Cheers and Merry Christmas folks, Mark.

Edited by Windlesoul
Posted

Quote from the cd ..

Bee gee stans were from Richmond but Detroit was considered as Soul central ,so adding that to the groups name was considered a good business move .

Posted

it's also a solo female, so probably more a band than a group

"It's " ??

Is that correct Grammar Bob ?

Interesting point though ,as I myself never give it a thought and use the term group loosely .

But it is actually a valid point if given enough thought .

Posted

"It's " ??

Is that correct Grammar Bob ?

Interesting point though ,as I myself never give it a thought and use the term group loosely .

But it is actually a valid point if given enough thought .

A group is simply more than two of whatever is making up the group. A band is a group of musicians.

Posted

A group is simply more than two of whatever is making up the group. A band is a group of musicians.

I took it as a band is made up of musicians and one main singer .

A group has more than one vocalist ??

Posted

"It's " ??

Is that correct Grammar Bob ?

Interesting point though ,as I myself never give it a thought and use the term group loosely .

But it is actually a valid point if given enough thought .

"it" refers to the record. what did you think was grammatically incorrect?

Posted

Dodgy ground when correcting others grammar (is that spelt right :lol), usually make a mistake next posting :DIt's is an abbreviation of it is (or it has) but is usually avoided when referring to to the person. So I think Bob is technically right if referring to the record??? Where's the English teachers when you need them.

Posted

yeah, I thought that I was obviously saying "it is", where "it" referred to the record. I didn't even think that's what Nev was criticizing but I had no idea what he was trying to say was grammatically incorrect. Either way, it doesn't matter and is off topic, but I'm still wondering what he thought was wrong.

p.s. Nev, way to not be a steward of your mother tongue. FOR SHAME.

  • Helpful 1
Posted

yeah, I thought that I was obviously saying "it is", where "it" referred to the record. I didn't even think that's what Nev was criticizing but I had no idea what he was trying to say was grammatically incorrect. Either way, it doesn't matter and is off topic, but I'm still wondering what he thought was wrong.

p.s. Nev, way to not be a steward of your mother tongue. FOR SHAME.

Hi Bob ,It's ok if you were referring to "the record " and not the person :)

That"s why I asked if it was correct .

It reminded me of being corrected for referring to a woman in company as "she " or a new born baby as "it " .

I was'nt trying to be pedantic ,it just did'nt look or read right when I first read it.

Atb for 2013 .

Get involved with Soul Source

Add your comments now

Join Soul Source

A free & easy soul music affair!

Join Soul Source now!

Log in to Soul Source

Jump right back in!

Log in now!


×
×
  • Create New...