And yes, I’m interested in both. For different reasons. Evelien, makes wonderful music. Delicate, warm songs. And, there is a high ‘no bullshit’ factor. She post’s her songs on Myspace. The page has some pictures, and a little bio. But other then that, the music speaks for itself. You can like it or dislike it, but I have the feeling that she’s not there to have the songs ‘debated’. If you like it, awesome. If you don’t, that’s fine too. The absence of intense marketing is a relief, and as a listener I get to do my fairly uninfluenced listening, and make up my own mind. She’s on hyves. And on Twitter. But both seem to be used for their original purpose. Communicate with friends, as opposed to the now popular marketing functions.

That is not so much the case with Fabienne Frank. Although I’m not saying it’s a bad thing. From her, it’s the whole web presence I really enjoy seeing unfold. Webpage, twitter, hyves, facebook, bandcamp, youtube – it’s all there. It seems as though she’s read through some of the popular blogs and pdf’s about being an musician and how to embrace the whole internet scene as your audience. The music is not so much my style, nor taste. But that does not mean I can’t respect it, nor does it mean that I can’t respect seeing someone paving her own road to the stars. It does mean that at this point, I’m not really listening to her music.

And right there, reveals itself an interesting question. The woodpecker amongst questions. The one that leads to what we could define as the ‘essence’. Am I more likely to keep my interest in music that I think is really awesome – Evelien – or, will – Fabienne Frank- ultimately keep me more interested, simply because her web presence? I hear the critics in the stands ruffle their feathers, cough softly, and say: ‘But my dear chap, what you’re doing here is comparing apricots to raisins! Both could have very different desires for themselves in terms of what they want to accomplish. One might be content to just post her songs online, surprising the occasional surfer by, while the other is shooting for stardom.’

‘Dear critics,’ I would say, ‘Dear critics, you may have a fair point. If it weren’t for the fact that I am, well thinking, independent, maybe even slightly hedonistic individual, who seeks to be entertained. If I’m really honest, I don’t care about what they want to accomplish. I want to be entertained. Swept away with song, or brilliant ideas. And I was just wondering what would keep me interested the longest.’

-Edit- After posting this article, I contacted both Evelien and Fabienne Frank, and I’m very happy to announce they both agreed to do an interview! Check back soon! :-)

So far, they’ve conquered the world in a blaze of amazement. Most people have heard them by now, I’m sure of it. And, most people will have formed their opinion as to whether the sound is to their liking. I’m wondering what all the Satriani fans are going through. I mean, if you’re completely into his style of instrumental music, is it difficult to get used to hearing your god play in a band with vocals?

I expected, well…nothing to be honest. Try to imagine what it would sound like if you put Bon Jovi, Chris Perry, Duff, and Ceasar Zuiderwijk together. A potpourri spreading through 3 different musical decades and influences. To my astonishment it really works well for Chickenfoot. Even more surprising, Satriani writes awesome guitar lines without going flashy. Or over the top. Or running down 14 different scales in 20 seconds (that’s jealousy talking here ;-)).The riffs are very headnoddingly addictive, the vocals strong, and base and drums tight. Tight like the eighties jeans tight.

What’s more, they seem to grasp the whole digital era. All their songs are listenable via their website. Every song has a diary style like video too, if you want to. They do podcasts. If you haven’t already, please check them out here!: www.chickenfoot.us.