Pod People

originally posted March 25, 2008

So, in case you're one of the few people on this planet who don't own an iPod (because according to mainstream media everybody has one) you might have heard about their plan to offer unlimited downloads for their subscribers.  This is obviously another step towards their goal of global consumer domination - everyone must own one eventually.

Well, yes that's a pretty good deal, only they haven't decided how much it will be.  Some think it could be a monthly subscription, for say $20 a month.  Or it could be a flat fee of $100 that's included in the price when you buy one.

But you have to always be a subscriber to Apple products in order to keep listening to the music - the moment you decide you want to cancel, you don't get to keep the music.  Call me crazy, but I think that's rotten.  If I've paid for something, I should be able to keep a copy of it.

You could always burn an audio CD of anything you download and have a physical copy that way, but it seems to me that most people got rid of their physical CD libraries when they bought their mp3s players, so they don't want to clutter up their homes again.

Not to mention, that the quality of the files you download isn't as good as a physical CD copy anyways.  And I don't own an iPod, so I can't verify the rumour that the battery wears out after 18 months, forcing you to buy a new one.

And today in the news, SONY/BMG has now announced they are working on plans to start their own online music distribution service, that will be compatible with existing music players.  It's even "possible" that users could keep the music they buy, even after they are no longer customers.  Oh, how generous.

This is SONY/BMG's next move since their MusicPass mp3 download cards are not doing well.  Have you seen these?  They look like credit cards, graced with album artwork of the SONY artist in question (Celine Dion, Avril Lavinge, Bruce Springsteen, Elvis, etc).  They cost $12.99 and I've seen them in practically every retail store.

How they work is you buy the card, take it home, log on to their website, type in the security information, and boom - you get to download the album (with a few piddly extras) in mp3 format.

Um...I'm sorry to point out the obvious, but if I go to a record store, I'm looking to buy a physical CD, not something I have to take home and download, using my own computer and bandwidth.  For less than $12.99, I can buy the real CD, with artwork I can actually hold, listen to on any of my CD players, and make copies of for myself.  Or I can sell it to a used-record store...something the labels don't like, and that online downloading curbs.

It's not like SONY/BMG are offering out-of-print albums that are 'not worth their investment' to produce mass copies to put in record stores - these are only fully available, recent releases by major label artists.

Why would they do such a wasteful thing?  WHO is going to buy it?  People who buy their music online  will do it at home and add it to their growing library of albums they bought online, already installed on their computer.  They will not go to a store to buy a card, and register with a brand new website to give them access to one single album.  I really don't get it.

But then again, I'm from the generation of music listeners that remember where they bought every CD, record or tape and all the memories that are associated with them.  My record collection just isn't a collection of music, it's a scrapbook of memories and feelings.  I will never get misty over something I downloaded.

Seriously, we should just go back to cassette walkmans.  Oh, and just when I thought MAD TV wouldn't have anything clever to say:



currently listening to: Colin Hay - "Man @ Work", Leona Naess albums, Malibu - "Robo-Sapiens", Ray Montford - "A Fragile Balance"

Urban Rush!

originally posted April 7, 2008

On Friday last week, I tagged along with Shiral and Fred to the Urban Rush taping.  They have a pretty nice studio, my favorite part being the glowing neon lights around the TV monitors in the Green room (apparently they have them all over the building).  If you want to watch the video of Shiral and Fred on the show, I've moved it to the links page.

I also took a digital camera with me, so here's a little tour:



The spacious green room, where you can see the glowing TV thingys.  You can see Shiral sitting facing the TV, and on her left is the back of Andre-Philippe Gagnon's head.  I thought it was him when I saw him, but it was strange because he looked exactly the same as he did 20 years ago (as you obviously tell from the back of his head).


Here's Fred and Shiral pre-chatting with Michael Eckford, also seen here from the back.  I'm really good at taking photos of the back of people's heads.


Fred posing with Urban Rush producer Lisa MacFarlane.  I had a shot of the back of her head, but decided to go with this one, being different and all.


..and a shot of the full set inbetween the commercial breaks.  Notice how many people I managed to photograph from the back of their heads.  Must be my true calling.

Thanks to the extremely friendly staff at Urban Rush!

The Loudness War

originally posted March 13, 2008

There's been alot of justified talk lately that CDs are mastered too loudly, thereby destroying the music and making it impossible to enjoy.

My favorite is this article by Rip Rowan over the crappy sound of Rush's ablum Vapor Trails.

Also, there's this great article written about CD levels in general being too loud. And this one.

Let me be clear here, I'm not talking about compression, as in 'file compression', as in the argument that mp3s don't sound as good as CDs do (which they don't).

This is a deliberate action, taken by either the bands or the label that physically removes all dynamics from the music on purpose, in order for the overall sound to be LOUD.

Have you noticed that the CDs you bought around 1992-95 are a lot quieter than the brand new ones?  You have to be careful because I've noticed that a lot of "remastered" releases just mean they made it louder, and not improved the sound quality at all.  There are exceptions: ELO and Peter Gabriel's remastered catalog sound glorious, and take full advantage of the frequency spectrum.

Other titles, especially on the Rhino label, just make things loud.

What's especially interesting is I bought the DVD audio version of Rush's newest album Snakes and Arrows, because I wanted the documentary AND I suspected the CD version might have the same problem as their previous album, Vapor Trails had, which was too loud.  And guess what?

Here's what really interesting: I ripped a copy of the first track "Far Cry" from the CD, and the same track at the same position from the DVD audio version, and the results are below. You can see the difference immediately:

CD version:


DVD version:


I did not boost or touch either of the original files - this is how they look.  You can just tell by looking at them the obvious difference.  The natural peaks and dynamics of the DVD version is how it's supposed to look.  And you can guess which one sounds better.

I bet the DVD is closer to what the music actually sounded like when it was mixed in the studio - before the mastering hacks got their hands on it.

While I'm glad the truest form of the music of this particular album *IS* available, I'm disappointed that yet again I can't listen to the CD because of the mastering.

Besides, this Rush album wasn't even one of my favorite releases from last year - other albums I wanted to enjoy more were ruined by the bad mastering, making it hard to listen to the music for more than a short sitting.

I shouldn't have to buy the fancier and MORE expensive product to get a better sound. So if there is no DVD audio version available, at least there are older masters of older albums still around.  In fact, I've seen record stores put the older version of releases at cheaper prices than the newly remastered one.

So just be warned that just because it's a new remaster, doesn't mean it sounds the best it could be.