Hey, the Jazz Festival has returned to Montreal! The Festival is one of the best things about summer here - two weeks of great, mostly free music. There’s a lot to say about the Festival, but for now I’ll just stick to a few things.
Each year, the Festival has a few big free shows, that typically draw tens of thousands of people down to Place des Arts. Sometimes they’re incredible, like Cirque du Soleil. Sometimes, like last night, it’s the Neville Brothers. I usually try to go to the big concerts, even when I’m not crazy about the artists, just because of the scope of the events.
So I tried, valiantly, to appreciate Aaron Neville’s crooning, but it just wasn’t happening (even after an afternoon of drinking and baseball). Luckily for us, there was a great band from France - Smooth playing at another stage. Billed as “an electro-jazz sung in English but grooving in the universal language of hip”, these guys were really good. Their sound was built up from their really funky rhythm section of a drummer and bass player, with a singer/guitarist/keyboardist on top.
That show was part of the Groove series at the Festival, which always has the best party music each year, and looks to be really solid again this year. Tonight, I’m going to try to see Gomez, but might not, because who starts a rock show at 6pm?
Friday, June 30, 2006
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
World Cup Predictions
I haven’t been able to watch too much of the World Cup so far because it falls during my workday, but here are some predictions anyways.
England will not win the World Cup. The only reason I say this is because their fans seem to have the same mentality as fans of the Toronto Maple Leafs. Charitably, blind optimism, less charitably, denial.
I’m rooting for Argentina again, which I think I’ve done since around 1994, when I was swayed by their cool blue jerseys, and old Disney cartoons that made me think everyone in the country was a cowboy.
England will not win the World Cup. The only reason I say this is because their fans seem to have the same mentality as fans of the Toronto Maple Leafs. Charitably, blind optimism, less charitably, denial.
I’m rooting for Argentina again, which I think I’ve done since around 1994, when I was swayed by their cool blue jerseys, and old Disney cartoons that made me think everyone in the country was a cowboy.
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Sushi and Tit for Tat
Since I’m ostensibly thinking about evolution a lot of the time, I started thinking about how I decide where to shop and eat in terms of game theory. I think that, when I’m in the process of deciding which restaurants to go to, or which airline to fly, or any decision like that, I play a pretty standard strategy of Tit-for-Tat.
A lot of evolutionary game theory is based on trying to answer questions relating to the evolution of cooperation. Cooperation at first seems counterintuitive from an evolutionary perspective: selection acts on organisms, and organisms that are selfish will generally end up with more resources than organisms that are unselfish, and so end up having more and better offspring. Selection should then generally favour selfish individuals over altruistic ones.
But altruism, and cooperation between organisms are quite commonly observed. How does this evolve? One classic, and tractable way of approaching the problem is the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Briefly, in an iterated game of Prisoner’s Dilemma, two parties are subjected to repeated interactions with each other. Each round, they are able to select a strategy of cooperation or defection. The highest possible reward is for defecting when your partner cooperates, followed by both individuals cooperating, then both individuals defecting, and finally the worst possible outcome, cooperating while your partner defects. The object of the game is to select a strategy that maximizes your individual fitness over time.
The story of the original Prisoner’s Dilemma competition is really quite interesting, but I won’t repeat it here (read about it here if you’re interested). The relevant question is, what is the optimal strategy? If you know that your opponent will always cooperate, the best strategy is to always defect. Similarly, if you know your opponent will always defect, you should always defect too. But what if you don’t have any advance knowledge? What if your opponent’s strategy changes in response to yours? It turns out that a remarkably good strategy is a very simple one: Tit-for-Tat. Simply, a Tit-for-Tat strategy involves cooperating on the first turn, then repeating your opponents last move. If your opponent betrays you, betray them back next time. Tit-for-Tat is an evolutionarily stable strategy (or ESS), implying that a whole population playing this strategy cannot be invaded by individuals playing any other strategy.
Back to me and shopping. I was thinking that I’m just very boring and stuck in a rut of only going to a few places. I’ll give new places a chance, and if I enjoy them, I’ll return. As long as I keep having good experiences, I keep returning. But, if I’m unsatisfied, I don’t get mad, I just never return. So if I’m really playing Tit-for-Tat, it would seem that to get me back as a customer, a business would have to do something for me - a free pizza, or something like that. But even if I was offered something, I might just cynically take their offer, then never return anyways. So perhaps my strategy is “Cooperate until defected upon, then always defect, regardless of whether the opponent cooperates or defects”.
I’m not sure the analogy completely holds up - as a consumer, I usually have quite a bit of prior knowledge about a service before I enter the store. So I don’t just go out and try everything once, then only return to the places I like. Also, I have the advantage of knowing how likely I am to interact with that business in the future. In an iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma game, the players don’t know how many times they’ll interact in the future, otherwise defecting on the last turn is always the best strategy.
So maybe I am stuck in a rut of having a few favourite haunts. But at least this lets me feel like I’m just being strategic.
EDIT: There was an actual point to titling this post "Sushi and Tit for Tat", though I forgot about it when I actually wrote the post. The sushi place I've been going to recently always tosses in a few extra cucumber or avocado rolls. Awesome! Last time, however, they didn't. Do I keep going back, or have they betrayed me?
A lot of evolutionary game theory is based on trying to answer questions relating to the evolution of cooperation. Cooperation at first seems counterintuitive from an evolutionary perspective: selection acts on organisms, and organisms that are selfish will generally end up with more resources than organisms that are unselfish, and so end up having more and better offspring. Selection should then generally favour selfish individuals over altruistic ones.
But altruism, and cooperation between organisms are quite commonly observed. How does this evolve? One classic, and tractable way of approaching the problem is the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Briefly, in an iterated game of Prisoner’s Dilemma, two parties are subjected to repeated interactions with each other. Each round, they are able to select a strategy of cooperation or defection. The highest possible reward is for defecting when your partner cooperates, followed by both individuals cooperating, then both individuals defecting, and finally the worst possible outcome, cooperating while your partner defects. The object of the game is to select a strategy that maximizes your individual fitness over time.
The story of the original Prisoner’s Dilemma competition is really quite interesting, but I won’t repeat it here (read about it here if you’re interested). The relevant question is, what is the optimal strategy? If you know that your opponent will always cooperate, the best strategy is to always defect. Similarly, if you know your opponent will always defect, you should always defect too. But what if you don’t have any advance knowledge? What if your opponent’s strategy changes in response to yours? It turns out that a remarkably good strategy is a very simple one: Tit-for-Tat. Simply, a Tit-for-Tat strategy involves cooperating on the first turn, then repeating your opponents last move. If your opponent betrays you, betray them back next time. Tit-for-Tat is an evolutionarily stable strategy (or ESS), implying that a whole population playing this strategy cannot be invaded by individuals playing any other strategy.
Back to me and shopping. I was thinking that I’m just very boring and stuck in a rut of only going to a few places. I’ll give new places a chance, and if I enjoy them, I’ll return. As long as I keep having good experiences, I keep returning. But, if I’m unsatisfied, I don’t get mad, I just never return. So if I’m really playing Tit-for-Tat, it would seem that to get me back as a customer, a business would have to do something for me - a free pizza, or something like that. But even if I was offered something, I might just cynically take their offer, then never return anyways. So perhaps my strategy is “Cooperate until defected upon, then always defect, regardless of whether the opponent cooperates or defects”.
I’m not sure the analogy completely holds up - as a consumer, I usually have quite a bit of prior knowledge about a service before I enter the store. So I don’t just go out and try everything once, then only return to the places I like. Also, I have the advantage of knowing how likely I am to interact with that business in the future. In an iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma game, the players don’t know how many times they’ll interact in the future, otherwise defecting on the last turn is always the best strategy.
So maybe I am stuck in a rut of having a few favourite haunts. But at least this lets me feel like I’m just being strategic.
EDIT: There was an actual point to titling this post "Sushi and Tit for Tat", though I forgot about it when I actually wrote the post. The sushi place I've been going to recently always tosses in a few extra cucumber or avocado rolls. Awesome! Last time, however, they didn't. Do I keep going back, or have they betrayed me?
Thursday, June 08, 2006
Thoughts on Writing About Music
I have a few entries on music that are stewing around in the back of my mind right now, and that may eventually get put up here. But thinking about those entries, and starting to write them, got me thinking about what I want to write about when I write about music.
I don’t think I’d be very good as an “objective” reviewer of music, and that’s not really my interest anyways. One of the writers that I’ve read for a few years online (Caryn Rose, formerly of 5h, now of jukeboxgraduate) once wrote something about how she wasn’t writing about music per se, she was writing about listening to music. That’s what I’d like to do here. Not an attempt at objectivity or ranking, but something much more subjective: how does it make me feel when I hear a song, what memories get dragged out, and does it make me tap my feet?
The first album I was going to write about was Dylan’s Blood on the Tracks, but that one is cutting a little close to home right now. I’ve moved from “Simple Twist of Fate” and “You’re A Big Girl Now”, going briefly through “Idiot Wind”, and settled in now at “If You See Her, Say Hello” and “Buckets of Rain”, thanks for asking.
Instead I’d like to write about Pearl Jam, and their new album. This post will either eventually be complemented by a bunch of others, or will stand here alone mocking me! The plan is to go through the new album, track by track, with a few autobiographical detours thrown in as necessary.
I don’t think I’d be very good as an “objective” reviewer of music, and that’s not really my interest anyways. One of the writers that I’ve read for a few years online (Caryn Rose, formerly of 5h, now of jukeboxgraduate) once wrote something about how she wasn’t writing about music per se, she was writing about listening to music. That’s what I’d like to do here. Not an attempt at objectivity or ranking, but something much more subjective: how does it make me feel when I hear a song, what memories get dragged out, and does it make me tap my feet?
The first album I was going to write about was Dylan’s Blood on the Tracks, but that one is cutting a little close to home right now. I’ve moved from “Simple Twist of Fate” and “You’re A Big Girl Now”, going briefly through “Idiot Wind”, and settled in now at “If You See Her, Say Hello” and “Buckets of Rain”, thanks for asking.
Instead I’d like to write about Pearl Jam, and their new album. This post will either eventually be complemented by a bunch of others, or will stand here alone mocking me! The plan is to go through the new album, track by track, with a few autobiographical detours thrown in as necessary.
Saturday, June 03, 2006
Buying me off: Cheap and easy!
A few friends and I received free tickets to see Al Gore’s new movie, An Inconvenient Truth, the other night. I think the idea behind giving free tickets to people working in the sciences is that we’ll convince all our friends and acquaintances that it’s a really important, compelling, and scientifically rigorous movie. Since I’m easily bought, and the movie really was good, I don’t feel bad saying: This is a really important, compelling, and scientifically sound movie. Go see it if you get a chance.
The film focusses on Gore’s efforts to educate people about the global warming crisis, mainly by depicting scenes from a slideshow Gore regularly gives on the topic. The biggest potential stumbling-block for the film is that it’s as much about Gore and his work as it is about global warming. The presentation on global warming is interspersed with vignettes from Gore’s life, and travels, including stories about his family, his political career, and his failed presidential campaign. While I (and my friends) thought this approach might be at best a distraction from the movie’s message, and at worst a campaign ad for Gore ‘08, it actually serves the film quite well. Each story from Gore’s life serves to underline just why Gore has dedicated so much time to the issue, and why warming really is a moral issue that should transcend political or economical concerns.
As someone who’s seen more than his fair share of talks on atmospheric carbon dioxide and global warming, it’s really easy for the material to come off as either terribly boring if it’s presented poorly, or terribly depressing if it’s presented well. One of the real achievements of the movie is in how it conveys the seriousness of global warming, while maintaining a sense of optimism and determination. Previous “insoluble” problems like ozone pollution have indeed been tackled, and at much less cost than doomsayers initially predicted.
The direction of the film is quite good, with many of the vignettes having a real autumnal quality to them. Though autumnal themes and 3/4 time are two of my main weaknesses, it’s still good. The most similar examples I can think of in tone are (cheesily enough) the voiceover monologues of Galadriel at the beginning of The Fellowship of the Ring, and Private Witt’s voiceovers from “The Thin Red Line”.
As several other reviews I’ve looked at have noted, it’s really easy to ask at the end of the film: What might have been? What if the US had a president who really did care about science and the environment? Though I can’t imagine how he did it, Gore seems to be at peace with himself, and ready to move on. He’s doing a noble thing.
Obligatory Mac nerdness: Gore uses PowerBooks and Keynote throughout the film, which makes sense, since he’s on the board at Apple. They’ve put up a key to "An Inconvenient Truth" at their site .
The film focusses on Gore’s efforts to educate people about the global warming crisis, mainly by depicting scenes from a slideshow Gore regularly gives on the topic. The biggest potential stumbling-block for the film is that it’s as much about Gore and his work as it is about global warming. The presentation on global warming is interspersed with vignettes from Gore’s life, and travels, including stories about his family, his political career, and his failed presidential campaign. While I (and my friends) thought this approach might be at best a distraction from the movie’s message, and at worst a campaign ad for Gore ‘08, it actually serves the film quite well. Each story from Gore’s life serves to underline just why Gore has dedicated so much time to the issue, and why warming really is a moral issue that should transcend political or economical concerns.
As someone who’s seen more than his fair share of talks on atmospheric carbon dioxide and global warming, it’s really easy for the material to come off as either terribly boring if it’s presented poorly, or terribly depressing if it’s presented well. One of the real achievements of the movie is in how it conveys the seriousness of global warming, while maintaining a sense of optimism and determination. Previous “insoluble” problems like ozone pollution have indeed been tackled, and at much less cost than doomsayers initially predicted.
The direction of the film is quite good, with many of the vignettes having a real autumnal quality to them. Though autumnal themes and 3/4 time are two of my main weaknesses, it’s still good. The most similar examples I can think of in tone are (cheesily enough) the voiceover monologues of Galadriel at the beginning of The Fellowship of the Ring, and Private Witt’s voiceovers from “The Thin Red Line”.
As several other reviews I’ve looked at have noted, it’s really easy to ask at the end of the film: What might have been? What if the US had a president who really did care about science and the environment? Though I can’t imagine how he did it, Gore seems to be at peace with himself, and ready to move on. He’s doing a noble thing.
Obligatory Mac nerdness: Gore uses PowerBooks and Keynote throughout the film, which makes sense, since he’s on the board at Apple. They’ve put up a key to "An Inconvenient Truth" at their site .
We Should Spend More Time Together in Crowds
Interpreting a person’s intent from email messages has always frustrated me. All sorts of nuances present in normal conversation are lost, and internet-speak only makes it worse. I recently learned a few of my friends have a pretty good triple-tag-team textual parsing thing going on to try to interpret some of the emails they get from guys. So I thought it would be fun to write ambiguous emails, specifically designed to vex them. Here’s my first shot:
From: Rod
Subject: We should spend more time together in large crowds
Date: June 3, 2006 8:26:13 PM EDT (CA)
To: X
Dear X,
I've really enjoyed the time we've spent together recently. You're like a sister to me (a sexy sister!). We should definitely hang out more - do you like Indian food? I know a really great place, but we'd have to go in a group of at least eight. Do you have many cute friends?
Oh yeah, I couldn't stop thinking about that story you told me the other day - It made me laugh, and I was thinking about you all day. The girl I was talking to at the gym thought it was totally hilarious too.
Anyways, I do think we should get together sometime soon and talk - maybe coffee? Or maybe drinks? I don't want you to think I'm moving too fast, but...
Kind regards,
Rod
p.s. My old friends Pat and Terry might be in town too - would it be cool if they came along?
I Don't Know What I Expected
I had a bit of an “Arrested Development” moment yesterday in the lab. There’s this scene where Michael opens his freezer to find a bag labelled “Dead dove. Do not eat”. He opens the bag, closes it, and says “I don’t know what I expected”.
So there I was, opening a small container of dried salmon sperm. I don’t know just what I expected it to look like. But if you can imagine what a bunch of dried salmon sperm would look like, that’s pretty much it.
So there I was, opening a small container of dried salmon sperm. I don’t know just what I expected it to look like. But if you can imagine what a bunch of dried salmon sperm would look like, that’s pretty much it.
Monday, May 29, 2006
More hockey predictions
Okay, in this round Edmonton will beat Anaheim in 5 games, while the Buffalo-Carolina series will go to at least 6.
Also, I haven’t updated here in awhile not because of a lack of interest, but because I’ve been dealing with some personal issues at home. I think I’m ready to start writing here again, so we’ll see how it goes.
Also, I haven’t updated here in awhile not because of a lack of interest, but because I’ve been dealing with some personal issues at home. I think I’m ready to start writing here again, so we’ll see how it goes.
Saturday, May 20, 2006
Things I was wrong about, part one of many
So it turns out that “sad bastard music” is actually a reference to High Fidelity, which surprised me when I was watching it last night.
Also, I still suck at predicting hockey playoffs. Given a bunch of advance knowledge (2 games played in each series I think), I predicted only one correct result. The lesson, obviously, is that I need to wait til series are at 3-0 to make predictions.
Also, I still suck at predicting hockey playoffs. Given a bunch of advance knowledge (2 games played in each series I think), I predicted only one correct result. The lesson, obviously, is that I need to wait til series are at 3-0 to make predictions.
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
And If I Could Find My Way Back Home, Where Would I Go?
Say what you will about the silly name, the new Nintendo console will feature a re-release of Duck Hunt, which erases any doubts I had about its awesomeness.
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
Uniformed prognostication
Any hockey predictions I make should probably be ignored, since I always expect that the Canucks will win the Cup, and get frustrated every year.
But anyways, Ottawa will climb out its 0-2 hole to beat the Sabres in 7, while the Oilers, Avalanche, and Devils will all lose their series in 5 or 6 games.
But anyways, Ottawa will climb out its 0-2 hole to beat the Sabres in 7, while the Oilers, Avalanche, and Devils will all lose their series in 5 or 6 games.
Thursday, May 04, 2006
More Listening Commentary
Continuing from this entry, some additional thoughts on listening frequency charts.
1. It seems there might be some issues with autocorrelation going on in the data. For example, it’s not clear whether the high position of “Meadowlake Street” is due to me really liking the song, or just due to the fact that it follows “Sweet Illusions” on the album. But then “When Will You Come Back Home” is played more than either of those, and is the fourth track on the album. So who knows? Subjectively, I remember listening to those three songs as a block all the time last fall.
2. It also seems to me that “number of times a song is listened to” doesn’t (or shouldn’t be expected to) correlate exactly with how much I like a given song.
3. Man I’m a sucker for sad or slow music. Of the Top 20, only five or so are rockers. It could be that I tend to listen to a bunch of different rockers while only a few slow songs will really grab me. Or that I just like listening to “sad bastard” music, as Loring puts it.
4. A few albums I listened to obsessively last fall are heavily represented: Iron & Wine’s Our Endless Numbered Days, Ryan Adam’s Cold Roses, and the Iron & Wine / Calexico split EP In The Reins.
5. I can’t believe that when I saw Iron & Wine with Calexico, they played every single song from the EP except “History of Lovers”. What the fuck!
1. It seems there might be some issues with autocorrelation going on in the data. For example, it’s not clear whether the high position of “Meadowlake Street” is due to me really liking the song, or just due to the fact that it follows “Sweet Illusions” on the album. But then “When Will You Come Back Home” is played more than either of those, and is the fourth track on the album. So who knows? Subjectively, I remember listening to those three songs as a block all the time last fall.
2. It also seems to me that “number of times a song is listened to” doesn’t (or shouldn’t be expected to) correlate exactly with how much I like a given song.
3. Man I’m a sucker for sad or slow music. Of the Top 20, only five or so are rockers. It could be that I tend to listen to a bunch of different rockers while only a few slow songs will really grab me. Or that I just like listening to “sad bastard” music, as Loring puts it.
4. A few albums I listened to obsessively last fall are heavily represented: Iron & Wine’s Our Endless Numbered Days, Ryan Adam’s Cold Roses, and the Iron & Wine / Calexico split EP In The Reins.
5. I can’t believe that when I saw Iron & Wine with Calexico, they played every single song from the EP except “History of Lovers”. What the fuck!
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Doodads and Whatsits
I’m still playing around with the format of the blog, but it’s starting to come together a bit. I’ve added a stats counter at Site Meter, and I’ve hooked up a Last.fm account as well. Both are down to the right on the sidebar.
The idea of the last.fm counter is that it listens to what I’m playing on my computer and iPod, sends it to their website, and then formats it into a chart that gets displayed back here. I’m not too worried about privacy issues here, but more worried about what people will think when they see that I’ve already listened to “Margaritaville” twice this morning. Once it’s got a bit more data to work with, I think I’ll switch to a weekly chart, rather than a “just-played” chart.
One drawback is that the count is only starting from yesterday, so it’ll miss out on a decade and a half of listening. But it does work well for getting an idea of what I’m listening to these days in general. For the sake of comparison, I looked at the data from my local copy of iTunes. This data goes back to November ‘04, when I started working on this machine. Here are the Top 20 most-played tracks:
The idea of the last.fm counter is that it listens to what I’m playing on my computer and iPod, sends it to their website, and then formats it into a chart that gets displayed back here. I’m not too worried about privacy issues here, but more worried about what people will think when they see that I’ve already listened to “Margaritaville” twice this morning. Once it’s got a bit more data to work with, I think I’ll switch to a weekly chart, rather than a “just-played” chart.
One drawback is that the count is only starting from yesterday, so it’ll miss out on a decade and a half of listening. But it does work well for getting an idea of what I’m listening to these days in general. For the sake of comparison, I looked at the data from my local copy of iTunes. This data goes back to November ‘04, when I started working on this machine. Here are the Top 20 most-played tracks:
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Pearl Jam, Pearl Jam
Pearl Jam’s new album, cunningly titled Pearl Jam, came out today. First listen report: whoa.
I also picked up the new Tool album (both albums were only $10 today), and I can report that it has goggles.
Also, I didn’t die connecting the barbecue.
I also picked up the new Tool album (both albums were only $10 today), and I can report that it has goggles.
Also, I didn’t die connecting the barbecue.
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Plan for Summer Bliss: Update
Just to reinforce how boring a lot of the content on this blog will be, here’s an update on the PSB:
The barbeque is now built. It took me over three hours, somehow. It may have been because I was watching the Canadiens lose in OT, and drinking Boréale. Now, I just need to get a propane tank and hook that up.
If there are no further updates here, feel free to assume that I’ve blown myself up.
The barbeque is now built. It took me over three hours, somehow. It may have been because I was watching the Canadiens lose in OT, and drinking Boréale. Now, I just need to get a propane tank and hook that up.
If there are no further updates here, feel free to assume that I’ve blown myself up.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
The Name of This Blog
The name of this blog is taken from a Gillian Welch song, called, funnily enough, “One Little Song”:
There’s gotta be a song left to sing
Cause everybody can’t have thought of everything
One little song that ain’t been sung
One little rag that ain’t been wrung out completely yet
Gotta a little left
The last time I tried writing online, I got totally preoccupied with how the work would be perceived, and so shied away from writing about lots of things because I didn’t think I knew enough about them to have something intelligent to say. This time around, bombs away! Expect totally uninformed commentary on anything I happen to find interesting.
I’m trying to improve my writing skills by writing more. I’ve been writing a journal lately, but the problem there is that I’m only talking to myself, so I get all the inside jokes. With this blog, while I imagine I’ll be writing for about eight people, it’s still enough to make me concentrate on readability, and not fall back on some of my lazy writing habits.
The reason then, why I gave the blog the title I did, is that I hope this space does become my one little song. Not a huge song that the whole world will sing along to, but a song I can call my own, and I can share with my friends. Because everyone can’t have thought everything yet, can they?
p.s. If you haven’t actually heard Gillian’s albums Time (The Revelator) or Soul Journey, they’re awesome.
There’s gotta be a song left to sing
Cause everybody can’t have thought of everything
One little song that ain’t been sung
One little rag that ain’t been wrung out completely yet
Gotta a little left
The last time I tried writing online, I got totally preoccupied with how the work would be perceived, and so shied away from writing about lots of things because I didn’t think I knew enough about them to have something intelligent to say. This time around, bombs away! Expect totally uninformed commentary on anything I happen to find interesting.
I’m trying to improve my writing skills by writing more. I’ve been writing a journal lately, but the problem there is that I’m only talking to myself, so I get all the inside jokes. With this blog, while I imagine I’ll be writing for about eight people, it’s still enough to make me concentrate on readability, and not fall back on some of my lazy writing habits.
The reason then, why I gave the blog the title I did, is that I hope this space does become my one little song. Not a huge song that the whole world will sing along to, but a song I can call my own, and I can share with my friends. Because everyone can’t have thought everything yet, can they?
p.s. If you haven’t actually heard Gillian’s albums Time (The Revelator) or Soul Journey, they’re awesome.
Crashing Cucurbita
So it looks like The Smashing Pumpkins (well, Billy and Jimmy at least) are going to record a new album. I’ll wait to actually hear the album before I say either “they were doomed from the start, trying to rehash their past success” or “Damn the nay-sayers, I knew they had another great album in them!”. But I did want to say something about the Pumpkins towards the end of their previous incarnation.
Lots of people seemed to view Adore as a big misstep for the Pumpkins: Jimmy was gone, and they abandoned their traditional wall-of-guitars sound for synthesizers and drum loops. The move was viewed by some as cashing in on the late-90s “electronica” bandwagon. Their followup album, Machina: The Machines of God was then hailed as a “return” to the classic Pumpkins sound, with lots of big guitars everywhere. Fairly soon after the release of Machina, the Pumpkins imploded.
In my own view, in rock as in life, you can’t go home again. Adore definitely had its weak spots - the first single, “Ava Adore”, is totally awful. But that song sticks out like a sore thumb on the album. The rest of the album is really quite good, but not in the same way Siamese Dream or Mellon Collie were. Where their previous work was epic, sort of like a soundtrack for conquering the Universe, Adore is a quieter album. While loneliness was always a predominant theme for the Pumpkins, the loneliness explored in the songs on Adore is much more mature. Whereas Billy is lonely on Siamese Dream because he’s a bit of a geek still, and people always thought he was a weirdo growing up, on Adore he explores the loneliness that comes from losing a parent, or facing death alone. There’s also hope, and redemption, and all that good stuff if you want to dig into it. The music is often quite beautiful also - “To Sheila” strips away almost everything we previously knew about the Pumpkins, using bare keyboard and guitar lines alone, while “For Martha” has Matt Cameron on it (no further explanation required). To my mind, Adore marks a transition for the Pumpkins similar to what Pearl Jam accomplished with No Code, or Wilco with Being There, two of my absolute favourite albums.
But as I said before, people didn’t really like Adore. So a few years later, with Jimmy back and D’arcy on the way out, we got Machina. The giant waves of guitars were back, and the openness in the lyrics of Adore was replaced by obscurantism - a story that listeners were supposed to decipher from the lyrics and booklet. I believe there was actually a contest - the person who could “most correctly” infer Billy’s vision won some prize. In sum, the album felt like a calculated attempt by the Pumpkins to recapture their former glory. Where Adore was risky, Machina was safe, and there’s nothing more dull than a rock band playing it safe.
Lots of people seemed to view Adore as a big misstep for the Pumpkins: Jimmy was gone, and they abandoned their traditional wall-of-guitars sound for synthesizers and drum loops. The move was viewed by some as cashing in on the late-90s “electronica” bandwagon. Their followup album, Machina: The Machines of God was then hailed as a “return” to the classic Pumpkins sound, with lots of big guitars everywhere. Fairly soon after the release of Machina, the Pumpkins imploded.
In my own view, in rock as in life, you can’t go home again. Adore definitely had its weak spots - the first single, “Ava Adore”, is totally awful. But that song sticks out like a sore thumb on the album. The rest of the album is really quite good, but not in the same way Siamese Dream or Mellon Collie were. Where their previous work was epic, sort of like a soundtrack for conquering the Universe, Adore is a quieter album. While loneliness was always a predominant theme for the Pumpkins, the loneliness explored in the songs on Adore is much more mature. Whereas Billy is lonely on Siamese Dream because he’s a bit of a geek still, and people always thought he was a weirdo growing up, on Adore he explores the loneliness that comes from losing a parent, or facing death alone. There’s also hope, and redemption, and all that good stuff if you want to dig into it. The music is often quite beautiful also - “To Sheila” strips away almost everything we previously knew about the Pumpkins, using bare keyboard and guitar lines alone, while “For Martha” has Matt Cameron on it (no further explanation required). To my mind, Adore marks a transition for the Pumpkins similar to what Pearl Jam accomplished with No Code, or Wilco with Being There, two of my absolute favourite albums.
But as I said before, people didn’t really like Adore. So a few years later, with Jimmy back and D’arcy on the way out, we got Machina. The giant waves of guitars were back, and the openness in the lyrics of Adore was replaced by obscurantism - a story that listeners were supposed to decipher from the lyrics and booklet. I believe there was actually a contest - the person who could “most correctly” infer Billy’s vision won some prize. In sum, the album felt like a calculated attempt by the Pumpkins to recapture their former glory. Where Adore was risky, Machina was safe, and there’s nothing more dull than a rock band playing it safe.
Sunday, April 23, 2006
iTunes is exposing my inner awful-music lover
I was initially skeptical about the iTunes music store. While I thought that selling music digitally was definitely the way the industry should move, I didn’t think I’d end up using the iTMS for a few reasons.
First, I love albums. I love reading the lyrics, I love having the artwork, I loved seeing all my CD’s next to each other (until they all got stolen, at least). I would spend hours sorting my albums, remembering where I was when I first heard it, though I don’t think I could pull off an autobiographical sort. While you can buy all the music from the iTMS, you lose out on some of the fun aspects of collecting music.
Secondly, the music sold on the iTMS is compressed as AAC files. While they sound fine, for the most part, I’m always worried that if I invested in a lot of iTMS albums, someday I’d buy an awesome sound system and hear all the artifacts.
Finally, music from the iTMS is protected by DRM. I’m not criticizing Apple for this - it’s the only way they could pull the whole thing off. So if I have the choice of paying ~$10 for a version of an album that comes without the case and booklet, in a lossy compression format, and is playable on only a few devices, versus a regular CD for ~$15, I’d still take the CD.
Unfortunately for my credit card, I’ve recently stumbled upon the facet of the iTMS that works for me. “Eye of the Tiger”. “The Final Countdown”. “The Gambler”. “To All the Girls I’ve Loved Before”. All awful, awful, songs. I love them all. While I’d never want to get the albums these songs come from, I’m completely happy to pay $1 to be able to hear them. The iTMS is awful (and by awful I mean awesome) for impulse-purchases of one-hit-wonders, songs that were popular while I was growing up, or misadventures of Willie Nelson.
So while I think I’ll stick to CDs for most of my collection, iTMS is great for a rainy afternoon when you really need to hear some Boyz II Men.
First, I love albums. I love reading the lyrics, I love having the artwork, I loved seeing all my CD’s next to each other (until they all got stolen, at least). I would spend hours sorting my albums, remembering where I was when I first heard it, though I don’t think I could pull off an autobiographical sort. While you can buy all the music from the iTMS, you lose out on some of the fun aspects of collecting music.
Secondly, the music sold on the iTMS is compressed as AAC files. While they sound fine, for the most part, I’m always worried that if I invested in a lot of iTMS albums, someday I’d buy an awesome sound system and hear all the artifacts.
Finally, music from the iTMS is protected by DRM. I’m not criticizing Apple for this - it’s the only way they could pull the whole thing off. So if I have the choice of paying ~$10 for a version of an album that comes without the case and booklet, in a lossy compression format, and is playable on only a few devices, versus a regular CD for ~$15, I’d still take the CD.
Unfortunately for my credit card, I’ve recently stumbled upon the facet of the iTMS that works for me. “Eye of the Tiger”. “The Final Countdown”. “The Gambler”. “To All the Girls I’ve Loved Before”. All awful, awful, songs. I love them all. While I’d never want to get the albums these songs come from, I’m completely happy to pay $1 to be able to hear them. The iTMS is awful (and by awful I mean awesome) for impulse-purchases of one-hit-wonders, songs that were popular while I was growing up, or misadventures of Willie Nelson.
So while I think I’ll stick to CDs for most of my collection, iTMS is great for a rainy afternoon when you really need to hear some Boyz II Men.
Friday, April 21, 2006
Moving In Continued
I’m continuing to move into this space bit by bit. Today I’ve messed around with the sidebar, and tossed up a bunch of links. As will probably become a trend here, I’m shamelessly stealing from (or paying homage, if you prefer) to the late Douglas Adams. The link categories for now are Life, The Universe, and Everything. Links in the “Life” category are people I know who also have websites. “The Universe” has a bunch of science- and evolution-related stuff, and “Everything” is, well, everything else.
The next step in moving in is to modify the theme colour scheme and template a bit, so the site doesn’t look exactly like 10 million other Blogger blogs. Also, to actually write enough here so that the “content” isn’t greatly outmatched by the sidebar.
The next step in moving in is to modify the theme colour scheme and template a bit, so the site doesn’t look exactly like 10 million other Blogger blogs. Also, to actually write enough here so that the “content” isn’t greatly outmatched by the sidebar.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)