Archive for the 'music' CategoryPage 66 of 70

When the Mix Doesn't Match

We talk a lot over here about the ability and productivity of mixing and matching. It seems that every combination of two or more things is sacrosanct in this neck of the woods. Therefore, the thought for today is what happens when mixing and matching goes wrong? Now there’s two types of wrong mixmatch: the kind where the match is just a little off and some people might like it, others may not, and the kind where the match is so off that almost no one in their right mind could possibly conceive of liking it.

Case in point…I like eating hot sauce on cheddar cheese. Now that’s a slightly odd pairing, but I’m basically certain that there are a lot of people out there who either enjoy it or would enjoy it if they were to think of trying it. It might be a little weird, but a lot of people could enjoy it given the chance. But what about dunking oreos in orange juice? I’ve never seen anyone do that, it sounds disgusting, and I don’t know anyone who would even try it. Another example…my aunt likes to chew ice that she’s put salt on. I always considered this out of the ordinary, but I can imagine hundreds of thousands of people the world over enjoying it. But I’ve never seen anyone that enjoys the taste of Snapple Peach Iced Tea after they have brushed their teeth. That’s a mix that just doesn’t match. Or, as they like to say in my office, “That dog don’t hunt.”

So how does this relate to music? Well my pet rant today is what happens when good bands mix themselves with horrendous band names. There’s not a whole lot, if you’re an artist in the music business, that you can control. You can control the music that you make to start out with, but you can’t really control if you get discovered or not. Once discovered, it’s very possible you lose control over the music to some extent. You can control the gigs you play but not the crowds they bring in. The band can control who’s in it, but can’t control what the people involved actually want to do.

But there is one thing that every band has absolute control over because it exists long before the gigs and the labels and the fans…the name. Every band chooses their own name, and they have to do it before they even play a gig. And whether we like it or not, a lot of people (especially those of the American Idol fan club ideology) can and do judge a book by its cover. I mean, millions of people every year tune in and think that because some nobody from one of the fly-over states can sing cover songs, they deserve to have their own musical career. But that’s a rant for another post. But one of the first things, if not the first thing, that anyone hears about a band is their name. And once a band has become popular, usually in large part due to word of mouth, the name is near impossible to change with the same force of the original output.

So why then do good bands mix good music with bad band names? It’s an almost surefire way to make sure you’re either never discovered or taken as a joke. Some band names are catchy, but if the music doesn’t back it up, once that catch begins to fade, the name becomes sticky, a wad of gum holding the shoe sole of the band’s future to the pavement of its past. There are several types of naming sub genres I’ve identified for this little rant, and I’m going to examine them from glorious top to ignominious bottom: the popular/easy/immortal name, the easy to shorten name, the cumbersome name and the impossible name.

First let’s take a look at names that are immortal for one reason or another. Names that stick, roll off your tongue, entice someone who hasn’t heard them to listen to them, and names that are in some cases so simple that their mere ease of remembrance helps spread the band’s popularity. Obviously in some of these cases, the popularity of the band and their music helped to immortalize the name, but in others, the way the name is framed helps. The Beatles (clever because they’re not the Beetles), U2, The Doors (a reference at the time, I believe, to Aldous Huxley’s The Doors of Perception), Hieroglyphics, Beck, Atmosphere, Dr. Dre, Eminem, Radiohead (who most people may not know is actually a name of a Talking Heads song.) The list of these names goes on and on, simply because there are a lot of good bands with great names. I’m sure you can think of at least three between now and the next paragraph. The names are most often short, to the point, descriptive, easy to remember and fitting for the band. Names of artists also fall in here like Johnny Cash, Frank Sinatra, Joni Mitchell and John Lennon.

Then you have the easy to shorten name. These names can sometimes be long, but the band’s music and the form of the name justify the creation of an easy and acceptable abbreviation. The Jimi Hendrix Experience (Jimi, Jimi Hendrix), Del Tha Funkee Homosapien (Del), Death Cab For Cutie (Death Cab), Creedence Clearwater Revival (Creedence), Dave Matthews Band (Dave Matthews, DMB), Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band (Bruce Springsteen, The Boss). These names have great staying power because often the whole name has more impact, but the shortened name is just as effective.

Now let’s look at bands where the names got them some recognition, but then became a heavy burden or joke once the gleam of their first hit single faded. Bear in mind that these people may or may not still put out good music, but their credibility is constantly under scrutiny because why should you have band names like these if every song isn’t a hit? The Mighty Mighty Bosstones, Hootie and the Blowfish, Insane Clown Posse, Frou Frou, Goo Goo Dolls, Jefferson Starship (how can you take it seriously when they changed from Jefferson Airplane just to be more modern? That in conjunction with a different band line-up killed every song but “We Built This City” for them) and Young MC (how can he ever grow up?)

These groups were all groups with some very good music at one point or another in their careers, and yet all of them faced intensified scrutiny later in their careers that was hard to overcome with the band names they had chosen. After five or six years, Hootie and the Blowfish might still make some good music (some of the tracks off their second album, Fairweather Johnson, were pretty good), but it had become a joke to listen to “Hootie.”

And then, you have the worst possible combination…a group that hasn’t been discovered, has no clear cut radio single for the masses to easily digest, and has a name that makes you not just want to not hear them, but to actively avoid them. One of the foremost examples in my mind is Deadeye Dick, a 90s alternative band that had a number of songs I really liked off their second album Whirl. The songs are all solid and could easily have found chart time with the other rock bands of the time, but the name helped crush them. Sure, it’s a good name for a Kurt Vonnegut novel, but in the end, books can overcome their names because it’s what’s inside that’s important. With a band, that name has to stand up to being repeated and tossed around as a prime identifier of the group.

A group like this is the entire genesis of this posting. A few weeks ago, I was asked to listen to and review for the site an album by a group called the Kung Fu Vampires. Their album was entitled Blood Bath Beyond, a clever play, to be sure, but how many people are actually going to pick up and listen to a CD by a group called Kung Fu Vampires? I wouldn’t have even thought about it if I hadn’t been handed the CD personally. The problem is, not much in the album is about Kung Fu or vampires. The beats are tight, the flows are pretty well put together, but there might be four or five lines on the entire disc that has anything to do with either of these subjects. So why alienate possible fans with a band name that is not only off topic, but in the end pretty silly? In conjunction with the album title, the whole thing looks pretty ridiculous, and unfortunately for the group, this ridiculous cover appearance could very well tank their potential to sell big. I laughed when I saw it, and after my second time through thought to myself, “This is actually a pretty decent rap album.”

So to all you aspiring musicians out there, especially those that may attempt to create something out of the MixMatch site, beware the name you choose. It can help you, hinder you, elevate you or bury you in due time, and once you’re established, it’s almost impossible to change. There’s no sense mixing bad names with good music. You might as well see how an oreo tastes in orange juice.

Football Helmet Guitar

Not really sure what to make of this:
helmetguitar1b-thumb.jpg

While getting ready for Sunday football and browsing through what the all-knowing Google Reader has deemed read-worthy for me today, I came across this little tidbit on Create Digital Music. Complete with interchangeable face masks and football shaped picks, this helmet guitar can rock your world for only $299. Forget playing a round of flip cup, reheating your nachos, or doing another kegstand on your Heineken mini during half-time, why not take off your shirt and declare your love of sports and music like the guy in the video here?

Web 2.0 Bubble A Cappella Style

This YouTube video was made by another local a cappella group, The Richter Scales (who are, well, slightly more established than the one I sing in). Not only does it feature the lovely voices of its talented members (many of whom work in high-tech), it but also pretty much sums up startup culture (as experienced by the lucky few and dreamt of by many more). To get an idea of how savvy you are when it comes to what’s going on in web 2.0 these days, see how many of the references you understand.

5 Gift Ideas for Music and Tech Lovers

Having officially commenced my holiday gift shopping today (including one of the below recommendations), I began to wonder if our shopping habits might reveal interesting (or disturbing?) facts about our true selves. Here is my breakdown of shopper types. Which one are you?

Types of shoppers:

– Those who spend 6 months brainstorming, obsessively searching for the perfect thing…not to mention the time and money spent wrapping gifts with meticulous care, despite the wrapping’s imminent fate of being torn apart and discarded.

– Those who nonchalantly wait till 8pm on December 24th, then panic and do all their shopping in two hours at Walmart.

– The home-made gift givers who slave away knitting scarves, framing photos, making mixed CDs, editing video …

– And of course the eh-I’ll-just-buy-em-a-gift-certificate types.

Whatever their shopping style, most people have someone in their life who is an aficionado of music or technology. Or both. Here are some gift ideas for that person:

1. The Gamerator – Arcade game/Beer tap. “Not only does this supreme frat-gadget give home to a flatscreen monitor, full MAME game system, and vintage arcade controls, it also hosts a kegerator that situates its tap right beneath the joystick ledge, allowing mid-game refills without any pause in competitive action.” So, when you get sick of playing Beirut you can move on to this more high-tech drinking game set-up.

2. Guitar Hero and/or Rock Band – Someone I know recently got a visit from the cops at home because he and his friends were playing Rock Band too loudly…Whether your giftee is a musician, a gamer, both, or neither, these games are a good bet. Be forewarned, however, that both can be highly addictive (or so I hear).

3. Pro Tools – One of the best DAWs available for recording musicians (professional or not-so-professional). There are a plethora of other software alternatives including Logic Pro, Cubase, Digital Performer, Sonar and Garage Band. Some of these software programs practically require a degree in nuclear physics to master, others could be learned while simultaneously watching the Simpsons, eating a taco, and updating your Facebook profile, so it’s advisable to ascertain the recipient’s level of musical ability and familiarity with software before making your purchase.

4. Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain – bestselling book by author/neurologist Oliver Sacks, in which he examines the power of music on the human brain and recounts stories ranging from “people with ‘amusia,’ to whom a symphony sounds like the clattering of pots and pans, to a man whose memory spans only seven seconds–for everything but music.” I once read an article about a girl who has a terrible stutter, except for when she sings – wonder if he included her in the book…

5. Solar Messenger Bag – Charge your cell phone, ipod, camera, etc (can carry but not charge a laptop) as you bike to the office in your suit with your latte in one hand and your newspaper under your arm…Good for hippies, green-friendly business types, or anyone who habitually forgets to charge their devices at home.

Record Execs: Stupid, or Just Plain Greedy?

Read an interesting article this week in Wired. Actually, the entire magazine was phenomenal and prompted me to order a subscription, but one article jumped out. Examining the current state of the music industry through the eyes of Universal Music Group‘s CEO Doug Morris, author Seth Mnookin prompts a series of new perspectives and questions surrounding the idea of where exactly we are now and where we are likely to go in the future with regards to music rights management, distribution and artist promotion. All of which, obviously, are keen topics in the mind of MixMatchers.

Morris is an industry ancient. If it weren’t for the fact that the past several years have seen him hammering other companies over rights to use and sell the Universal catalog with great success, he’d be a dinosaur. But he has. He’s been very busy, limiting who can use the Universal catalog and when, making YouTube sign an agreement with regards to the licensing, he’s engaged in a lawsuit with Myspace, and he has even gotten Microsoft to give Universal $1 for every Zune music player sold because they could be used to play music that wasn’t directly paid for by the listener.

So why’s he involved in all these digital disputes at the moment? It boils down to the record industry turning an ignorant eye in the 90’s to the idea that the huge profit margins on CDs and the public’s willingness to buy them couldn’t be eradicated by something as non-tangible and silly as a, um, what was it called again? Oh, yea, mp3. When you look at this period in time, it would be easy from an outside perspective to see clearly and rationally that the record labels didn’t want to go digital for fear of losing the justification for the large profit margins created by CDs. So rather than get out in front of the mp3 movement and attempt to control its direction, record companies dug in. The obvious initial example is the first assault on Napster. When Apple launched the iTunes store, they were only able to get major labels to sign on because when you break it down, Macs are a small percentage of the population, so how much could they possibly damage the sale of CDs? Of course, this is before the Windows iTunes was released….I doubt Jobs told the execs THAT when he was pitching them on letting him sell their music on the web.

But is Morris willing to concede that they took the wrong road by ignoring and attacking mp3s instead of going along, and are now paying for it dearly? Not really. I laughed out loud when he states in the article, “That’s a misconception writers make all the time, that the record industry missed this. They didn’t. They just didn’t know what to do.” Please. You didn’t know what to do? You mean, you couldn’t think of a way for digital music to make as much for you as CDs, so you chose not to know what to do? This is the part of the article where having read about the ascension in the ranks of Morris, I start to ask if it was because he was an accomplished and intelligent individual that could continually renovate an industry, or simply a good company man with a knack for turning a profit. If you say you didn’t get into mp3s because you “didn’t know what to do,” you’re either a liar or a fool. You could have easily figured it out if you took the long view (that mp3s and the digital music industry will eventually make you more money as consumers have greater control over what they want) versus the short view (these damn mp3s are cutting into our profit margin and need to go).

Well, they did sign up with Apple, and the article points out an interesting quandry: Jobs sold labels on the smaller population of Macs and the proprietary DRM Apple uses. While these are the types of security blankets that the industry was looking for for their revenue streams, they neglected to look at the fact that because the Apple DRM tracks will only work on an iPod through iTunes, and iPod has singlehandedly crushed the entire mp3 player market, they’ve created a golem in the iTunes store. According to the article, 22 percent of ALL music in the US this year was downloaded from the iTunes store. Furthermore, Jobs consistently blames the mess of mp3 players and protected songs on the labels, which leaves him looking pretty good.

So now Morris is taking a different route. Extremely protective over rights and licensing, Morris has decided that the next battlefront needs to make sure that Apple doesn’t run away with the entire digital music industry. By backtracking on his obsessive need for protection, he’s come to the conclusion that the only way to unseat Apple is to offer DRM free music in a wide variety of ways that entice people away from the iPod (good luck with that buddy).

This is a man who clearly has mixed priorities. First it was no mp3s, then it was DRM mp3s. Now it’s DRM-free and a non-exclusive iTunes agreement. His battle cry is that stolen and shared music, or albums sold for $10 when coffee is $3 a cup, are severely damaging the artists. In reality, they’re cutting into his profits. When you continue to pay the artist the same amount, and the net return on the profit takes a hit, it doesn’t matter if you’re selling CDs for 10 or 30 dollars, because you haven’t changed what you’re paying the artist! Now Morris faces an even steeper challenge with the fact that bands (by which I mean Radiohead and the inevitable overflow of copy-cats) realize they can take ALL the profit if they just release it themselves.  Artists that care about the integrity of their message, such as Immortal Technique, have already shunned record label overtures in pursuit of music that doesn’t need to conform to an executive’s idea of music, and profit that doesn’t involve paying out to someone who has had almost no hand in the creative process.

Unfortunately, as evidenced by his continuing victories in the fights he picks, Morris isn’t a dinosaur yet. But you have to wonder when the musicians that he claims to represent, and the fans those musicians want to serve will take a long look in the mirror and realize that together, they can create a place where artists are paid more, the labels that “own” their music don’t get away with highway robbery, and everyone can win. Ancients such as Morris like the win/lose approach (which often results in a lose/lose anyways) over the win/win approach. But with greedy record execs like this, and a populace gradually seeing that they don’t deserve to be slaughtered over the cost of a CD that their artist will see pennies on anyways, you have to believe the meteor is coming.