The Record as Icon

As someone of a particular age- read old -I am less inclined to the recent fascination and elevation of vinyl, or as us oldsters used to say, records. I'm not against them, in fact, as the photo above can attest, I still have my phonograph, record player, which I still use from time to time.

Mostly while watching sports because the play-by-play and commentary has, of late, become just a lot of background noise. Why not listen to something more interesting? With 4K hi-def, I won't be missing anything visually.

But this isn't about that.

No, this is about the elementary nature of playing records, which I imagine is part of the renewed interest in buying and spinning platters. Hipsters, anyone?

Naturally, in order to play records, one needs a record player, also referred to as turntables and phonographs. A quick review on Amazon finds many available from the portable, which were popular when you wanted to play anywhere, to $1000 Japanese imports. And for those with lots of extra dollars, there are the high end models that cost as much as a car.

Then there's the fun of getting up to flip the record (don't forget to clean it).

None of this is new to someone like me, who lived through the great age of vinyl in the 60's (probably the 50's as well, but that predates me) through the 80's, when CD's made their play. The irony with the whole record thing is that the quality of sound, which is what the Dad's are swinging, man, because records are king, is predicated on the entire signal chain, meaning that everything from the phonograph to the amp (preamp)/receiver to the speakers, including the wires, plays into how "good" your record sounds. This is minus the inherent limitations of vinyl to begin with, but that's old hat.

That means if you buy a $50 tabletop phonograph with built-in speakers, it probably won't sound any better than the MP3 does through tinny earbuds. For those more discernible listeners, there's the thrill of component matching and how long you'll be paying for it.

As a case study, I have a JVC QL-Y55F turntable, a Yamaha R-S300 receiver, which replaced a preamp/amp combo many years ago, feeding AR28 bookshelf speakers. The turntable and speakers I've had for 30 plus years. I spent real money on this stuff and as I've had them for that long speaks well of them. I have had to replace the cartridge on the turntable and both speakers have been reconed, but other than that, they still sound great... to my ears.

The point of this, as it has always been with audio, is what you hear is what you buy and what you buy, outside of budget, is subjective because, hopefully, you listened before you bought. And that is true of any media you listen to music through. I don't play heavy bass driven stuff through the AR28's because it beats the hell out of them; they're not built to move that much, but anything out of the classic period mentioned above sound great... to me.

And that's the whole point.

©2019 David William Pearce

The Masked SInger Asks a Serious Question

For anyone serious about their music, and isn't that thick with portend, shows like The Masked Singer ask the disturbing question: Should music be serious at all? In this instance, the answer is no, but few, if any, self-respecting musical people will be caught dead on this show.

But, their music might be. Is that bad, good; does it even matter? As noted in this review, it's doubtful Pete Townshend envisioned his song Who Are You? being used in so unserious a show as this. Then again, it's quite possible that most of the audience won't know who Pete Townshend is, and it gives Pete one more revenue stream that pays far more than streaming itself.

Who are you the show asks? Probably a B-list celebrity looking for a bump in "Oh yeah, I remember you, maybe", or a possible product endorsement future or the shocking denouement that there are B-list celebrities who can sing.

I assume.

I tried to watch, truly I did, for research obviously, but I confess I flamed out because I thought it was idiotic. I humbly apologize to those who found it better than that. And I freely admit to a certain snobbery when it comes to the performances I'll watch, but enough about me...

Well, a little more.

The question, assuming you're not Pete Townshend, is would you be up for having your song sung on TV by a B-list celebrity in some bizarre costume, for the purposes of possibly expanding your fan base. This assumes that there maybe songs sung that are not instantly recognizable, which is unlikely, which puts most of us less than well-known purveyors of music on the outside looking in.

It also assumes assumes the audience would be so taken by your song, assuming it was picked- though we all know if they do include a "new" song, it would be by someone a big label is pushing- that they would take the time and effort, think Shazam, to find out who wrote that song.

It's possible, just not probable, which makes my snobbery so much more potent!

I think...

©2019 David William Pearce

Photo by Magda Ehlers from Pexels

Strike Up the Band!

Photo by Vladislav Vasnetsov from Pexels

I got into music years ago, as a kid when I joined the band. Specifically, the school band. I played the trombone all throughout my school years, playing in every band they had: concert band, jazz band, pep band, the orchestra, and the marching band, to which I dedicated three years and many early mornings and sacred summer days-like the football team, we had to be ready when the season started.

As such, I am a fierce advocate for school bands and marching bands. To the point that I think they should the act during Superbowl halftime shows versus the overblown pap we're often subjected to. This is also true of your average college or pro game foisted upon the public on just about every day of the week: more bands at halftime; less talking heads pontificating on what we already know or don't care about.

This would do wonders for the bands themselves and music as a part of sports.

I thought of this recently, as I was watching the Harvest Festival parade in my hometown of Arvada, Colorado. It's exactly what it sounds like: a local parade filled with local people, including the schools in the area. All the high schools had marching bands and it was both fun and, at time, wistful, to see them.

They're not nearly as large as they once were. But, I suppose, that's to be expected. Less is put into the arts these days, which is a shame. Those of us from the 70's were incredibly fortunate, so much of that was supported and offered.

And without band, none of the music I make today or did for some many years would be possible. So much is infused subconsciously, so much absorbed and not noticed until years later. Yet it's there. 

I hear it so much more clearly now.

©2019 David William Pearce

Robot Pop and the End of Era of Pop Superstars

Photo by Alex Knight from Pexels

Recently, I've been reading Yuval Noah Harari's book, 21 Lessons for the Twenty-First Century.  

As pertains to this blog, music and the like, he points to the use of AI and algorithms to track and produce just the right kind of pop music-and perhaps any genre of music-that appeals to you and only you. It goes on to further the paradigm by noting that these computer programs will also create the entire dynamic of pop superstardom without any actual human superstars!

Lest you think that's bunk, spend a day listening to what pop music is today and note how much of it is the same derivative pap. Save the occasional producer who adds a "new" sound, the devolution of popular music is continuing at a steady pace. As such, how bad can AI produced pop music be compared to what's playing now?

In fact, because it can fine tune to your particular likes and dislikes, you personally will find what it plays for you to your liking. If this sound manipulative; it is, but no differently than what's being fed to you now.

For music producers, this will be a Godsend. For those who front the music, the performers, it may be the end of a long run for such entertainers. Sure, there will be some who make their mark, but if AI becomes so sophisticated that superstar avatars go along with the AI algorithm music, why would producers deal with petulant humans? Then there's the cost reduction: avatars aren't going to cost that much after they are produced and they won't age and won't have to be compensated throughout their holographic existence.

For the rest of us, who knows.

Mere humans will always sing and make music. Whether it has any monetary value... again, who knows? Recorded music is slowly being devalued; anyone gluming over their streaming payouts can attest to that.

But that capitalism; always has been, always will be. For the rest of us, the joy will still come from getting together and playing for one another.

See you there.

©2019 David William Pearce