blue2blue

I'm thinking he meant for a straight commercial with no hire out talent and just library music or minimal SFX.

And it still sounds cheap but things are tough these days...

But, obviously, an original jingle is a whole different animal. I mean, just imagine what you'd have to charge if it was a union date with live musicians.

That said, I just don't think THAT happens anymore -- not even much at the national TV spot level. Listen to the music under a lot of TV commercials -- a lot of it was done with library music or ACID or similar.

If you don't like the way a vendor prices his wares you have the ULTIMATE POWER.

Just don't BUY from them.

Boom.

Works like a charm.

_______________________

But if you're actually interested in WHY some companies have to charge more just to stay in business, it has a LOT to do with economy of scale and service. I think NewEgg seems like a pretty good outfit. But just try asking them for audio advice. Or just try getting the same motherboard at the same price your buddy got a month ago; you might. But chances are if it was a good deal, they blew them out of stock.

Anyhow, things are not NEARLY as simple as a lot of folks on the outside think...

All-encompassing work from Stranger!

The only thing I worry about is that his instructions are so detailed and so complete that they may -- in their sheer length -- be intimitading.

(I mean... I'm a power user and a business app developer but the sheer mass might give me pause. I'm kidding -- OBVIOUSLY, he's trying to cover all the bases.)

With regard to single-purpose machines... while reserving your machine strictly for recording is the EASIEST way to maintain a well-optimized, lean, mean machine, if you're careful, by and large, you can maintain a multi-purpose machine that is ALSO well-optimized for recording. Both my XP laptop and my (stripped down) Windows MCE desktop have a boot profile RAM footprint of about 120-125 MB or so with 20-22 processes running.

HOWEVER -- jgk62 was pretty spot on on highlighting PRECISELY the type of programs that like to burrow into your system and suck down its resources. Realplayer, Quicktime, some other big name players, put "loaders" in background that don't actually do much except put their logo in your system tray -- and take resources... sometimes more than you would ever imagine.

For instance, Sun's Java Runtime installation AUTOMATICALLY -- without asking -- installs a relatively huge background process (12-15 MB RAM footprint) in your boot profile -- what's it doing? Simply waitin for Sun to send word out on the web that there is a new Runtime software update. Even MICROSOFT's Windows auto-updater doesnt' take up nearly that much resources [last time I ran it in background and checked its footprint] -- closer to one third that. It's INSANE. Sun are [uncharitable but well-warranted slagging deleted by author].

With regard to PORN... porn viewers, "video players" -- just don't do it. There are SO many threats from this sector and many of them are designed to install WORMS in your system. (OK... there are SOME innocent porn/erotica sites, you should pardon the expression. But extreme caustion is warranted.)

OK... I'll go that -- at least for the purpose of argument (but, ACTUALLY, I've found a LOT of wrong info in MS's developer docs). I've actually -- on rare occasions got just the info I needed -- but almost NEVER using MS's benighted search engine.

My point: the best answers in the world are little good if few can find them.

I don't know if you're familiar with the MySQL online documentation but I think it's pretty great. I approached my first MySQL project a few years ago with considerable trepidation... having been developing mostly with MS tools for a number of years.

I thought it was night and day... it was almost a pleasure using the MySQL documentation because everything is laid out, easy to get to, coherently organized, version by version... not the horrorific jumble of outdated info on MS's dev sites.

I mean -- really -- I think MS's documentation, as a whole, is utterly pathetic.

BTW, I was over at GS earlier and George Necola who runs the music computers forum there was saying that -- with Aero, the new graphics engine, and a couple other things turned off -- Vista runs about as fast as XP.

http://gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=102464

He also says they've turned DRM off on their machine(s) but I have to admit I'm not at all up to speed on all the DRM issues... I only became aware of the intentional signal degradation (and superficially at that) in the last 10 days or so.

I should probably thin it out but at least half of them have some kind of sentimental attachment. Or obsessive... when I was just outta college I had about 300 LPs stolen and it really put my head in a bad place -- they were the 300 "most recent" listens... later when I had a few bucks and I'd see a copy of a favorite album in a used bin I'd buy it again -- even if I already had a copy or two. It was starting to get a little uncomfortable...

When you've bought THREE copies of the Seeds' Spoonful of Seedy Blues just to replace the copy you bought for 50 cents at a swapmeet in high school you know you're acting out some inner, unhealed trauma.

But that -- thinning out the LP collection, I think I've healed -- that won't be for a while... they're DEEP in the garage. They were the first thing I moved (old habit... along with the stereo... even though the tables are in the garage. Sigh. Then again, being a two minute walk to the sand is part of that tradeoff. And I do have access to most [but certainly NOT all] of the music in my vinyl collection via my subscription service.)

I've paid for three copies of XP (or, more properly, two XPs and a Media Center)... I suspect I may find some ethical "flexibility" within myself should I need to prolong the working life of one of my XP machines.

One time I had a pal make mp3s from his CD copy of an album I own on vinyl.* I'm really an outlaw at heart.

*(My turntable's in storage buried deep in my garage as are my 1200 vinyl LPs -- my beachside flat is just too small; the album wasn't available on my subscription service, either.)

That's somewhat heartening.

With re that last one copy of XP... yeah... I was just thinking they'll pull it from the shelves long before they stop giving new authorizations.

And -- long as you don't have to change CPUs after they stop giving authorizations... there's always the option of keeping a "core" backup on hand for mini-disasters.

But yeah... this is REALLY pushing me a LOT closer to the open source/*nix way of thinking.

It was one thing when we just had to keep a wary eye on MS... NOW they're all but threatening our computing way of life (and I DON'T mean just their draconian copy protection but it it's clear that it will impact far more than pirates).

Yep.

I'm no Microsoft basher. I really do like XP a lot and MS has done some pretty cool things by me and my sector (the release of basic Visual Studio developer apps as freeware was unexpected -- and perhaps self-serving as they were preparing for the Vista roll-out -- but it was still pretty cool)...

But my loyalty is to open, standards-based computing -- not Microsoft.

More of my own development work has been taking place on the web -- and that's often meant using non-MS developement tools (as well as MS tools like SQL Server and ASP).

The good news is that some open source developer tools are in many ways BETTER than MS's products. MySQL is an able performer -- but where it REALLY shines is in documentation and responsiveness to the developer community -- two places where Microsoft is UTTERLY ABYSMAL. (NO other company I've dealt with on an ongoing basis has such INCREDIBLY BAD DOCUMENTATION as Microsoft. It is an UTTER DISGRACE.)

I may well be among those who goes out to buy one last copy of XP...

And -- honest to gosh -- I'm going to start lobbying now for my DAW, Sonar, to be ported to Linux.

Someday -- when our computers are FOUR TIMES as powerful -- Vista MIGHT run as well on them as XP does on today's computers.

But Vista's MASSIVE CPU requirements -- MS, themselves estimate a fourfold increase in RAM will be needed at minimum and, IIRC, an even greater increase in minimum video standards needed to support MS's Mac-me-tooism, Aero, the rescaling graphics engined designed to compete with OS X's Aqua (that name-apple didn't fall far from the tree, huh?)

As far as I can tell, in the 5 years or so that Aqua has been laying its heavy hand on the Mac platform it has resulted in two things, The Swoosh (the animated "tornado" resulting from an open window "swooshing" down onto the Mac Dock [the OS X "innovation" that mimicked XP's taskbar -- MS is not the only shameless borrower]) and the ability to view graphic representation of documents in small "iconized" windows. (This ability has been available in various add-ins for Windows for years and I've yet to see anyone use it on an ongoing basis.)

Vista is ALL about one thing -- the need to "churn" the computer hardware and software market.

Hardware and software vendors have been increasingly anxious over MS's long-promised and often delayed "next generation" OS -- they need it to force people to buy new computers and new versions of old software.

What will you gain if you switch to Vista when it becomes available?

An operating system that will, in a very real sense, reduce ANY given computer's power to 25% of what it was under XP.

Think about THAT.

Give me a bunch of money and I'll make you famous.

No I'm serious... give ME a bunch of money and I'll make you famous.

Convincing?

No?

You know at least as much about me as you know about them (aside from what THEY have told you, anyhow).

I'm not saying that you shouldn't pay for valuable services rendered.

But I AM saying that this is one of the oldest scams going (third-oldest, I believe after the badger game and... politics).

IF you hook up with some music promo service provider find out EXACTLY what your money will buy you and how you will be able to ascertain that you DID, indeed, get what you thought you were getting, whether or not that makes you famous.

IOW, caveat emptor, baby. Bigtime.

If all else fails, check out whether using WDM/KS (kernel streaming) drivers for your interface work better.

When I use ASIO drivers with my MOTU 828mkII, I get all kinds of little problems.

WDM/KS drivers (when available) have high performance features to get around some of the inherent limitations of standard WDM drivers.

You know, I must be a funny cuss...

(Well, duh.)

Anyhow, for some reason, reading this thread has given me the itch to pull that Pod XT back out and give it another whirl.

Maybe it's cause last time I plugged into my Blues Jr I decided it needed to be retubed... maybe it's cause I was playing d.i. the other night via the instrument input on my MOTU 828mkII and the slight internal CueMix monitor latency didn't bug me as it has in the past... in fact, unless I thought about it, I didn't notice it. It was odd. In the past, it's simply made me uncomfortable. Maybe my sense of fine time is going in my dotage... if so, maybe I'm ready for the Pod.

If you like the pod, get the pod.

If you don't like the pod, don't get the pod.

I have a Pod XT over here and I don't much care for it. (It's on long term loan from a friend who does like it but has other things going on and needed somehwere to park it.)

But then I don't much care for most of the guitar sounds I hear in contemporary pop, so there ya go.

If I was -- heaven forfend! -- in a cover band (it would have to be a very lame cover band 'cause I certainly don't have the chops many of my working brothers and sisters do ), I'd probably have some sort of digital box where I could punch up the "latest sounds" and feel fine about it.

Well even their first album, which had some heavily produced numbers on it had European Son (to Delmore Schwartz)... justly infamous for covering up the sound of a very clumsy edit with the sound effect of a toilet flushing... that used to SLAY me... but then I'd usually wander off and start cleaning house or something a minute or so into the "jam"...

The say drugs have personalities -- and I believe there's a certain amount of poetic truth to that. But think of the complex "personality" that would have to be behind European Son and also behind something like Kinda Blue...

Now... first let me say that I think it's, overall, a great record and a landmark of its time and I would NOT want anyone to touch one waveform in the original master mixes... but ever since I sat down and listened to Derek and the Dominos again for the first time in a few decades, all the way through on good speakers I found myself thinking... wow... great record but some really rough, noisy, messy recording.

But like I said I'll lay myself down in the roadway in front of anyone driving over to remix or substantially remaster that album. And consider the sacrifice noble.

Not sure why you think their career is flagging, Lee... their new album debuted at number one on both the U.S. pop albums chart and the U.S. country albums chart. (This means their last 3 albums debuted at number one.)

It sold 526,000 copies in the first week.

That was the year's second-best first week sales for any country act.

It went gold its first week out.

So I guess I'm not the only one who's "into their music."

[That said, the tour has been having problems with ticket sales in some "red states." Uh... and Fresno.]

I don't doubt that some country fans feel insulted -- but I still haven't read any of the insults...

Does anyone have a link to them?

PS... I'd certainly agree that it's an unfortunate state of affairs if people adopt the political positions of their favorite artists for no other reason than that the artist holds them. But if an artist can EXPLAIN those positions in such a way as to persuade someone, fan or not, I say, more power to them. (And I'm not, by any means, suggesting that the DC have done so. Just making a comment about the process, here.)

And let's not forget that one of the two founding sisters, Martie Seidel, won third place honors at the National Fiddle Championships... some folks seem to want to make them out to be talentless manufactured stars. Like 'em or not, they do have roots in country and bluegrass music.

FantasticSound

Well, I think you've explained your positions pretty well and I think it makes a fair bit of sense.

Obviously, arguing about what is and isn't "real" country is like arguing about what's "real" rock or "real" blues... ultimately, there's going to be a lot of subjectivity and I should have probably stipulated that even though it's probably obvious to both of us.

(And you don't even want to know what I think of current "rock" -- lemme tellya! )

Time Mag isn't my favorite for political analysis but they typically get their facts straight. But they didn't cite their sources, so...

__________

On the "free speech" thing, to the extent that we're talking about constitutional rights and the law, I think that's a lot less open to subjective interpretation. The DC getting frozen out by CC and/or other broadcasters does have a free speech aspect -- but, as I got at before, it really relates to Clear Channel's free speech rights, so, as much as CC ticks me off (and I think is BEGGING prosecution on payola issues, which is another matter, of course), I have to say that Constitutional free speech guarantees tend to support their position to play what they want (within the guidelines of existing law and FCC policy).

The DC certainly are assured free speech rights under the constitution but there's nothing that assures them the right to be played by a given broadcaster -- and much that supports the broadcaster's right not to play them.

Now, if the government was censoring their records or printed materials, THEN you'd have a bigtime free speech issue...

Let's put it this way -- if I held a broadcast license, I'd be UP IN ARMS if someone tried to make me play, say, Ted Nugent -- a man whose nearly every aspect and certainly whose politics and music turn my gut. (OK... I did kind of like "Journey to the Center of Your Mind" because it was so damn silly... but it PALES in comparison to Kenny Rogers' faux-psychedelic classic "I Just Dropped in to See What Condition My Condition Was In.")

______________

PPS... back to music... I think I'm on FantasticSound's page with re "Landslide." I like it a bit better by the DC than by Nicks, but still not a huge amount. (I'm a Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac fan. I like some of the Bob Welch stuff pretty well, too, but it's, you know, pretty well a different band, as different from the FM headed up by PG as that fronted by Buckingham and Nicks. BTW, I can say that I heard the Buckingham and Nicks [presumably still obscure] solo record before I heard them with FM. Is THAT worth anything in the props dept? Yeah... I didn't think so... OK... how about this... I played through a little fender amp belonging to Christine MacVie once when I was in a one-time-only band headed up by Pete Paterno when he was still in law school and still FM's part-time soundman (put together for a law school talent show, no less)... still no props, huh? Oh well... )

That's what I'm thinking, Bill.

Where "free speech" enters into the CC vs DC thing is actually that CC's free speech rights could be argued to support their decision to not play the DC -- in the extremely unlikely event this FCC should get interested in the brouhaha.

If the DC bought a station (or published a paper, blog, etc) and the government/FCC tried to restrict what they said or broadcast, then we could be talking about the DC's free speech rights and whether or not they were being infringed.

I kept seeing that ongoing discussion and meant to weigh in directly on the use of the term with regards to this but kept getting distracted...

It's an important consideration to keep straight, I think, and I understood your tenacity in pursuing that.

Originally posted by fantasticsound The only insult I mentioned was the direct press release from the chicks that they were no longer country artists. That, in and of itself, was insulting. In a nutshell, I took it to mean rock audiences are cool, country are narrowminded, right wing nut jobs. Call me crazy, but I don't think that's reading too much between the lines when they jump ship. They never said it was about the country music powers that be. They said they were leaving country for fans who appreciate them. How you were raised has no bearing on the fact that redneck is alternately used by some southern folk as a badge of the working man's honor and as a derogatory term every time someone is labelled ignorant with a southern accent. Some people revel in that rural, salt of the earth, practiacality over book learning reputation, but many do not. Some black people think it's ok to use the "n" word between themselves is ok. Others are enraged at such use. "Redneck" is used much the same way. Wow. An exception to a stereotype. Stop the presses! Wow, again. You're a demographic expert and intimately familiar with the character and past of most country pop stars. What's with that mountain sized chip on your shoulder. I don't know who you're talking about, but I'm acquainted with more than a few of those I believe you're talking about and you couldn't be more wrong. To be sure there are people in country (and rock and jazz and...) who fit the description you suggest. But don't paint such a broad picture because you're bound to be wrong, and not just about a few people. I suggest you point that evil eye at roots country and do some research. I think you'll find a lot of disappointment when you learn a thing or two about some of your favorites. So A + B = C. Unfortunately, you're starting with a flawed statement. They didn't make their sound "less countrified". They played the game and made their sound more like what was selling. And for every artist that makes it there must be what, 100.. 1000 more with as much talent who don't? Please. It's convenient to blame their success on being "less country", but the fact is they were being more of what the country music establishment was selling. Even so, once they were on top, their most country album, Home, sold better than the two before it. So obviously they were in touch with people who might characterize themselves as more and less country.

Wow, yourself.

Well, the rednecks I know don't think "redneck" is an insult.

I guess if you think it's an insult that's your interpretation.

With regards to demographics, country music, and suburban fans:

"Market research indicates the average country listener is white, suburban and leans to the right..."

-- Time Magazine

If you have contrary information, I'd be happy to take a look at it.

I think you were implying I might be surprised by the politics of some of my favorite roots country icons... I somehow doubt it.

I don't like them because their politics "match" my own complex matrix of political beliefs and positions (I am, after all, a small-government, fiscal-conservative, anti-corruption, anti-war Republican -- an odd duck by most measures). I like them because they make music that moves me in a number of ways.

I would be as bothered by, say, Ricky Skaggs being shut out from, say NPR, because of his conservative politics as I am by ClearChannel shutting out the Dixie Chicks. Happily, Ricky Skaggs seems a frequent and welcome guest on some NPR shows.

And finally, if you think the stuff that mainstream Nashville artists pump out has much to do with real country music -- all I can say is, wow.

_________

PPS... While I agree that -- everything else being equal -- a corporation typically has the right to control what they publish or disseminate -- when they broadcast on the public airwaves they do NOT have the same breadth of rights as a print or net publisher or even a cable-caster.

Still, I think it confuses the issues to talk about "free speech" with regard to the Dixie Chicks' rights on this issue. It is however a pertinent term when talking about the broadcaster's (limited) free speech rights. IOW, the broadcaster's own free speech rights (limited as they are by statute and administrative rulings) could be used to argue for greater latitude in exercising their right to play or not play a record. (But it's clearly a complex field.)

I didn't read/hear the referenced "insults" though when I searched just now, here's how the NY Times crit Kelefa Sanneh characterized what may have been the quote:

I was raised to think that "redneck" was not to be taken as a perjorative -- that a man's neck was red because he was working in the hot sun.

And I don't think "redneck" should be synonomous with "right wing" -- since I know more than a few self-described rednecks who are ANYTHING but pro-Bush.

But, as as a roots country fan, I think it's an absurd fantasy to think the average Nashville pop fan is anywhere close to a redneck, in the classic sense of the word. He/she is often as not suburban, with a "regular" job -- and his country pop music needs are serviced these days by people who wouldn't know an honest day's work if it walked up and kicked them in their silver cocaine straw...

And -- one last thing -- about those country roots...

The Dixie Chicks could hardly get a tumble with "country radio" fans when they actually sounded country... despite the fact they had killer instrumentals (Martie Seidel won third place honors at the National Fiddle Championships) and strongly roots flavored singing, it wasn't until they switched singers and developed a "smoother" less countrified sound that their sales to "country fans" took off...

I was thinking more principle than practice, here. Obviously, under the last two administrations, the FCC has -- in the eyes of many -- not been fulfilling their congressionally mandated duties with regard to a number of provisions of federal communications law.

No, I was addressing the fundamental difference between a commercial publisher -- or cable- or net- caster -- and a commercial entity which has been granted stewardship of a band of the airwaves, which is a limited public resource.

While the rationale for extending "decency standards" laws to cable casters may stretch many legal minds to the breaking point, I think most folks can see the rationale for attaching restrictions and provisos to a license to use the public airwaves.

But, just so I'm not misunderstood here, I'm not saying that CC did necessarily break any laws or violate rules of their license. I'm only talking about the distinction between broadcasting on the public airwaves and print, cable, or net publishing or media transmission.

I don't know if they did violate laws or rules -- but I think it's extremely unlikely that there would be legal consequences from this FCC, even if they did. Particularly given the givens.

Bill, I understand your thinking here -- but there's one crucial distinction between a magazine (or internet or cable station) -- and a broadcast station.

Broadcast stations are granted a limited license to use a (limited supply) public asset, the airwaves in order to pursue their 'private' business. Because of that, the courts have consistently upheld greater restrictions and qualifications to the license granted than would ever be constitutionally tolerated were they somehow applied to a form of commercial speech which did not use such a public asset (the airwaves).