Well, it comes down to how "raw" the song is. It's rock & roll...the mistakes, the mishaps in the recording live of a song actually go INTO the song too.
You sound more like a producer/tech...which is great, don't get me wrong...I mean you make yourself (in this forum) seem like that. But next time, just on a lark, take your admitted "horrible" guitar skills and play it anyway on a track. The history of rock is littered with "horrible" guitarists that actually elevate the art! It's one of those things that sound bad on paper (and on a forum) but actually turns out better than you think.
But over-producing produces crap 9 times out of 10. Plain and simple. Out of tune slightly...keep it out of tune slightly. It DOES matter to the listener!
The albums of the past were rushed many times...they had to get the band in there and get them out and then slap it on a record and get it out there...rushed, yes...but thats where the real gems of music come from! When a band slowed down and actually started taking their time is when they lost a spark of something. Though, yes, there are great acts/albums that came away from that as something to strive for....The Beatles and Pink Floyd come to mind.
But speaking of the Beatles, look at "Let it Be" and "Let it Be: Naked". The original was The Beatles trying to get away from over produced songs that they had been heading toward. But it was a disaster in the studio because (well, books and books have been written as to the why it was a disaster)...so they gave it to Phil Spector to "produce"...and the outcome was over produced slicky music. Sure, we've had 30 years now of listening to that Album for it to grow in our minds...but when "Naked" came out last year I was like...WOW! It was them in the raw. Raw songs. Some didn't like it really because it differed to what they basically grew up hearing. But I tried to step back and act like it was the first time I was hearing it. The magic was there.
Ok, I'm going on and on. I'd be interested in seeing what you think of at least trying to play live...just to shake things up a big...get the creative juices flowing!
While I agree with you on certain bands...not all bands sounded bad unplugged, and of course it went to the better musicians that really showed their stuff unplugged. Eric Clapton leaps to mind as well as Page/Plant...but for the most part you're right on the money.
And no, that's not even on anymore. They don't play music on M(usic)TV anymore. Even VH1 is getting out of that.
Re:More Democratic Market
on
The Long Tail
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
They again, were entertainers...no one really goes and studies the "music" of Sinatra like one would go and study up on Miles Davis or Bob Dylan or Jimmy Page....as in the art of music itself.
But there's certainly nothing wrong with Britney Spears if you're into her. It's what someone likes...and the "music" is really secondary to BS or others of her ilk. It's the entertainment that's the draw.
I was just wondering, why would a Newspaper or a news outlet go out and say "We're endorsing this candidate over this other one".
I mean, shouldn't they at least TRY to be non-biased about the news they report? I know I know...there is this "Liberal Media" that's suppose to pump up all Democrats and rake-across-the-coals all Republicans...at the same time there are conservative news outlets that almost try to convince us that Democrats cause cancer....but shouldn't they at least pretend to not be biased?
I want my news from unbiased..."we don't endorse anyone" kind of thing. I know, it's a pipe dream to try to find just raw news reporting without SOMEONE saying it's biased one way or another.
Just always wondered why newspapers go out on a limb like that.
Care to enlighten us on what exactly it is you mean? Since OSX sits on top of a BSD varient...and BSD to the best of my knowledge is a true "Unix"...what do you mean by Apple not using Unix?
When you were creating it, did you in your wildest dreams ever think that 30 years people would still be using it on a daily basis? Was it designed from the beginning to grow and be added onto?
Anyone remember a Macworld some years ago that Bungie demoed Halo on a Macintosh, touting that it was all being rendered "real time" on the Mac and blah blah blah and how cool it was going to be.
Gee...how long did it take to make it to the Mac? I was so looking foward to it also.
But Shatner is already in a series...Boston Law or whatever it's called now. Comes on tonight on ABC, check local listings.
No, it's not that TJ Hooker hung up his gun and became a lawyer either...though that might be interesting.
Shatner won an Emmy last year...yeah, hard to belive. The Emmy's are still kind of sort of legit (please insert indignation about what show you loved that didn't get nominated) but at least they're not like the "Throw-in-every-catagory there-is-so-everyone-get s-an-award-no-matter-what" that is the Grammys. If you put out a record, you get a Grammy.
Ok, I have NO idea how I drove the topic right into a ditch...what were we talking about again?
You no more have to "babysit" Linux than any other OS out there. In fact, less so with Linux.
With XP you have to run virus protection, windows updates, disk defragmentation and disk cleaning on a regular basis.
With Linux, I reboot about once a month or so, and that's only when I upgrade a kernel...no virus checking, no disk defrags, no disk cleaning...updates are handled by a cron job with Gentoo because portage handles all the dependencies for me.
If Linux has already arrived, why isn't it successful? Why are the unwashed masses still using Windows, if you're right?
This is a non-argument. If we were use this sort of thinking then Mac-OSX isn't "here" yet either since all the unwashed masses still use Windows...right? So a desktop operating system is only good or "here" if everyone uses it. So following your "logic" then only Windows is the desktop that's here now. Everything else isn't ready for the desktop yet. Right?
So please, Linux isn't hard to use. If I can install and use Gentoo Linux, anyone can...i'm not a computer expert, not a programmer...didn't go to school for any of this. I can read the easy-to-follow instructions and load it. Was very simple. Was easy. My 11 year old could do it. So don't give me this crap that Linux is just barely usable by novices and unfixable by same. If you like Windows, fine...run it! I'm not a zealot that says "Linux only". But I speak up when for some reason people want to spread bullshit around about something they have no idea about. What is the point? Why spread this? Do these people have a personal financial stake in Microsoft or OSX or whatever? What compells someone to lie? It's just an OS...
Re:Speak for yourself, OSX is more than there alre
on
Syllable 0.5.4 Released
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Sorry, it IS here. Just because it doesn't act like OSX doesn't mean anything. No, it's not OSX...so what?
Does everything have to behave like everything else? OSX is very elegant...so what? I enjoy KDE...I think it's very elegant. Who's right and who's wrong?
OSX is right for you. KDE is right for me. But just because OSX is a nice UI doesn't mean everything else is crap.
And more to the point, Linux is the Harley...where you can tinker with it and customize it totally to become anything you want. While OSX is more like a crotch-rocket Ninja or whatever the kids are riding now adays. Very sleek, very fast...but can't really be totally (and I mean totally) customized to where you want it.
Thanks for the analogy...you just had it mixed up. Glad I could set you straight.
Linux on the desktop is here. It's happening as we speak and it's fine.
This isn't some "far away dream" to "someday" have Linux work as a desktop OS. It's here now. People all around the world use it as their sole OS on the desktop and get along fine with it.
So the FUD of "Linux isn't "here" yet on the desktop" is just nonsense.
It's here there and everywhere...all you have to do is open your eyes. But I suppose if it doesn't work exactly like Windows then it can't be "here" yet. Then I guess OS/X isn't "here" yet either.
I don't care how Bush acted in the National Guard...to me I don't care if he had a stellar record there and did an outstanding job or if he snorted cocaine on the flight-line...everyone is missing the big, overall point here.
He dodged the draft! He dodged going to Vietnam. Look, there were 3 ways to get out of going to Vietnam if your number came up back then. 1, skip off to Canada. 2, be in college forever. 3, Join the National Guard.
And again, this same way of thinking can be applied to Kerry. The "Swift Boat Vets" who accuse him of false heroism in Vietnam are again missing the point too. I don't care if Kerry was a file clerk that never saw combat and stayed in Saigon...HE WAS IN VIETNAM! He went there...he didn't try to get out of it.
Our last two Presidents got out of going to the War...
So bottom line...and in case it really matters to anyone and if anyone is keeping score...Kerry went to Vietnam, Bush got out of going.
I'm a tad slow on the uptake I suppose, but I read the article by Ashlee Vance at the Register and while she was trying to be cute and clever, she didn't really explain just what the hell the UDC was.
Was it a server product? Was it a service? Was it an exhibit at HP ala Epcot Center or something?
All I got from her article was that it was kinda cool, yet not really cool. Innovative, yet not really. Marketed yet not marketed. And that customers didn't want to buy it...probably because they didn't know exactly what they were buying?
Well, how about a helmet 24/7? How many people have died from slipping in the bathtub? Out on ice on the sidewalk?
What about the people that get into car accidents that are wearing a seat-belt but still get blunt-trama to the head? Should they also be placed in the "don't wanna fund your stupidity" department? I mean, if they too were wearing helmets I'm sure the risk of them becoming vegetables would have been greatly reduced!
How far do we take this? "Shouldn't have been walking on that icy sidewalk without a helmet! NO FUNDS FOR YOU! Shouldn't be taking a bath without a helmet! NO FUNDS FOR YOU!"
Think about this anywhere and everywhere you've ever seen someone get head-trama. Then think back to this post...they should have been wearing their helmet!
And as I read this again from a different perspective, perhaps deezl was calling out the makers of Celsius 41.11 because if you go to their site, no where does it say where or how or even if you can download their movie. Just lists how to get the DVD.
So maybe he's saying that Celsius 41.11 isn't true? Or is he saying that Michael Moore isn't true?
Just WTF is deezl saying? Or is he saying anything?
Or maybe to quote Mongo: "deezl just pawn in game of life".
Slashdot Mirror
Actually yeah, I was kind of impressed by Kiss when they did unplugged.
Even more so when Ace Frehley joined them and proceed to totally SMOKE the other guy they had replaced him with. Was kinda cool to see.
Not to mention the fact that my very first concert I ever saw was Kiss when I was 15 at the Hampton Roads Collesium in Virginia back in 77
Well, it comes down to how "raw" the song is. It's rock & roll...the mistakes, the mishaps in the recording live of a song actually go INTO the song too.
You sound more like a producer/tech...which is great, don't get me wrong...I mean you make yourself (in this forum) seem like that. But next time, just on a lark, take your admitted "horrible" guitar skills and play it anyway on a track. The history of rock is littered with "horrible" guitarists that actually elevate the art! It's one of those things that sound bad on paper (and on a forum) but actually turns out better than you think.
But over-producing produces crap 9 times out of 10. Plain and simple. Out of tune slightly...keep it out of tune slightly. It DOES matter to the listener!
The albums of the past were rushed many times...they had to get the band in there and get them out and then slap it on a record and get it out there...rushed, yes...but thats where the real gems of music come from! When a band slowed down and actually started taking their time is when they lost a spark of something. Though, yes, there are great acts/albums that came away from that as something to strive for....The Beatles and Pink Floyd come to mind.
But speaking of the Beatles, look at "Let it Be" and "Let it Be: Naked". The original was The Beatles trying to get away from over produced songs that they had been heading toward. But it was a disaster in the studio because (well, books and books have been written as to the why it was a disaster)...so they gave it to Phil Spector to "produce"...and the outcome was over produced slicky music. Sure, we've had 30 years now of listening to that Album for it to grow in our minds...but when "Naked" came out last year I was like...WOW! It was them in the raw. Raw songs. Some didn't like it really because it differed to what they basically grew up hearing. But I tried to step back and act like it was the first time I was hearing it. The magic was there.
Ok, I'm going on and on. I'd be interested in seeing what you think of at least trying to play live...just to shake things up a big...get the creative juices flowing!
Just jam and roll tape! Take care...
While I agree with you on certain bands...not all bands sounded bad unplugged, and of course it went to the better musicians that really showed their stuff unplugged. Eric Clapton leaps to mind as well as Page/Plant...but for the most part you're right on the money.
And no, that's not even on anymore. They don't play music on M(usic)TV anymore. Even VH1 is getting out of that.
They again, were entertainers...no one really goes and studies the "music" of Sinatra like one would go and study up on Miles Davis or Bob Dylan or Jimmy Page....as in the art of music itself.
But there's certainly nothing wrong with Britney Spears if you're into her. It's what someone likes...and the "music" is really secondary to BS or others of her ilk. It's the entertainment that's the draw.
That's an interesting way of looking at it. Acts as kind of a filter for the reader to know where the paper is coming from.
Never thought about it that way. I suppose I'm trying to live in an idealized world.
I was just wondering, why would a Newspaper or a news outlet go out and say "We're endorsing this candidate over this other one".
I mean, shouldn't they at least TRY to be non-biased about the news they report? I know I know...there is this "Liberal Media" that's suppose to pump up all Democrats and rake-across-the-coals all Republicans...at the same time there are conservative news outlets that almost try to convince us that Democrats cause cancer....but shouldn't they at least pretend to not be biased?
I want my news from unbiased..."we don't endorse anyone" kind of thing. I know, it's a pipe dream to try to find just raw news reporting without SOMEONE saying it's biased one way or another.
Just always wondered why newspapers go out on a limb like that.
Apple doesn't use Unix
Care to enlighten us on what exactly it is you mean? Since OSX sits on top of a BSD varient...and BSD to the best of my knowledge is a true "Unix"...what do you mean by Apple not using Unix?
Just wondering.
Ah, so maybe you should email Roblimo and tell him this since the whole story is:
"Ask Unix Co-Creator Rob Pike"
Set Roblimo straight then...instead of just spouting off in the forums where no one but me will see it.
When you were creating it, did you in your wildest dreams ever think that 30 years people would still be using it on a daily basis? Was it designed from the beginning to grow and be added onto?
Actually, wasn't ment to be a troll at all...more like a "walk down memory lane".
And yeah, in reality, who cares?
Anyone remember a Macworld some years ago that Bungie demoed Halo on a Macintosh, touting that it was all being rendered "real time" on the Mac and blah blah blah and how cool it was going to be.
Gee...how long did it take to make it to the Mac? I was so looking foward to it also.
But as I said, this was many years ago.
It's from Paul Simon:
Still Crazy After All These Years
It's good to see crazy people remain crazy. Kinda gives you a touch-stone in the world to make sure everything is alright...
But Shatner is already in a series...Boston Law or whatever it's called now. Comes on tonight on ABC, check local listings.
t s-an-award-no-matter-what" that is the Grammys. If you put out a record, you get a Grammy.
No, it's not that TJ Hooker hung up his gun and became a lawyer either...though that might be interesting.
Shatner won an Emmy last year...yeah, hard to belive. The Emmy's are still kind of sort of legit (please insert indignation about what show you loved that didn't get nominated) but at least they're not like the "Throw-in-every-catagory
there-is-so-everyone-ge
Ok, I have NO idea how I drove the topic right into a ditch...what were we talking about again?
Lol, yeah, after I submitted this comment I went D'OH and noticed all the spelling errors.
I also got "recieved" wrong also. "I before E except after C" was pounded into my head enough in grade school you'd think I would rememeber it.
Well, I guess that was why it got rejected! Cause I'm an idiot!
Oh well, at least someone got it posted on here, and that's all that matters really.
And it go rejected...same exact NYT story with links and everything. Guess CmdrTaco is easier to get stories by. lol
But anyway, this does look interested. And you have to have a lot of balls to take on something as big as well recieved as Google is.
You no more have to "babysit" Linux than any other OS out there. In fact, less so with Linux.
With XP you have to run virus protection, windows updates, disk defragmentation and disk cleaning on a regular basis.
With Linux, I reboot about once a month or so, and that's only when I upgrade a kernel...no virus checking, no disk defrags, no disk cleaning...updates are handled by a cron job with Gentoo because portage handles all the dependencies for me.
I do use Gentoo...you can have it run very sleek and very fast...very small footprint, run it with fluxbox.
So yeah, Linux is still the Harley that you can customize into a very sleek and very fast bike.
Thanks...glad to set you straight.
If Linux has already arrived, why isn't it successful? Why are the unwashed masses still using Windows, if you're right?
This is a non-argument. If we were use this sort of thinking then Mac-OSX isn't "here" yet either since all the unwashed masses still use Windows...right? So a desktop operating system is only good or "here" if everyone uses it. So following your "logic" then only Windows is the desktop that's here now. Everything else isn't ready for the desktop yet. Right?
So please, Linux isn't hard to use. If I can install and use Gentoo Linux, anyone can...i'm not a computer expert, not a programmer...didn't go to school for any of this. I can read the easy-to-follow instructions and load it. Was very simple. Was easy. My 11 year old could do it. So don't give me this crap that Linux is just barely usable by novices and unfixable by same. If you like Windows, fine...run it! I'm not a zealot that says "Linux only". But I speak up when for some reason people want to spread bullshit around about something they have no idea about. What is the point? Why spread this? Do these people have a personal financial stake in Microsoft or OSX or whatever? What compells someone to lie? It's just an OS...
Sorry, it IS here. Just because it doesn't act like OSX doesn't mean anything. No, it's not OSX...so what?
Does everything have to behave like everything else? OSX is very elegant...so what? I enjoy KDE...I think it's very elegant. Who's right and who's wrong?
OSX is right for you. KDE is right for me. But just because OSX is a nice UI doesn't mean everything else is crap.
And more to the point, Linux is the Harley...where you can tinker with it and customize it totally to become anything you want. While OSX is more like a crotch-rocket Ninja or whatever the kids are riding now adays. Very sleek, very fast...but can't really be totally (and I mean totally) customized to where you want it.
Thanks for the analogy...you just had it mixed up. Glad I could set you straight.
Linux on the desktop is here. It's happening as we speak and it's fine.
This isn't some "far away dream" to "someday" have Linux work as a desktop OS. It's here now. People all around the world use it as their sole OS on the desktop and get along fine with it.
So the FUD of "Linux isn't "here" yet on the desktop" is just nonsense.
It's here there and everywhere...all you have to do is open your eyes. But I suppose if it doesn't work exactly like Windows then it can't be "here" yet. Then I guess OS/X isn't "here" yet either.
I don't care how Bush acted in the National Guard...to me I don't care if he had a stellar record there and did an outstanding job or if he snorted cocaine on the flight-line...everyone is missing the big, overall point here.
He dodged the draft! He dodged going to Vietnam. Look, there were 3 ways to get out of going to Vietnam if your number came up back then. 1, skip off to Canada. 2, be in college forever. 3, Join the National Guard.
And again, this same way of thinking can be applied to Kerry. The "Swift Boat Vets" who accuse him of false heroism in Vietnam are again missing the point too. I don't care if Kerry was a file clerk that never saw combat and stayed in Saigon...HE WAS IN VIETNAM! He went there...he didn't try to get out of it.
Our last two Presidents got out of going to the War...
So bottom line...and in case it really matters to anyone and if anyone is keeping score...Kerry went to Vietnam, Bush got out of going.
Black & White wasn't a bad game. Sure, there was a ton of hype about it, but not all of it from Peter. The press had a ton of hype about it also.
And when all was said and done, it wasn't that bad of a game. Over-hyped for sure, but not bad.
I had fun with it and it brought a smile to my face...what else should a game do?
I'm a tad slow on the uptake I suppose, but I read the article by Ashlee Vance at the Register and while she was trying to be cute and clever, she didn't really explain just what the hell the UDC was.
Was it a server product? Was it a service? Was it an exhibit at HP ala Epcot Center or something?
All I got from her article was that it was kinda cool, yet not really cool. Innovative, yet not really. Marketed yet not marketed. And that customers didn't want to buy it...probably because they didn't know exactly what they were buying?
So please, someone enlighten me!
Well, how about a helmet 24/7? How many people have died from slipping in the bathtub? Out on ice on the sidewalk?
What about the people that get into car accidents that are wearing a seat-belt but still get blunt-trama to the head? Should they also be placed in the "don't wanna fund your stupidity" department? I mean, if they too were wearing helmets I'm sure the risk of them becoming vegetables would have been greatly reduced!
How far do we take this? "Shouldn't have been walking on that icy sidewalk without a helmet! NO FUNDS FOR YOU! Shouldn't be taking a bath without a helmet! NO FUNDS FOR YOU!"
Think about this anywhere and everywhere you've ever seen someone get head-trama. Then think back to this post...they should have been wearing their helmet!
And as I read this again from a different perspective, perhaps deezl was calling out the makers of Celsius 41.11 because if you go to their site, no where does it say where or how or even if you can download their movie. Just lists how to get the DVD.
So maybe he's saying that Celsius 41.11 isn't true? Or is he saying that Michael Moore isn't true?
Just WTF is deezl saying? Or is he saying anything?
Or maybe to quote Mongo: "deezl just pawn in game of life".