<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:iweb="http://www.apple.com/iweb" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>What I’m Listening to</title>
    <link>http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Blog.html</link>
    <description>Life these days is a mess of media.  My life is no exception.  As I weed through it I find that I've become the &quot;go to&quot; guy for a number of people looking for something to watch, or something to listen to.  So why not lay it out for anyone that wants to check it out.  The charts to the left show what I'm actually listening to day to day, and I'll try to post a bit now and then about shows I've gone to, bands I've found, projects I'm working on, or just life.  Who knows what will show up.  Check back from time to time...&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;</description>
    <generator>iWeb 2.0.2</generator>
    <item>
      <title>Compression</title>
      <link>http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Entries/2008/1/21_Compression.html</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">ce8b3cef-5256-4115-8f35-c673a2bfac44</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:51:06 -0800</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Entries/2008/1/21_Compression_files/01b-waveform20recorded20at20excessive20volume..jpg&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Media/01b-waveform20recorded20at20excessive20volume._1.jpg&quot; style=&quot;float:left; padding-right:10px; padding-bottom:10px; width:236px; height:114px;&quot;/&gt;&lt;/a&gt;I came across an interesting article in a recent issue of Rolling Stone.  It was about compression killing music.  Not compression as in toward smaller file size (although that does alter quality), but rather compression in the mixing process.  The push toward loudness.  The argument was that with digital technology we can now alter tracks to make them play louder than ever before without distorting.  In the course of this though the waveform is squashed into what ends up hitting our ears as more and more of what is essentially a messy buzz.  There’s still music in there, but the extremes are eliminated.  Anyway, I’m just regurgitating, click &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17777619/the_death_of_high_fidelity/print&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; to read it yourself, and another one from &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/commentary/listeningpost/2007/10/listeningpost_1029&quot;&gt;yahoo&lt;/a&gt; that I think explains well why I still buy things on vinyl.  Partially it’s to hear what something sounded like when it came out, but the technology also doesn’t allow for the massive amounts of compression.  Extremes are still extremes.  Again, I digress.  Here’s the point.  I’m starting a list, and feel free to suggest other ones, of tracks that are worth checking out as an example of what I’m talking about.  If you can get them on vinyl and then mp3, do it.  I’ll also try to post copies ripped from record next to the file off of iTunes.  You’ll see the difference.  I hope to update this every time I run into another good track.  Enjoy. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Song one:&lt;br/&gt;Tweeter and the Monkey Man - The Traveling Wilburys&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Phono Rip-                         Digital Remaster-&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;</description>
      <enclosure url="http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Entries/2008/1/21_Compression_files/01b-waveform20recorded20at20excessive20volume..jpg" length="62645" type="image/jpeg"/>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Daft Punk and Meditations on Techno</title>
      <link>http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Entries/2007/11/26_Daft_Punk_and_Meditations_on_Techno.html</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">90df72da-3d8e-457c-b131-dcc3184f817b</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:01:52 -0800</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Entries/2007/11/26_Daft_Punk_and_Meditations_on_Techno_files/l_d1319b8b0e89281f346fcc3d65603dc3.png&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Media/l_d1319b8b0e89281f346fcc3d65603dc3.png&quot; style=&quot;float:left; padding-right:10px; padding-bottom:10px; width:364px; height:321px;&quot;/&gt;&lt;/a&gt;So after a couple weeks of listening to nothing but Springsteen following a show of his I decided to kick this thing off with something other than idol worship.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;So, I’ve always been a reasonably big fan of techno.  That’s not to say I’ve done ecstasy and passed out of dehydration at a party as have some of my friends - more committed disciples than I.  But if The Chemical Brothers are touring I’ll check it out.  This year I caught Dj Shadow and Cut Chemist doing their “The Hard Sell” set, that was one of the best shows I’ve been to this year.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I’ve been working on a hypothesis for a while that I’ve floated by a few people and it has always resulted in heated debate, so why not throw it out here....I think techno may be the closest original artform to improvisational jazz that may be left.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Anyway, baring the fact that I mostly likely suffer from standard generational lack of foresight...the arguments goes like this.  Jazz is essentially an artform built on group improvisation.  And the only way to coordinate such a group is to run with certain themes on top of which something different can be built.  So we have the idea of improvisation on a theme.  These themes were the songs that the artist would write, and record.  But when you go to see them live you stand little chance of actually hearing that song note for note.  Sure you hear something that reminds you of “So What”, the themes are there, but note for note, the song from the album you bought the week before?  No.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;A Daft Punk show, or a Chemical Brothers show, and numerous other touring techno/trance acts function the same way.  “Alive 2007” is a great example.  Throughout the course of the set you’ll hear the basics of DP hits like “One More Time” and “Da Funk” just enough so that you can recognize the song you like, but they are mixed together with other songs, in different order, different tempos, sometimes with something you’ve never heard before and sometimes with a piece of a song you also recognize.  Technology has advanced to the point that the bevy of loops, samples and clips that could be used to build a new sound on a old theme is limitless, and this is ignoring the fact that these guys made the sounds with keyboards to begin with, so playing live isn’t out either. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Now I can’t say that I’ve ever seen two shows back to back, but what I hear from friends is that particularly with acts like the two mentioned above no show is the same.  And it does make sense, trance DJs are well known and sought after acts around the world for this very reason, sure they show up with a few crates of records and a laptop, but what’s going to come out of the speakers is unknown.  To me that’s not much different then showing up with a chest full of trumpet runs, or fingers full of guitar licks.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;What do you think?&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;~A&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;</description>
      <enclosure url="http://web.mac.com/kerp/MMM/Blog/Entries/2007/11/26_Daft_Punk_and_Meditations_on_Techno_files/l_d1319b8b0e89281f346fcc3d65603dc3.png" length="67545" type="image/png"/>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
