I think as long as we don't start bringing calculators to rehearsal, then we're still ok. But some of the new tunes we're writing in Mr. Maps have us all counting like mad Shakespearian bookkeepers.
So the Mr. Maps line-up is solidified now, to 5 members. Andrew White, Chloe Cooper, Nick Smethurst, Sangdae Yang, and me (Chris Perren). The whole things started off with us learning the songs that I composed for honours last year, which were based on cut-up jams with Sangdae and some other musos. But finally we've mastered ("mastered"... I use this word very loosely) those few pieces and have started writing songs together as a band.
I've never been one to advocate writing songs as a band, I'm more into the write-it-myself-and-make-everyone-learn-the-parts-and-hurt-them-if-they-get-it-wrong kind of approach, but the dynamic between the five of us seems to be conducive to the collaborative writing process. The new tunes which are coming out are very pretty, and as illustrated earlier, a little mathy (don't worry though, we're not about to become the Mars Volta anytime soon...).
If you're curious about this new material, or about how the five of us plan to fit on a stage the size of pirate ship's plank, or what the difference really is between turtles and tortoises, (ok we probably won't be able to help you with that) you should come to Ric's Bar this Sunday, to see us, and also the great Skinny Jean from about 7:30pm.
Sunday, June 01, 2008
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Emo | The Subcultural Scapegoat of Our Generation
An article I wrote a few months ago and did nothing with, and may not make any sense. Thus I've posted it here, where making sense is not a necessary criteria for material...
-----------------------------------------
EMO
The subcultural scapegoat of our generation
Typing “emo” in the search at YouTube yields no less that 104,000 results. If we sort those results in order of popularity, 68 of the first 100 videos are piss-takes on “emo-kids”; the remainder consists of 25 montages of “hot emo boys” and “hot emo girls”, and the remaining 7 are a mix of unrelated results which happen to contain the letters e, m and o, and a small scattering of genuine emo music videos or serious “emo” material. Strange results to say the least, but certainly not unexpected. What does all this mean, however? That "emos" exist primarily to be ridiculed, secondarily to be lusted over for their dark sexy looks, and sometimes, very occasionally, as a subculture in their own right? Surely I’m missing something here. Why is it so fashionable or enjoyable to take stabs at this poor, eyeliner-wielding segment of youth culture?
I'd like to suggest some possible answers to this question. Firstly, It’s certainly not a new thing in human history to define ourselves not by who we are but by who we hate. We all need a sense of belonging, and it’s much easier and less committal to achieve this by jumping on an established bandwagon AGAINST something else. It makes a lot of sense; why take the effort to truly find your place in culture, and express your identity through it, when you get the desired result far more easily by joining a torch-weilding angry mob? Fair enough.
So what, then, made the angry mob want to lynch the emos? Why not surfers or footy jerks? The common justification is the emotional sensitivity and depression despite being part of a privileged middle-class. Many are disgusted by a group who are defined by their sadness and melancholy, when in perspective they have little to be sad about. This is certainly a fair accusation, but lets be broad about it. Let’s level the same pointed finger at middle-class hip-hop fans who are far from an oppressed minority, or the white suburban punks who have no reason to be so very aggressive. Every youth subculture has aspects which seem despicable to those outside of it, and I hardly think that the emotional sensitivity stereotypical of emos is any more deserving of persecution than any other trait displayed by any other youth subculture. Comfortable middle-class kids complaining that life is hard is not exclusive to emo - it’s called adolescence.
Let’s take a closer look at these emo-bashing videos plaguing my YouTube search. Some of them are genuinely hilarious. I’m not claiming to be righteous here, I’ll have a giggle at the emos’ expense like anyone else, as I would at any subcultural parody (except maybe the pink polo shirt rugby types, they’re far too big and scary). But in addition to the funny few, many of these Youtube videos are neither clever nor humorous. They’re just kids with webcams, whose understanding of satire goes as far as putting on make-up and pretending to cry a lot. On any other topic, something so uninspired would be ignored on youtube, but for some reason these videos, devoid of any creative spark or talent, are topping the Youtube viewer charts.
So what do the experts have to say? Brian Bailey of the University of Rochester defines emo as a “youth subculture that listens to a specific genre of music, which is characterized by feelings of vulnerability and a willingness to express heart-felt confessions about adolescence.” He also shows that there is a distinction between the original “independent” emos and more recent followers of the commercialised emo product. This distinction aside, language is defined by use, and therefore I feel that the best understanding of any word is what most people think it means today.
On the International social music database site, Last.fm, the genre tag “emo” displays a list of artists which the masses have deemed to fit in the category. Topping that list is American 5-piece, My Chemical Romance. Photos of the band show an image fairly consistent with the mainstream expectation of emo as seen in the youtube send-ups, notably the tight black jeans and eye make-up, and lyrical content agrees with Bailey’s definition of emo. So therefore, frontman of My Chemical Romance, Gerard Way should know a little bit about emo. Let’s see what he’s had to say about it. In an interview with The Maine Campus he revealed, “I think emo is fucking garbage, it's bullshit.” “I think there's bands that unfortunately we get lumped in with that are considered emo and by default that starts to make us emo.”
Wait! So the number one tagged “emo” band, who look, sound and act as the emo literature suggests they should, are in fact, not emo at all. So who is emo? anyone? The only bands to stand up and call themselves “emo” are the ones who did so before the commercialization and consequent humiliation of the whole thing. But their definition of the word is slightly different to the definition which the world has since collectively decided on, so we can only real call them “emo” as much we can call cassette tapes “high-fidelity.” So when it comes to actually describing something, the term “emo” is about as useful as a wire bathtub.
So lets all put our arms back down and turn the webcams off for a while. Take the spotlight off the poor emos and back on ourselves. Are we so afraid of having to address our own identities that our only way to feel safe is to fling mud at someone else? It’s the same mindset that gave such strong unity to Nazi Germany, except our Jews don’t even really exist in any clear sense, which makes us far stupider (Granted, I haven’t heard of any emo-gassing chambers, so maybe this is an exaggeration). Perhaps now that I have reached the sad stage of comparing emo-haters to Nazis, it may be about time for me to end my little rant. My last thought however, is that I believe it’s far healthier to define ourselves through expressing our own identities, our aspirations, and find community through positive rather than negative relationships. And finally, let’s give the emo kids a break.
-----------------------------------------
EMO
The subcultural scapegoat of our generation
Typing “emo” in the search at YouTube yields no less that 104,000 results. If we sort those results in order of popularity, 68 of the first 100 videos are piss-takes on “emo-kids”; the remainder consists of 25 montages of “hot emo boys” and “hot emo girls”, and the remaining 7 are a mix of unrelated results which happen to contain the letters e, m and o, and a small scattering of genuine emo music videos or serious “emo” material. Strange results to say the least, but certainly not unexpected. What does all this mean, however? That "emos" exist primarily to be ridiculed, secondarily to be lusted over for their dark sexy looks, and sometimes, very occasionally, as a subculture in their own right? Surely I’m missing something here. Why is it so fashionable or enjoyable to take stabs at this poor, eyeliner-wielding segment of youth culture?
I'd like to suggest some possible answers to this question. Firstly, It’s certainly not a new thing in human history to define ourselves not by who we are but by who we hate. We all need a sense of belonging, and it’s much easier and less committal to achieve this by jumping on an established bandwagon AGAINST something else. It makes a lot of sense; why take the effort to truly find your place in culture, and express your identity through it, when you get the desired result far more easily by joining a torch-weilding angry mob? Fair enough.
So what, then, made the angry mob want to lynch the emos? Why not surfers or footy jerks? The common justification is the emotional sensitivity and depression despite being part of a privileged middle-class. Many are disgusted by a group who are defined by their sadness and melancholy, when in perspective they have little to be sad about. This is certainly a fair accusation, but lets be broad about it. Let’s level the same pointed finger at middle-class hip-hop fans who are far from an oppressed minority, or the white suburban punks who have no reason to be so very aggressive. Every youth subculture has aspects which seem despicable to those outside of it, and I hardly think that the emotional sensitivity stereotypical of emos is any more deserving of persecution than any other trait displayed by any other youth subculture. Comfortable middle-class kids complaining that life is hard is not exclusive to emo - it’s called adolescence.
Let’s take a closer look at these emo-bashing videos plaguing my YouTube search. Some of them are genuinely hilarious. I’m not claiming to be righteous here, I’ll have a giggle at the emos’ expense like anyone else, as I would at any subcultural parody (except maybe the pink polo shirt rugby types, they’re far too big and scary). But in addition to the funny few, many of these Youtube videos are neither clever nor humorous. They’re just kids with webcams, whose understanding of satire goes as far as putting on make-up and pretending to cry a lot. On any other topic, something so uninspired would be ignored on youtube, but for some reason these videos, devoid of any creative spark or talent, are topping the Youtube viewer charts.
So what do the experts have to say? Brian Bailey of the University of Rochester defines emo as a “youth subculture that listens to a specific genre of music, which is characterized by feelings of vulnerability and a willingness to express heart-felt confessions about adolescence.” He also shows that there is a distinction between the original “independent” emos and more recent followers of the commercialised emo product. This distinction aside, language is defined by use, and therefore I feel that the best understanding of any word is what most people think it means today.
On the International social music database site, Last.fm, the genre tag “emo” displays a list of artists which the masses have deemed to fit in the category. Topping that list is American 5-piece, My Chemical Romance. Photos of the band show an image fairly consistent with the mainstream expectation of emo as seen in the youtube send-ups, notably the tight black jeans and eye make-up, and lyrical content agrees with Bailey’s definition of emo. So therefore, frontman of My Chemical Romance, Gerard Way should know a little bit about emo. Let’s see what he’s had to say about it. In an interview with The Maine Campus he revealed, “I think emo is fucking garbage, it's bullshit.” “I think there's bands that unfortunately we get lumped in with that are considered emo and by default that starts to make us emo.”
Wait! So the number one tagged “emo” band, who look, sound and act as the emo literature suggests they should, are in fact, not emo at all. So who is emo? anyone? The only bands to stand up and call themselves “emo” are the ones who did so before the commercialization and consequent humiliation of the whole thing. But their definition of the word is slightly different to the definition which the world has since collectively decided on, so we can only real call them “emo” as much we can call cassette tapes “high-fidelity.” So when it comes to actually describing something, the term “emo” is about as useful as a wire bathtub.
So lets all put our arms back down and turn the webcams off for a while. Take the spotlight off the poor emos and back on ourselves. Are we so afraid of having to address our own identities that our only way to feel safe is to fling mud at someone else? It’s the same mindset that gave such strong unity to Nazi Germany, except our Jews don’t even really exist in any clear sense, which makes us far stupider (Granted, I haven’t heard of any emo-gassing chambers, so maybe this is an exaggeration). Perhaps now that I have reached the sad stage of comparing emo-haters to Nazis, it may be about time for me to end my little rant. My last thought however, is that I believe it’s far healthier to define ourselves through expressing our own identities, our aspirations, and find community through positive rather than negative relationships. And finally, let’s give the emo kids a break.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Some thoughts on extreme dynamic compression in TV commercials
I don't watch a lot of T.V. these days, so when I do switch on the tube, the downright absurdity of some aspects of the whole television broadcasting trade just seem all the more stark and discordant.
I was watching a movie last night, an action-packed cop-drama-suspense with lots of gunfire and car chases. The kind of film that you have to turn down occasionally so that the explosions don't rattle your neighbourhood too much. But I found that there was no need to worry about the movie being loud, as when the commercial break came on, I was assaulted by a barrage of ear-splitting rug-sale-insanity and raucous advertising that launched through my TV at a good 2-3 dB above anything in the movie. So when the ads came on and I turned to my partner to discuss the last segment of the movie, any feeble sound that escaped my mouth was railroaded by attention seeking advertisers. Screw rock & roll, now we have insurance commercials.
Why does this happen? The explanation is simple enough. Advertising is about attracting attention, and if you're louder than the next guy, usually that secures it. So the studios that create the ads apply heavy compression and limiting to the soundtrack - tools which allow a sound to increase in its average volume, without exceeding the capacity of the circuit. The more you compress something, the louder it can be, however the quality is compromised. This is a problem that we can see in the music industry as well, sometimes called the "Loudness War" (click here for a more in-depth explanation). 30 or so years ago music producers would apply a little compression to pump up the volume a bit and make their tunes stand out, while trying to balance it with a quality sound. Then a few years later the next record producers want their records just a little louder than that, so they compromise the sound a little more and crank it up a notch. You can see where this is heading right? So now we live in a world where it's all completely squashed up with compression just to get heard amongst everything else. You ever made a mix CD with old tunes alongside new tunes, and you constantly have to adjust the volume? This is the Loudness War at work.
But advertising has more motivation than the record industry to crank their audio to the roof - firstly, because being noisy is far more important for them, and sound quality is far, far less important. If a voice-over screaming product names followed by prices with the word "crazy" thrown in every now and again is how you get your message is across, then having a silky-smooth, well-rounded sound quality must certainly take a back seat. So through natural evolution and adaptation, we have arrived at this dilemma where the ads, which you don't want to watch, are twice the volume of the T.V. programs, which you do want to watch. Absurd.
So one crazy part about this is that the whole reason why advertisers crank their volume is defeated by the fact that they are now all at the same gigantically irritating level. They are like people who get stuck in a traffic jam and start beeping their horns like its going to help. No single ad has achieved the goal of being louder than the others, because they all just match each other. The only effect it has is that if an ad DOESN'T sound like a jet engine taking of inside your brain, it won't be noticed. But even this is not entirely accurate, because the only ads that make me turn and look are the few that eerily silent.
But the really ridiculous part is this; while the media industry has evolved into this mess, people adapt as well. Most people I know have become pretty handy with a "mute" button. They're like a hotshot western gunslinger with that thing - "we're going to take a short bre-" BAM! Sound off. Peace. Ready to shoot again the moment the show comes back on. So what have the ads achieved by being louder? Competing for more attention has denied them any attention at all, and instead caused them to be completely ignored by their audience. (I myself am not blessed with the power of remote control, hence the frustration that led me to write this.)
So, we have ads competing to be louder, resulting in all ads being the same irritating volume and causing many viewers to shun them completely. *slow claps*. This is clearly not a good situation for any parties involved. And the solution is surely not that difficult. Most of this stuff is digital nowadays, right? The RMS or "average" volume of an audio track is not difficult to calculate. And if you can calculate that, you can bring the whole volume down accordingly, ensuring that everything sits at a comfortable and consistent level. You don't even have to manually do this - the humble iTunes on everyone's home computer has a function called "Sound Check" which performs this very trick. Surely that kind of technology is not out of reach for a big broadcast studio. And failing that, broadcasters are already able to place restrictions on advertising, such as the duration and content of commercials. For the sake of the quality of entertainment, I don't see why they cannot impose a restriction on the average volume. Any of these solutions would not only make for a better experience for the audience, but it would also lower the likelyhood that the adds will get muted due to a volume war which renders itself redundant anyway.
Well I'm glad that's out of my system now. I'm going to go watch a DVD.
I was watching a movie last night, an action-packed cop-drama-suspense with lots of gunfire and car chases. The kind of film that you have to turn down occasionally so that the explosions don't rattle your neighbourhood too much. But I found that there was no need to worry about the movie being loud, as when the commercial break came on, I was assaulted by a barrage of ear-splitting rug-sale-insanity and raucous advertising that launched through my TV at a good 2-3 dB above anything in the movie. So when the ads came on and I turned to my partner to discuss the last segment of the movie, any feeble sound that escaped my mouth was railroaded by attention seeking advertisers. Screw rock & roll, now we have insurance commercials.
Why does this happen? The explanation is simple enough. Advertising is about attracting attention, and if you're louder than the next guy, usually that secures it. So the studios that create the ads apply heavy compression and limiting to the soundtrack - tools which allow a sound to increase in its average volume, without exceeding the capacity of the circuit. The more you compress something, the louder it can be, however the quality is compromised. This is a problem that we can see in the music industry as well, sometimes called the "Loudness War" (click here for a more in-depth explanation). 30 or so years ago music producers would apply a little compression to pump up the volume a bit and make their tunes stand out, while trying to balance it with a quality sound. Then a few years later the next record producers want their records just a little louder than that, so they compromise the sound a little more and crank it up a notch. You can see where this is heading right? So now we live in a world where it's all completely squashed up with compression just to get heard amongst everything else. You ever made a mix CD with old tunes alongside new tunes, and you constantly have to adjust the volume? This is the Loudness War at work.
But advertising has more motivation than the record industry to crank their audio to the roof - firstly, because being noisy is far more important for them, and sound quality is far, far less important. If a voice-over screaming product names followed by prices with the word "crazy" thrown in every now and again is how you get your message is across, then having a silky-smooth, well-rounded sound quality must certainly take a back seat. So through natural evolution and adaptation, we have arrived at this dilemma where the ads, which you don't want to watch, are twice the volume of the T.V. programs, which you do want to watch. Absurd.
So one crazy part about this is that the whole reason why advertisers crank their volume is defeated by the fact that they are now all at the same gigantically irritating level. They are like people who get stuck in a traffic jam and start beeping their horns like its going to help. No single ad has achieved the goal of being louder than the others, because they all just match each other. The only effect it has is that if an ad DOESN'T sound like a jet engine taking of inside your brain, it won't be noticed. But even this is not entirely accurate, because the only ads that make me turn and look are the few that eerily silent.
But the really ridiculous part is this; while the media industry has evolved into this mess, people adapt as well. Most people I know have become pretty handy with a "mute" button. They're like a hotshot western gunslinger with that thing - "we're going to take a short bre-" BAM! Sound off. Peace. Ready to shoot again the moment the show comes back on. So what have the ads achieved by being louder? Competing for more attention has denied them any attention at all, and instead caused them to be completely ignored by their audience. (I myself am not blessed with the power of remote control, hence the frustration that led me to write this.)
So, we have ads competing to be louder, resulting in all ads being the same irritating volume and causing many viewers to shun them completely. *slow claps*. This is clearly not a good situation for any parties involved. And the solution is surely not that difficult. Most of this stuff is digital nowadays, right? The RMS or "average" volume of an audio track is not difficult to calculate. And if you can calculate that, you can bring the whole volume down accordingly, ensuring that everything sits at a comfortable and consistent level. You don't even have to manually do this - the humble iTunes on everyone's home computer has a function called "Sound Check" which performs this very trick. Surely that kind of technology is not out of reach for a big broadcast studio. And failing that, broadcasters are already able to place restrictions on advertising, such as the duration and content of commercials. For the sake of the quality of entertainment, I don't see why they cannot impose a restriction on the average volume. Any of these solutions would not only make for a better experience for the audience, but it would also lower the likelyhood that the adds will get muted due to a volume war which renders itself redundant anyway.
Well I'm glad that's out of my system now. I'm going to go watch a DVD.
Friday, January 25, 2008
He is 42, five feet eight inches tall...
Rehearsals for Mr. Maps are well underway, and it's all sounding great. And yes, I stole the band name from a Books song... but in total homage and respect for their artistic genius. Sangdae, Andrew and I are all working hard to put the tunes together live, and having a blast all the while. Andrew is skipping off to Japan for a while (lucky bastard) so I'm expecting he'll come back with super-human robotic bass-playing skills, or possibly an original Moog. Either way it'll be good for the band.
Our first show is pencilled in for March 5 at Ric's bar, supporting the always explosive Skinny Jean.
We're also canvassing our wares over the net, so be sure to check out these websites:
Mr. Maps Myspace
Mr. Maps on Last.fm
Mr. Maps on Triple J Unearthed (vote and review us PLEASE)
In addition to that, Brisbane has hosted three great gigs recently that I was lucky enough to rock along to, those being Caribou, at the Gallery of Modern Art; Ben Frost, Chris Corsano and Lawrence English at IMA; and the breathtaking Battles at the Zoo. All very inspiring for us as we put our collective nose to this year's musical grindstone.
Our first show is pencilled in for March 5 at Ric's bar, supporting the always explosive Skinny Jean.
We're also canvassing our wares over the net, so be sure to check out these websites:
Mr. Maps Myspace
Mr. Maps on Last.fm
Mr. Maps on Triple J Unearthed (vote and review us PLEASE)
In addition to that, Brisbane has hosted three great gigs recently that I was lucky enough to rock along to, those being Caribou, at the Gallery of Modern Art; Ben Frost, Chris Corsano and Lawrence English at IMA; and the breathtaking Battles at the Zoo. All very inspiring for us as we put our collective nose to this year's musical grindstone.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
2007 Wrap-up
So as the last bits of 2007 get swept under the rug, I thought I'd do a bit of a round-up of the highs and lows... 2007 was a strange year. I felt like I spent the entire year waiting for something or other, and not achieving anything immediate. Having said that, I did achieve a few good things this year, and I think I've set myself up for a pretty eventful 2008.
So a few of the little victories of 2007:
1. Launching my E.P. at The Zoo, and playing with talented Musos like Shem Allen and Sangdae Yang at various shows this year.
2. Completing my compositions and thesis for honours, and scoring first class (7) on them.
3. The Mini animation.
4. Various Blackbrow successes, for example a feature on Undergroundfilm.
5. Playing shows in Japan.
Exciting things on the horizon in 2008:
1. A new Blackbrow film.
2. My new band, Mr. Maps
3. A performance collaboration with director Shane Jones.
4. More regular blog entries... (I know, I know)
5. Who knows??!?!
So a few of the little victories of 2007:
1. Launching my E.P. at The Zoo, and playing with talented Musos like Shem Allen and Sangdae Yang at various shows this year.
2. Completing my compositions and thesis for honours, and scoring first class (7) on them.
3. The Mini animation.
4. Various Blackbrow successes, for example a feature on Undergroundfilm.
5. Playing shows in Japan.
Exciting things on the horizon in 2008:
1. A new Blackbrow film.
2. My new band, Mr. Maps
3. A performance collaboration with director Shane Jones.
4. More regular blog entries... (I know, I know)
5. Who knows??!?!
Sunday, April 01, 2007
Wooden Logic
The BRAND NEW EP:
Finally finished, with 6 tracks and some pretty artwork by Pete foley.
Also on the schedule, Tokyo Tour Dates:
Thursday 12 April:
8pm at The Pink Cow, Shibuya
(For Flo Union Event)
Sunday 15 April:
7pm at Loopline, Sendagaya
(with Cartonbox and Right Mind)
Sunday, January 28, 2007
BAH-RIZ-BUN
Brisbane is the same as I remember... the weather is a little bit odd though. Now I'm back at QUT working on my Honours. I'm lucky enough to be working under the direction of Robert Davidson, of Post-Classical masters Topology. The finished product will have something to do with Post-Rock and Cut-and-paste aesthetics in acoustic music... more on that when I know what the hell I mean by it.
As if I hadn't had enough of the place, I'm planning a trip to Japan in April, to do a few gigs and spend some time in the studio with Cartonbox working with them on their new album. Should be exciting. Also getting some final comments and putting the polish on my EP, coming out pretty soon...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
