What kind of hippies drink Starbucks, anyway?
It was hot today. Not scorching hot, but sweaty and uncomfortable accompanied by a rather unpleasant slate gray skyline. My lady friend and I rode our bikes over to Starbucks in the late evening to spend a gift card that my mother had received at work.
First of all, I'm sure everyone's noticed how ALL THE SIZES AT STARBUCKS MEAN LARGE! Why is that? Tall, Grande, Veinte... It just means LARGE in three different languages. It's almost as bad as that ice cream shop Cold Stone that requires its patrons to order in predicates rather than sizes. Listen- "Love it" is not a size. It's not even a noun!
We ordered two of the sweetest, whipped creamiest, least coffee-like drinks on the menu. I believe they were called Veinte Mint Chocolate Frappuccinos. I thought mine was pretty foul, and at over 4 bucks a pop, not worth a repeat visit.
Anyway, this is where we saw the hippies. Not an uncommon sight around here, especially at a coffee shop, but... Starbucks? Probably the only coffee shop south of downtown that DOESN'T smell like a bong. They were a young couple, probably in their late 20s. The guy was wearing a blue bandanna with nappy dreaded hair sticking out the back, and a brown leather sling over his shoulder that held a pretty big jug of water. His lady friend looked equally nappy, and they had a pretty young kid, maybe 7 years old, wearing overalls and no shirt. They hung out inside for a few minutes and left their dogs (Two nice looking dogs, well trained, but with NO LEASHES and NO COLLARS!) outside to wait. The entire time all I was thinking was "Damn, one of these dogs is going to get hit." I mean, I have a well trained dog, too. These dogs looked genuinely pretty scared and confused out there, and they were surrounded by busy streets and parking lots. I even saw one of the dogs walking around in a nearby parking lot behind the cars. Don't these people think for a second that nobody in that parking lot could see a dog crouched behind their car? Ain't nobody gonna roll over my pooch.
Oh, and by the way, Starbucks doesn't have very good cookies, either.
I guess they couldn't inveigle their way into my wallet this time. Granted, the beverage I had can hardly qualify as coffee.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Internet killed the pop star
"Does anyone really buy albums anymore?"
A wonderful musician, and good friend of mine, posed this question to me yesterday. We all know how the RIAA and MPAA feel about 'peer to peer' file sharing- a very hot trend with the younger generation. The RIAA Website is quick to point out the immorality behind downloading music on the internet. They characterize recording artists as the main victims; If everyone can download music for free, nobody will buy CDs, recording artists can't make money, and all hell will break loose. So is the recording industry doomed?
Here's something you may not have considered: The recording industry is relatively young. Perhaps you jazz fans know what I'm talking about here- The Original Dixieland Jazz Band had the first album ever recorded for commercial sale back in 1917, just a little over 90 years ago. So what does this mean to musical artists? Well, for one thing, it means that for all the thousands of years humans have been making music, shrink wrapped pop music represents a tiny sliver of time. Working in a recording studio is simply not as practical as it was in the days before Apple's Garage Band. Serious amateur musicians can record high quality audio with programs like Propellerhead's Reason software and virtually mimic hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of instruments. This severely levels the playing field between independent artists and bloated pop album producers like Columbia Records. With websites like myspace, it's easy to independently bring your music to the masses.
So is this the end of music as we know it? Hardly. In addition to overlooking the fact that many artists are making money providing their fans with direct and affordable MP3 downloads (which is far more profitable for the artist, who could potentially reap 100 percent of the profits), the RIAA has overlooked the fact that a great number of musicians are primarily performing artists, not recording artists. Will people stop seeing their favorite bands live because they can get recordings for free? Most definitely not. The end of fat cat recording companies does not spell the end of profit for musicians.
I, for one, welcome the death of the record industry. After the countless Britney Spears and Backstreet Boys clones of the 90s-- faux musicians created by corporate America and spoon fed to kids via MTV and top 40 radio-- aren't we ready to bring back hard working performing musicians with class and talent?
A wonderful musician, and good friend of mine, posed this question to me yesterday. We all know how the RIAA and MPAA feel about 'peer to peer' file sharing- a very hot trend with the younger generation. The RIAA Website is quick to point out the immorality behind downloading music on the internet. They characterize recording artists as the main victims; If everyone can download music for free, nobody will buy CDs, recording artists can't make money, and all hell will break loose. So is the recording industry doomed?
Here's something you may not have considered: The recording industry is relatively young. Perhaps you jazz fans know what I'm talking about here- The Original Dixieland Jazz Band had the first album ever recorded for commercial sale back in 1917, just a little over 90 years ago. So what does this mean to musical artists? Well, for one thing, it means that for all the thousands of years humans have been making music, shrink wrapped pop music represents a tiny sliver of time. Working in a recording studio is simply not as practical as it was in the days before Apple's Garage Band. Serious amateur musicians can record high quality audio with programs like Propellerhead's Reason software and virtually mimic hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of instruments. This severely levels the playing field between independent artists and bloated pop album producers like Columbia Records. With websites like myspace, it's easy to independently bring your music to the masses.
So is this the end of music as we know it? Hardly. In addition to overlooking the fact that many artists are making money providing their fans with direct and affordable MP3 downloads (which is far more profitable for the artist, who could potentially reap 100 percent of the profits), the RIAA has overlooked the fact that a great number of musicians are primarily performing artists, not recording artists. Will people stop seeing their favorite bands live because they can get recordings for free? Most definitely not. The end of fat cat recording companies does not spell the end of profit for musicians.
I, for one, welcome the death of the record industry. After the countless Britney Spears and Backstreet Boys clones of the 90s-- faux musicians created by corporate America and spoon fed to kids via MTV and top 40 radio-- aren't we ready to bring back hard working performing musicians with class and talent?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)