From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V6 #288 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Thursday, September 28 2000 Volume 06 : Number 288 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: the day the solid format died [Bill ] Re: the day the solid format died [Joseph Zitt ] Re: the day the solid format died [Joseph Zitt ] RE: the day the solid format died [Phil Hudson ] RE: the day the solid format died ["smolla" ] dearth of the solid format [dmw ] Re: dearth of the solid format [Joseph Zitt ] Re: the day the solid format died [Joseph Zitt ] RE: dearth of the solid format [Phil Hudson ] Re: Rita Ribeiro ["Rosana L. de Oliveira" ] Re: Rita Ribeiro [Neal Copperman ] RE: the day the solid format died ["Foghorn J Fornorn" ] project lo next week [meredith ] Re: the day the solid format died [Yngve Hauge ] Re: project lo next week [Jeffrey Burka ] Re: Rita Ribeiro [Bill Mazur ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:50:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Bill Subject: RE: the day the solid format died On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Phil Hudson wrote: > another extension of the television. Give me something that isn't held in > place by a fragile stream of magnetically aimed electrons. I personally enjoy the look, feel, and smell of printed paper. Something about flipping the pages as you move along... - - Bill G. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:15:17 -0400 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: the day the solid format died On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 08:53:20PM +0200, Yngve Hauge wrote: > Not long ago I looked through my LPs and came across Fleetwood Mac's Tusk > album. Not very surpricing though as I'm a huge fan and have collected > them for years. That release got some of my favorite covers (the packaging > is pretty interesting in itself as it got separate covers for each of the > LPs in this double-release) of my favorite covers, and I've spent some > time studying it and trying to figure out references - the photos are > really wonderful as well. Ah, I was thinking of mentioning that one. I remember getting it the day it came out, and eagerly (and carefully) digging through layers of covers to get to the actual vinyl. If I ever were to compile a list of Perfect Album Sides, Side 4 of Tusk would be way near the top. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:30:33 -0400 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: the day the solid format died On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 02:49:25PM -0400, dmw wrote: > the book is an interface for accessing information that has been refined > over hundreds of years. a book gives you qualitative and quantitative > information that you probably don't think about, because the interface is > so intutitive, you don't think of it AS an "interface." but how many > literature students (or others) have been able to quickly find a passage > you were looking for (without knowing an exact search string) because you > remembered that it was on the top left hand side of a page? how many > people have decided to stay up an extra half-hour because the feel of the > pages under your right hand told you that that's how long it would take to > finish the novel? I suspect the top-left-hand-side method will be feasible -- I've used it flipping through PDF documents. And as for knowing how much is left, there's always scroll bars. > now, how many people have been unable to finish reading a book because > it's batteries suddenly died? how many people have been unable to read a > book because of glare conditions that couldn't be solved by putting on > sunglasses or moving closer to the light? Every technology has it comparable plusses and minuses. Including sunglasses, electric lights, candles, and the sun. > and when's the last time you used any high-tech device at all that > operated in a way that suggested that interface design/human factors had > been the PRIMARY operational consideration, instead of a poor second (at > best) to engineering-imposed constraints? ever?? 'cuz i sure haven't. if > you've ever seen a digital alarm clock as easy to use as the old fashioned > analogue type where you could see the alarm hand, i'd love to see it. Hmm. It's been a while that I've seen a digital alarm as difficult to use as the analog model. That interfaces tend to suck doesn't mean that they have to. As a tech writer (my career has looped back), I am committed to creating useful documentation, though 99.9999% of all docs are terrible. As Rabbi Tarfon (I think) said, "While you may not be able to complete the task, you still have to try." > i hate the idea of needing a 'computer' or 'computer-like' device to > listen to music, and i hate the idea of needing one to read far, far more. OTOH, having to deal with the expense and effort of transporting a room full of books everytime that I move, being able to put them all in a lunchbox is *very* appealing. Similarly, I once distrusted the somewhat silly idea of using computers instead of letters and phone calls... - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:16:41 -0700 From: Phil Hudson Subject: RE: the day the solid format died It was the first ever vinyl 12” disk with the cover artwork actually on the disk. It looked great, but, the tech was not great and the disks wore out really quickly; never mind, hang it on the wall instead! Phil > >Anyone still have a copy of the first ever ( to my knowledge) graphically >enhanced 12"; Curved Air? >> No. Never heard of it. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:33:45 GMT From: "smolla" Subject: RE: the day the solid format died I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Supertramps "Breakfast In America" yet. Great album artwork, but most important, an album that's a pure pleasure to listen to - start to finish! Steve http://www.siscom.net/~smolla/jewelry2.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:33:26 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: dearth of the solid format On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Joseph Zitt wrote: > I suspect the top-left-hand-side method will be feasible -- I've used > it flipping through PDF documents. And as for knowing how much is > left, there's always scroll bars. scroll bars are a good example of an interface element that i think is appalling, especially compared with the ease of flipping to an approximate place in a book. they require a pointer device to be moved to areas of the screen far away form the most statistically likely workspaces on the screen, and they require precise positioning, both horizontally and vertically -- the behaviour of a scroll bar when a document gets over a hundred pages or so is particularly egregious. > Every technology has it comparable plusses and minuses. Including > sunglasses, electric lights, candles, and the sun. true. i should have said what i really meant: i don't want to read anything backlit with any technology i've ever seen. i have yet to see a non-backlit technology -- at any price -- on the other hand, that offers satisfactory contrast and angle-viewing characteristics. > Hmm. It's been a while that I've seen a digital alarm as difficult to > use as the analog model. i think i would argue that indicates that you have been so accustomed to the silly things a digital clock demands that you aren't thinking about them. the vast majority of digital alarm clocks i've seen have the following (undesirable, imNeverho) traits: * default alarm time is midnight. how frequently do you set an alarm for then? * 'resetting' the alarm requires depressing two or more buttons simultaneously. in many cases, resetting the time requires depressing two or more buttons in a way that makes it all-too-easy to reset the time when you want to reset the alarm. in many cases, it's all too easy to reset the time or alarm time when blindly flailing to stop the thing's racket. * there are two common protocols for advancing alarm time: paired hour/minute advance buttons, and fast/slow advance buttons. the minute advance, in particular makes it inordinately difficult to set values such as "quarter of seven." fast/slow is markedly preferable, but it's easier to overshoot... * when you overshoot the desired time, you can't just back up a little bit - - you have to reset and advance all the way to the desired time again. * if something is impairing your concentration, it is appallingly easy to set the alarm time for, say, 7pm instead of 7am. * the snooze alarm has a nine minute duration. i'm not a sleep researcher, but i think this is far from optimal. (in fact, the fantastically expensive alarm clocks designed for people with serious S.A.D. problems have very different snooze behaviors) in contrast, the analog alarm clock i used to have * had a single button to shut off the alarm - no interface component in common between shutting off the alarm and any time-setting operation. * single post on the back to set the alarm time. (it took about 4 seconds to put it anywhere you wanted, and it was no trouble to back it up a little bit) * had no posibility of am/pm confusion * operation to set time was physically distinguished from operation to set alarm - by tactile feedback on post, as well as position. * the digital alarm clock offers greater precision (but i think a 5 minute tolerance is reasonable precision.) * had no 'snooze' feature. ...and yes, i have spent way the hell too much time analzying this, and other devices. (there's not too much wrong with my coffee maker, but i have a very low-tech coffee maker) > That interfaces tend to suck doesn't mean that they have to. As a tech > writer (my career has looped back), I am committed to creating useful > documentation, though 99.9999% of all docs are terrible. As Rabbi > Tarfon (I think) said, "While you may not be able to complete the > task, you still have to try." i completely agree with this. i found neal gerschenfield (sp?)'s _when things start to think_ about 2/3 fascinating, and thought he had a lot of good suggestions about how to make usable information interfaces (i.e., interfaces that you don't think of as such). and i spend some of my professional time trying to design the best information-exchange interfaces that i can within the established constraints of monitor/keyboard/mouse behavior. on the other hand, as long as everyone looks at me like a nut when i say that their digital alarm clock is horribly designed -- i.e., as long as people tolerate ghastly interfaces -- there's little market impetus to change the way things are done. VCR programming is another good example - -- when programmable VCR's first hit the consumer market, they were ludicrous - the VCR equivalent of punch cards, requiring long sequences of entries with no errors, and no way to correct errors. the on-screen programming of my VCR is an order of magnitude better, but still horrible - -- it requires numerous redundant physical actions to perform reasonable common tasks -- but just about everyone CAN do it, so there's no reason for anyone to try to do it better. we've all been accustomed to the idea that's okay that when you get a new device, you need to learn how it works, and adapt YOUR behavior to match what the design constraints of the device. that's appropriate in some circumstances, i suppose, but in devices that purport to make life easier, or devices designed to accomplish tasks with modes that are highly variable on an individual basis -- like information transfer devices -- i think it's absurd. something like the palm-pilot 'learning' how you form characters with its stylus is a tentative step in the right direction -- except that it doesn't work very well, and everywhere i go, i see people reduced to pointing at the letter they want and tapping. ugh. call me "old curmudgeon" now, i think i've earned it? > OTOH, having to deal with the expense and effort of transporting a room > full of books everytime that I move, being able to put them all in a > lunchbox is *very* appealing. point taken. > Similarly, I once distrusted the somewhat silly idea of using > computers instead of letters and phone calls... point taken. - -- d. np cherry soda _joyride_ - - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr pathos - - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews - - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:31:04 -0400 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: dearth of the solid format [I think I pass my personal best in Length of Utterly Off Topic Ecto Messages when I write:] On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 04:33:26PM -0400, dmw wrote: Interesting stuff on a subject on which we both seem to be fanatics... > scroll bars are a good example of an interface element that i think is > appalling, especially compared with the ease of flipping to an approximate > place in a book. they require a pointer device to be moved to areas of > the screen far away form the most statistically likely workspaces on the > screen, and they require precise positioning, both horizontally and > vertically -- the behaviour of a scroll bar when a document gets over a > hundred pages or so is particularly egregious. Hmm... is the corner/edge of a book used for flipping a statistically likely workspace on it? Even worse, when holding a book in two hands, flipping pages requires juggling it to do so, with a good chance of dropping it. And the behavior of a page flip on large documents is pretty bad, too, considering each 100 pages takes up about 1/4 to 1/2 inch, compared to the much greater length of scroll bars. Some scroll bars are better than others, though -- the ones on the Mac that don't show you the relation of the size of the viewed area to the whole drive me a bit nuts, as do their putting both the up and down scroll buttons at the bottom of the bar. And the worst are the ones that stop the scroll and jump back to where you were within the document if you go out of the scroll bar -- it seems clear to me that if you begin a stroke within the scroll bar, it should ignore horizontal information in the stroke and just go up-down. (The one in emacs does that (by default at least), which I like using, though certainly user-hostile in some ways.) > > Every technology has it comparable plusses and minuses. Including > > sunglasses, electric lights, candles, and the sun. > > true. i should have said what i really meant: i don't want to read > anything backlit with any technology i've ever seen. i have yet to see a > non-backlit technology -- at any price -- on the other hand, that offers > satisfactory contrast and angle-viewing characteristics. I've heard -- though again I haven't yet seen -- that the new display technologies rival paper, backlit or not. > > Hmm. It's been a while that I've seen a digital alarm as difficult to > > use as the analog model. > > i think i would argue that indicates that you have been so accustomed to > the silly things a digital clock demands that you aren't thinking about > them. the vast majority of digital alarm clocks i've seen have the > following (undesirable, imNeverho) traits: > > * default alarm time is midnight. how frequently do you set an alarm for > then? What would be a better choice? > * 'resetting' the alarm requires depressing two or more buttons > simultaneously. in many cases, resetting the time requires depressing two > or more buttons in a way that makes it all-too-easy to reset the time when > you want to reset the alarm. in many cases, it's all too easy to reset > the time or alarm time when blindly flailing to stop the thing's racket. But not quite as easy as twisting the wrong knob on analog clocks I've experienced. > * there are two common protocols for advancing alarm time: paired > hour/minute advance buttons, and fast/slow advance buttons. the minute > advance, in particular makes it inordinately difficult to set values such > as "quarter of seven." fast/slow is markedly preferable, but it's easier > to overshoot... > * when you overshoot the desired time, you can't just back up a little bit > - you have to reset and advance all the way to the desired time again. I dislike this too, and am surprised that clocks don't have buttons that go the other way. > * if something is impairing your concentration, it is appallingly easy to > set the alarm time for, say, 7pm instead of 7am. The same as analog. > * the snooze alarm has a nine minute duration. i'm not a sleep > researcher, but i think this is far from optimal. (in fact, the > fantastically expensive alarm clocks designed for people with serious > S.A.D. problems have very different snooze behaviors) Hmmm, never used the snooze feature, so I can't say. > in contrast, the analog alarm clock i used to have > > * had a single button to shut off the alarm - no interface component in > common between shutting off the alarm and any time-setting operation. Same as my digital. > * single post on the back to set the alarm time. (it took about 4 seconds > to put it anywhere you wanted, and it was no trouble to back it up a > little bit) I've found troubles with precision on most analog clocks I've used, especially when, with unexceptional use, the hands and knobs get wobbly. > * had no posibility of am/pm confusion On a 12 hour clock face?! How? > * operation to set time was physically distinguished from operation to set > alarm - by tactile feedback on post, as well as position. > * the digital alarm clock offers greater precision (but i think a 5 > minute tolerance is reasonable precision.) Ah, as I'd mentioned before. > * had no 'snooze' feature. I've had analog clocks that did, but I haven't used the feature. > ...and yes, i have spent way the hell too much time analzying this, and > other devices. (there's not too much wrong with my coffee maker, but i > have a very low-tech coffee maker) Me, too -- I've been getting infuriated at bad design since I was a kid, and am continually sketching ways to make them better. When I was in college, I revamped the operations in our cafteria to make things flow more effectively. Little things like putting cutlery at the end of the line rather than the beginning, so people pick up the right tools for the foods they've chosen rather than either not using them (but they still need to be washed) or having to doubleback and break into the line for stuff they didn't realize they'd need, can make a big difference. > i completely agree with this. i found neal gerschenfield (sp?)'s _when > things start to think_ about 2/3 fascinating, and thought he had a lot of > good suggestions about how to make usable information interfaces (i.e., > interfaces that you don't think of as such). Gotta read this. A lot of where I'm coming from is based in Donald Norman's work and (longer ago and more dimly) Papanek's "Design for the Real World". > and i spend some of my > professional time trying to design the best information-exchange > interfaces that i can within the established constraints of > monitor/keyboard/mouse behavior. Hmm... exactly where I'd like my career to be going. Maybe I should ask you backchannel where you work, what you do, and if they need more people... > on the other hand, as long as everyone looks at me like a nut when i say > that their digital alarm clock is horribly designed -- i.e., as long as > people tolerate ghastly interfaces -- there's little market impetus to > change the way things are done. VCR programming is another good example > -- when programmable VCR's first hit the consumer market, they were > ludicrous - the VCR equivalent of punch cards, requiring long sequences of > entries with no errors, and no way to correct errors. the on-screen > programming of my VCR is an order of magnitude better, but still horrible > -- it requires numerous redundant physical actions to perform reasonable > common tasks -- but just about everyone CAN do it, so there's no reason > for anyone to try to do it better. My parents are still completely frustrated with their VCR, and use it for playback only. Even worse is their CD player: it has a 3-CD bay (a feature for which they have no use) and they are baffled as to which CD is going to play when they turn it on. I'm still nervous about my own VCR. (OTOH, my father may be an exceptional case. An actual question from him: "When I run a program by bringing it up in Word, the printer goes crazy. Is this because my monitor has EGA?") > we've all been accustomed to the idea that's okay that when you get a new > device, you need to learn how it works, and adapt YOUR behavior to match > what the design constraints of the device. that's appropriate in some > circumstances, i suppose, but in devices that purport to make life easier, > or devices designed to accomplish tasks with modes that are highly > variable on an individual basis -- like information transfer devices -- i > think it's absurd. Agreed. I have a very low tolerance for stuff that is tough to learn (which makes me an utterly atypical home Linux user). I only just managed to get a home router working -- and that's because rather than the "ridiculously simple" windows or Linux based systems I'd been trying over the course of three years, I got a hardware device with two ports, one of which is clearly marked as connecting to the inside network, and the other of which is clearly marked as pointing to the outside, and which required about 2 minutes configuration from within a browser (though even that would stop more extreme newbies cold). > something like the palm-pilot 'learning' how you form characters with its > stylus is a tentative step in the right direction -- except that it > doesn't work very well, and everywhere i go, i see people reduced to > pointing at the letter they want and tapping. ugh. I wasn't aware that the pilot 'learned' handwriting -- you have to do it its way. I have about 80% success with that, but my success at hitting the tiny letters on the keyboard image is even worse. But both are easier than deciphering and filing info I've scribbled on pieces of paper in a pocket. Especially after the pocket has gone through the wash :-) n.p. Tom Waits: Bone Machine n.r. Donald Norman: The Invisible Computer - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:33:28 -0400 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: the day the solid format died On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 01:05:51PM -0400, I wrote: > A good point. To toot my own horn, check out the cover/site design I > did a few years back at http://www.artswire.org/comma/CD/ -- it uses > the CD cover as an animated imagemap that opens out, as it were, into > a torrent of information and further links. Whoops, damnable case-sensitive Web server. The working URL is http://www.artswire.org/comma/cd/ - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:31:09 -0700 From: Phil Hudson Subject: RE: dearth of the solid format Doug's analysis of user interfaces is very insightful: I once had a fascinating conversation with two Italian designers who were at a trade show exhibiting a $6,000.00 bathtub. The thing did not have a faucet in sight, but it had (count 'em) 26 numbered buttons, and a manual the size of a metropolitan phone book. They just didn't want to accept the idea that this was after all, just a bathtub, and expected everyone to conform to their horrible, form-over-function, Italian-with-a-capital-I design flaws. This machine had memories for six different bath settings, temperature, volume, little bubbles, big bubbles etc. It could do all kinds of things, but one could simply NOT operate it without consulting the manual. Even one of the guys who designed it had to check his own manual to answer some questions. An engineer standing by listening, finally said: "If you design a simple household machine that needs a large book to tell you how to operate it, then you're just a bad designer, period." A very abrupt end to US-Italian relations ensued in the immediate vicinity. It's simply a question of where one wants to use their time; personally, I've learned a whole lot of various operating systems over the years, but now I'm just way too busy to be learning a new opsys everytime the latest Cool Thing comes to the market, however, many with more time on their hands, or different priorities than me may find it worth their while to train a BambleWeezie 3000 Turbo to accept voice commands in Yoruba, or enter 2000 names and numbers into a cell phone via the keypad.( Speaking of bad user interfaces! And what happens when they change your area code?.......) I also work in Silicon Valley, so I'm pretty tired of the typical life-less technophiles out here constantly trying to outdo each other; it's not unusual to see someone with a Palm, a phone, and one or two pagers hanging off their belts (why do you need two pagers anyway? Just in case one is busy? I've been meaning to ask) Once, a cellphone had some cachet as an exotic item; these days, it means you're just another working schlub at the beck and call of anyone with your number. Phil End of rant. Next outburst at 4:00pm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 18:54:02 -0400 From: "Rosana L. de Oliveira" Subject: Re: Rita Ribeiro At 09:17 AM 09/27/2000 -0600, Neal wrote: >>Listened to some >>samples of her new album too (hope you don't mind my correction, Neal - >>"Pérolas Aos Povos") and I have to say that she indeed has a great voice. > >I actually knew of the accent mark, I just don't konw how to make them! Hmmm, if you want, try checking http://www.wordinfo.com/how_to/accww7.htm . They give some key combinations for the accents and special characters for a US English keyboard. I don't know, maybe it could help. >Chico (I will be informal with him so I don't have to leave out the accent) >played after her at the festival. He was very good too, though I didn't >think he matched the description. His "petic lyrics and heartfelt vocal >stylings have been compared to those of noted Brazilian artists, such as >Caetano Veloso and Gilberto Til, but his energetic live performances draw >inspirations from American sensations Led Zeppelin, Bob Marley, and even >Donna Summer." He had a huge, very talented band, and they jammed all over >the place. But I was never put in mind of Led Zepelin. Hmm, I don't think I would either. Actually, Chico César is not really one of my favorites. >That's Rose and Charcoal by Marisa Monte, which is a phenomenal album. I >bought it for the guest appearance by Laurie Anderson, but that's such a >small part of why I like it. I keep meaning to buy more of her music. In >fact, I had noticed that she had a new album that came out in the last >month or so. Oh yes, Marisa Monte has just put out a new album, titled in English "Memories, Chronicles and Declarations of Love" and it's been one of our best sellers since July or so. In fact, I saw her live last July. She was quite nice, has a sweet but great voice and she is also the kind of artist who sings in a variety of styles. It's kinda funny that at the same time she is a pop singer, she is also considered to be sort of alternative. All of her dates here were completely sold out and she is known to make periodical shows in the US too, if I'm not mistaken. As for what I can recommend, there aren't many artists here that I could consider to be ectophilic. In fact, sometimes I think Brazil is the most mainstream country in the world, where people only care about what's trendy at the time. :) I myself have few favorites, but among these, I can recommend a singer named Zélia Duncan. She has a very deep and smooth voice (some people might even think that it's a guy singing at first) and she writes her own songs. I think she is well worth checking. I also saw her live last year and I can't wait for her to announce new dates sometime soon. The albums that I like best are "Acesso" and "Intimidade" (there's a new one out too, "Outra Luz", but I haven't heard it). A funny thing that I noticed though is that the cover of "Intimidade" is quite similar to Veda Hille's "Spine". Heh, I wonder... :) I also like some northeastern artists but they don't sound very ectophilic in my opinion. Regards, Rosana rioliv@br.homeshopping.com.br http://www.geocities.com/jerayna - ------- n.p. Zélia Duncan - Intimidade ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:25:59 -0600 (MDT) From: Neal Copperman Subject: Re: Rita Ribeiro On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Rosana L. de Oliveira wrote: > Oh yes, Marisa Monte has just put out a new album, titled in English > "Memories, Chronicles and Declarations of Love" and it's been one of our > best sellers since July or so. In fact, I saw her live last July. She was > quite nice, has a sweet but great voice and she is also the kind of artist > who sings in a variety of styles. It's kinda funny that at the same time > she is a pop singer, she is also considered to be sort of alternative. All > of her dates here were completely sold out and she is known to make > periodical shows in the US too, if I'm not mistaken. Yup, but I think not in Albuquerque :/ I think she was supposed to play in DC at the end of the month (which would be now). I know she has played there a couple of times, but I've always been out of town. neal np: Living in Clip - Ani DiFranco ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:41:20 -0400 From: "Foghorn J Fornorn" Subject: RE: the day the solid format died Well, its been a lively afternoon, now, hasn't it? In case it was not clear in my earlier posts, I'm thinking of things that aren't here yet. There have been some interesting approaches lately, but we have quite a way to go. In my opinion, future technology will be superior enough to make what we currently call media happily obsolete. Plenty of examples of "getting there" have been cited already. E-books and MP3 jukeboxes are limited today by current technology, but the trend is smaller faster cheaper. Eventually (if not already) the physical media becomes the weak link in the chain. Businesses can increase profit if they don't have to manufacture and inventory said physical media. I'm surprised no one has brought up what I'd consider the big problem -- no, call it controversy -- with the future ephemeral electronic media. Call it PPU - Pay Per Use, as currently being prototyped by cable Pay Per View, and certain post-MP3 allegedly secure audio formats. You know it ain't comin' over the wire for free forever! I'm sure many will say that that's the big reason to have a CD in one's hot little hands, since it is done and paid for, but think about your actual utilization for a while. Is a CD that you pay $15 for and play once and file away really worth as much as a $15 CD you play 100 times in the first month and at least once a week or so for the next 5 years? If you like the latter CD so much, wouldn't you feel good about rewarding its creator more than one lousy royalty chit? Other considerations are alternate pricing schemes, ala the phone companies. 10 cents a track, subscribe for $5 a month, etc etc. "Clubs" with bulk pricing. Face it, if a buck can be made these ways, they will appear. Already have. I find it very interesting to project this stuff, and how many of the issues we see even in this mail list (CD organizing, copyright infringement / rights of artist vs others, etc) require a whole mindset reset. Anyway, a couple other random observations: > The technology is still not the message, and never will be. True. But more and more it is becoming both the messenger and the media. > I dislike this too [digital clock set buttons that go forward], and am surprised that clocks don't have buttons that go the other way. Hm, I got one that has Fast Reverse/Slow Reverse/Slow Forward/Fast Forward. I too wish more of them did that. - ----------------------- "I want the future now I'm young, and it's my right. I want a reason to be proud. I want to see the light. I want the future now, I want to see it on the screen, I want to break our bounds, and make life worth more than dreams." - -- Peter Hammill, "The Future Now" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 21:35:29 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Re: Joan Osborne Hi! John exhorted: > And I'd especially recommend you drop everything to see her if she plays a >small club (dunno, perhaps 100-150 people, but I'm not good at estimation), >general admission (standing and dancing) as she did here. She'll be doing just that at Toad's Place here in New Haven this coming Sunday. Alas I can't go - but all the talk around here about her live shows makes me wish I could. +==========================================================================+ | Meredith Tarr meth@smoe.org | | New Haven, CT USA http://www.smoe.org/~meth | +==========================================================================+ | "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille | | *** TRAJECTORY, the Veda Hille mailing list: *** | | *** http://www.smoe.org/meth/trajectory.html *** | +==========================================================================+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 23:09:37 -0400 From: meredith Subject: project lo next week Hi! So, folks in the NYC/CT/DC/Philly area: Project Lo is coming to town next week! (How did that happen already?!) The Connecticut show is at Brass City Records in Waterbury, a legendary place I'm embarrassed to say I've never made it to. I was completely unaware they even had a performance space until this show came up. I honestly don't know how much publicity this thing is getting, so everyone who can get there next Wednesday (yes, just ONE WEEK from tonight) should. The show starts at 8 pm. I have to admit complete ignorance of Waterbury and its environs, so I'm unable to recommend a place for ectophiles to gather beforehand for dinner. Anyone got any ideas? The next night, a week from tomorrow, Project Lo will do two shows at the Alterknit Theater (or whatever they're calling it now) at The Knitting Factory (8 and 10 pm). There's not a lot of dinner options around the immediate environs of the venue there, but I'm not sure if we're going to be able to get down there much before it starts, so I'll leave any NY plans to the locals. Philly and DC we don't care about 'coz we're not going. ;) But I'm sure plenty of you are, so plan away... +==========================================================================+ | Meredith Tarr meth@smoe.org | | New Haven, CT USA http://www.smoe.org/~meth | +==========================================================================+ | "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille | | *** TRAJECTORY, the Veda Hille mailing list: *** | | *** http://www.smoe.org/meth/trajectory.html *** | +==========================================================================+ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 05:41:22 +0200 (CEST) From: Yngve Hauge Subject: Re: the day the solid format died On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Joseph Zitt wrote: > Ah, I was thinking of mentioning that one. I remember getting it the day > it came out, and eagerly (and carefully) digging through layers of covers > to get to the actual vinyl. I bought it when I was going through the worst time of my life, I had bought FM's Rumours a few days before (just before Christmas of '89), and I was so eager to hear their other albums. The funny thing was that at the same time I bought the Albatross/I'd Rather Go Blind compilation, and I did play that one first as it was released earlier than Tusk. For a while there I wondered if it was the same band ... the name was the same, but the music so very much different though still amazing enough. Tusk is a completely different story - I listened to it in my Grado labs headphones shortly ago, and the production still amazes me. Ok, they had money enough and Warner didn't bother them at all, but still most of the recording was done in Lindsey Buckingham's kitchen with the vocals done laying down in the shower (He liked the way they sounded :) They managed to spend $1M making it, so one can only imagine what was going on during that time :) > > If I ever were to compile a list of Perfect Album Sides, Side 4 of Tusk > would be way near the top. My eyes are still watering when hearing Stevie Nicks do Beautiful Child. She is so fully aware of the fact that she'll never get a child herself.. - -- Yngve n.p. Fleetwood Mac - Tusk n.r. Inbetween books ... another David Weber perhaps? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 23:47:30 -0400 From: Jeffrey Burka Subject: Re: project lo next week meth sez: > So, folks in the NYC/CT/DC/Philly area: Project Lo is coming to town next > week! (How did that happen already?!) [...] > > Philly and DC we don't care about 'coz we're not going. ;) But I'm sure > plenty of you are, so plan away... Yes, and they'll be in DC on the eve of yom kippur. So yes, Happy will actually be playing *in* DC, just about two miles from home, and I'll be roughly 6 blocks away at a kol nidre service. such *fabulous* timing! oh well. next time. jeff (who will probably also miss Melissa Ferrick this Sunday at Iota) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 21:32:13 -0700 From: Bill Mazur Subject: Re: Rita Ribeiro Rosana and my other Ectofriends, One of my favorite jazz/pop/Brazilian singers is Astrud Gilberto. Which, if any, of the singers that you have been discussing is similiar in style to Astrud? I love her smooth, silky, and sensuous singing voice. Thanks in advance! Bill M. n.p. Dead Can Dance _Into the Labyrinth_ "Rosana L. de Oliveira" wrote: > At 09:17 AM 09/27/2000 -0600, Neal wrote: > > >>Listened to some > >>samples of her new album too (hope you don't mind my correction, Neal - > >>"Pérolas Aos Povos") and I have to say that she indeed has a great voice. > > > >I actually knew of the accent mark, I just don't konw how to make them! > > Hmmm, if you want, try checking http://www.wordinfo.com/how_to/accww7.htm . > They give some key combinations for the accents and special characters for > a US English keyboard. I don't know, maybe it could help. > > >Chico (I will be informal with him so I don't have to leave out the accent) > >played after her at the festival. He was very good too, though I didn't > >think he matched the description. His "petic lyrics and heartfelt vocal > >stylings have been compared to those of noted Brazilian artists, such as > >Caetano Veloso and Gilberto Til, but his energetic live performances draw > >inspirations from American sensations Led Zeppelin, Bob Marley, and even > >Donna Summer." He had a huge, very talented band, and they jammed all over > >the place. But I was never put in mind of Led Zepelin. > > Hmm, I don't think I would either. Actually, Chico César is not really one > of my favorites. > > >That's Rose and Charcoal by Marisa Monte, which is a phenomenal album. I > >bought it for the guest appearance by Laurie Anderson, but that's such a > >small part of why I like it. I keep meaning to buy more of her music. In > >fact, I had noticed that she had a new album that came out in the last > >month or so. > > Oh yes, Marisa Monte has just put out a new album, titled in English > "Memories, Chronicles and Declarations of Love" and it's been one of our > best sellers since July or so. In fact, I saw her live last July. She was > quite nice, has a sweet but great voice and she is also the kind of artist > who sings in a variety of styles. It's kinda funny that at the same time > she is a pop singer, she is also considered to be sort of alternative. All > of her dates here were completely sold out and she is known to make > periodical shows in the US too, if I'm not mistaken. > > As for what I can recommend, there aren't many artists here that I could > consider to be ectophilic. In fact, sometimes I think Brazil is the most > mainstream country in the world, where people only care about what's trendy > at the time. :) I myself have few favorites, but among these, I can > recommend a singer named Zélia Duncan. She has a very deep and smooth voice > (some people might even think that it's a guy singing at first) and she > writes her own songs. I think she is well worth checking. I also saw her > live last year and I can't wait for her to announce new dates sometime > soon. The albums that I like best are "Acesso" and "Intimidade" (there's a > new one out too, "Outra Luz", but I haven't heard it). A funny thing that I > noticed though is that the cover of "Intimidade" is quite similar to Veda > Hille's "Spine". Heh, I wonder... :) > > I also like some northeastern artists but they don't sound very ectophilic > in my opinion. > > Regards, > > Rosana > rioliv@br.homeshopping.com.br > http://www.geocities.com/jerayna > ------- > n.p. Zélia Duncan - Intimidade ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V6 #288 **************************