From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V9 #175 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Thursday, June 19 2003 Volume 09 : Number 175 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Fwd: Bollywood LP Cover Gallery [Neb Rodgers ] RE: cd colecting ["Dave Williamson" ] RE: cd collecting ["Dave Williamson" ] RE: cd collecting [dmw ] RE: cd colecting [Nadyne Mielke ] Re: cd collecting (longish) ["ron" ] collecting cds/odds and ends ["Lyle Howard" ] Re: cd colecting [Sander ] Re: cd colecting [Joseph Zitt ] RE: cd colecting ["Dave Williamson" ] Re: cd colecting [Joseph Zitt ] RE: cd colecting [Yngve Hauge ] RE: cd colecting ["Dave Williamson" ] RE: cd colecting [Steve VanDevender ] HGP Part 5 is ok now [Xenus Sister ] RE: cd colecting [meredith ] Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! [Xenus Sister ] the tarting up of jewel kilcher [meredith ] Fwd: News from Anne Heaton 6/19/03 [meredith ] Re: cd colecting [jonathan soong ] Re: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! [Nadyne Mielke ] Re: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! ["Xenu's Sister" ] Re: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! ["Xenu's Sister" ] Re: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! [Joseph Zitt ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 23:10:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Neb Rodgers Subject: Fwd: Bollywood LP Cover Gallery Ah... if only reality looked like these album covers! - -Neb - ---Original Message--- Bollywood LP Cover Gallery - Colorful collection complete with release dates and music and lyrics credits. Also includes rare LP covers from South India and Bengal. http://bollylp.users.btopenworld.com/ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 09:12:07 -0400 From: "Dave Williamson" Subject: RE: cd colecting Ah, it's all OK because only tasteless people steal, and because they're only stealing tasteless music, then we musically superior ecto people think that's just fine. Screw all those tasteless music makers. And because you pay for some things it's OK to steal others? Guess shoplifting a couple of items in a high end store because they're over-priced is OK then as long as you bought something there last week. Nice set of logic upon which to base society. Thanks. I feel so much better now. Just to be clear - if all of this were somehow limited to people copying their own music, discovering music, making mix CDs of their own music, etc. - - I've got absolutely no issue with it. But technology has allowed people to go way beyond that. Were it limited to proper and ethical use it would be one thing. But it is not. Cheers, Dave. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-ecto@smoe.org [mailto:owner-ecto@smoe.org] On Behalf Of ron Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 5:39 PM To: ecto@smoe.org Subject: cd colecting hi >>>>some negative comments about mp3s & file sharing yes there are some miserable bastards who collect hundreds of mp3s and never buy the albms. so what??? in my experience they are normally, the tasteless fools who have hundreds of copies of the tasteless garbage put out on the hit parade by bands who are promoted by the same companies ignoring the type of music listened to by people on lists such as this. we hear the stats about how many millions of copies of tracks are downloaded. but they are downloaded by the same miserable bastards who would *never* buy the cds if forced to do so. so how much are the recording companies missing out on if people who wouldnt buy the cds anyway download them??????? i personally, and a number of people i have come across treat file sharing as a means of discovering new music. mp3s i have downloaded, or shared by mail have caused me to discover more music & buy more cds - mainly because the music i like is *not* available at my local cd store where i can listen to it first. so yes - i have a whole heap of samplers, and some copies of full albums in my rack. some artists who i have gone on to buy more of. some who i havent. but the record companies have earned far more out of me via copies than they will ever lose. ron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 10:06:26 -0400 From: "Dave Williamson" Subject: RE: cd collecting So what you're saying is that the current price point on CDs is economically the right price point. Interesting viewpoint. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-ecto@smoe.org [mailto:owner-ecto@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Sue Trowbridge Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:47 PM To: ecto Subject: RE: cd collecting On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Dave Williamson wrote: > In theory the ease with which the medium can now be produced should > have promoted a multitude of small labels distributing product at a > much lower price point which in the end would have applied the > appropriate competitive pressure on the big guys. Artists generally > get a better percentage from smaller labels. However I have been > unable to comprehend how the smaller labels that are out there charge > as much or more than the big labels themselves. Have pity on the small labels... once we've pay for manufacturing, a photographer & a graphic designer to do the artwork, advertising, mailing 300+ free promo copies to radio stations & journalists, and in many 300+ cases helping to finance the production costs of the CD, we're usually WAY in the red before the disc ever hits the streets. So don't begrudge us if we charge $15 or $16 for a CD that we've already sunk several thousand dollars into. I will point out, though, that you can often save money by buying a disc directly from the record company's web site or from the artist -- remember that of the $18 you spend on a CD at Tower or Virgin, a big chunk of that is going to the distributor and to the retailer. It could take many months for payment to *finally* trickle down to the label and then to the artist. It's tough going, but we do it because we love music -- believe me, you don't start a small record label 'cause you want to make money! I still think CDs are a pretty good deal, considering that first-run movies now cost $9.50 at most theaters here. For just a few dollars more, you get something you can keep forever, theoretically anyway ;) - --Sue ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:24:05 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: RE: cd collecting Not exactly -- the price point is fair for Sue or my label, because we do runs of 500-2000 discs or so. The big record companies have much much lower incremental costs for physical production -- but they have far bigger promo budgets, far more overhead (and also much bigger production budgets - -- but that was last moth's argument.) ANyone who's really interested in the economics of the record biz should read Mose Avalon's "Confessions of a Record Producer." Moses is a bit of kook, but his math is mostly pretty solid. When you talk about what artists make on their copyright, you MUST distinguish between composition and performance. in the US, composers make way way more than musicians who only perform on a track. I have friends who regularly get publishing airply royalty checks for hundreds and thousands on airply; I don't know anyone who's ever got a substantial royalty check from discs sold. But no royalties on SALES are paid until the record company has recouped, that is, recovered (according to its own, seldom auditited, accounting practices) the expense of making and promoting the record (including any tour budget and/or advance paid to the artist), On paper, it's easy for a record company to claim that a platinum album LOST them money (if the production/promo budget was fairly large). Correspondingly, an artist with a platinum record may not see a dime from royalties, unless they also have publishing. And yes, 128K mp3s DO sound like crap for most rock material. MP3 wasn't designed with music listening in mind, it's the audio layer of MPEG and its psychoacoustics are optimized for the speech bandwidth. VBR and 192K and 256K are much better. At 256K, personally I can only tell the differene when listening very actively on good equipment, but I know people for whom that point is 384K. On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Dave Williamson wrote: > So what you're saying is that the current price point on CDs is economically > the right price point. Interesting viewpoint. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ecto@smoe.org [mailto:owner-ecto@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Sue > Trowbridge > Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:47 PM > To: ecto > Subject: RE: cd collecting > > > On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Dave Williamson wrote: > > > In theory the ease with which the medium can now be produced should > > have promoted a multitude of small labels distributing product at a > > much lower price point which in the end would have applied the > > appropriate competitive pressure on the big guys. Artists generally > > get a better percentage from smaller labels. However I have been > > unable to comprehend how the smaller labels that are out there charge > > as much or more than the big labels themselves. > > Have pity on the small labels... once we've pay for manufacturing, a > photographer & a graphic designer to do the artwork, advertising, mailing > 300+ free promo copies to radio stations & journalists, and in many > 300+ cases > helping to finance the production costs of the CD, we're usually WAY in the > red before the disc ever hits the streets. So don't begrudge us if we charge > $15 or $16 for a CD that we've already sunk several thousand dollars into. > > I will point out, though, that you can often save money by buying a disc > directly from the record company's web site or from the artist -- remember > that of the $18 you spend on a CD at Tower or Virgin, a big chunk of that is > going to the distributor and to the retailer. It could take many months for > payment to *finally* trickle down to the label and then to the artist. > > It's tough going, but we do it because we love music -- believe me, you > don't start a small record label 'cause you want to make money! I still > think CDs are a pretty good deal, considering that first-run movies now cost > $9.50 at most theaters here. For just a few dollars more, you get something > you can keep forever, theoretically anyway ;) > > --Sue > - ------------------------------------------------- Mayo-Wells Media Workshop dmw@ http://www.mwmw.com mwmw.com Web Development * Multimedia Consulting * Hosting ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 09:57:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Nadyne Mielke Subject: RE: cd colecting Dave Williamson wrote: [snip] > Just to be clear - if all of this were somehow limited to people > copying their own music, discovering music, making mix CDs of their > own music, etc. - I've got absolutely no issue with it. But > technology has allowed people to go way beyond that. Were it limited > to proper and ethical use it would be one thing. But it is not. There's a few interesting questions in the whole online music debate. I think we're all aware that record sales are down, and this does happen to coincide with the rise of online music sharing. But very few people seem to have noticed that the recording industry as a whole has released fewer new releases (not just reissues of old material on CD, which made up quite a lot of the earlier CD sales). How much of the loss of sales has been due to a dearth of material? For those who are actually pirating music, would they have ever purchased it in the first place? I'm sure we all knew people who, ten years ago, would go over to their friend's house with a stack of blank tapes and copy their friend's albums. I don't have the answers to either of these questions, and I don't think that anyone else does, either. The question is, where does the real use of these technologies fall? Is it mostly pirating, or is it mostly sampling of artists that someone mightn't've heard otherwise? Aside from these questions, we have to decide whether we limit the use of a technology because some people have decided to use it for [illegal | unethical] purposes. You appear to say that it should be limited because there is some uncountable number of people using it in this fashion. I vehemently disagree. I draw a parallel to the use of alcohol: it should be legal for those who wish to partake of it, but those who use it illegally (such as operating a vehicle whilst intoxicated) need to be punished. /nm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:52:48 +0200 From: "ron" Subject: Re: cd collecting (longish) hi dave >>>>Nice set of logic upon which to base society. Thanks. I feel so much better now. lol!!!! ok - in the cold, sober light of day i see your point :-) maybe i didnt really make my point clear with my rant about *pop* music. (i had just spent time with a musician here whos been on the circuit since the 60's, just released a great indy album & the radio stations wont play it cause it doesnt fit their format.....)(insert plug for "hero of heroes" by brian finch http://www.rock.co.za/brianfinch/disco.html my main point was supposed to be that most of the people i know who download the pop music type stuff are people who wouldnt buy it anyway if prevented from downloading. so the the record cos arent actually losing out. yes - the people who download are getting an unfair advantage i guess. as for your shoplifting argument - looks good on the surface, but scratch a little deeper. if you listen to radio youre getting the songs for free. i dont listen to radio cause they dont play my kind of music. i cant stream audio cause the connections here arent fast enough. so i download, listen, then make my decision. yes - i keep the disc afterwards - so i wind up with duplicates that lie there & gather dust. how exactly is that different from me going to the cd shop where some of the cds are available & i can listen to them anytime i like - other than being more comfortable, and having better quality sound (mp3 over hi-fi beats cd over shop headphones anyday) thus enabling a better appreciation. a year or three ago i had the exact same opinion as you. downloading was out. live recordings (for trade as opposed to bootlegs for profit) were criminal, and the list (michelle shocked) i was running was strictly *no trading*. now i collect are those same live recordings & i just plain *love* the live show atmosphere that a sounddesk, or even audience recording gets as opposed to the clean sanitised, often lifeless sound that many commercial recordings have. some artists just plain have to have an audience in front of them to perform. and what about out of print and/or limited edition recordings. im sitting here listening to beth ortons "superpinkmandy". the only place im going to get a copy is from some incredibly expensive collector shop, and all the profits go to the collectors, not the musician anyway, who bought up a whole pile just to speculate. ive already bought everything else shes ever released, so there is just plain no way im going to feel guilty. also, if she did re release it - i would be one of the first queuing up for it. so no - im not just some heartless music thief. i thought long & hard about this issue. and if it didnt come across last night im sorry. chalk it up to a whole heap of beers, & some genuine concern for an aging musician who just plain deserves better. regards ron (np - beth orton - track 9 from superpinkymandy) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 18:07:05 +0000 From: "Lyle Howard" Subject: collecting cds/odds and ends Howdy, I like the tactile experience of holding lps and cds in my hand. However, my first listening experiences were ephemeral: church music, songs on the radio, tv music, etc. I can live in a world where our music is tied to physical objects and also where the music plays and disappears, leaving a memory. I play in bluegrass jams quite a bit and the music is and then it isn't and that's a good way to experience it. So, having MP3s that fly out of nowhere and go back to their binary homes is fine. It would be nice to have info on the digital music, but the world wouldn't end without it. CD booklets are hard to read as age lays its cold hand on my shoulder. I'm planning large print cd booklets for anything I burden the public with. Maybe I should start a service converting the tiny print in cd booklets for aging baby boomers. How do you people function with thousands of cds? I want to leave books, cds, and lps at the curb when I look out over the swamp of my livingroom and consider moving again. My approach to music is serendipitous. I know there are thousands of lps and cds I must have, but I don't know they exist or I just have an inkling that they exist and rely on chance to stumble across a style or singer or musician I can embrace with fervor. As far as copyright and supporting artists are concerned, I think the world is changing for the better. iTunes Apple Store makes me smile, and when everything musical is available to buy piecemeal, the world will be better. Artists (I think) will get a bigger piece of the apple pie, because they won't be paying for plastic and paper, just storage. Someone, somewhere will put up a version of iTunes for artists not signed to contracts with record companies. Other artists will just make their music available for free. We seem to be headed in the direction of distributing music as a digital medium with attached files for graphics and video. We won't have to squint at cd booklets much longer, because we will be squinting at little screens (some people already are) instead. But the thing about digital is, you can blow up the image on the TV in your livingroom. I'll miss my lps and cds, but I will adapt. Actually, I will continue lurking down at the Goodwill Store looking for lps that aren't scratched to the point of sounding like cicadas serenading in the trees. Bye, Lyle _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 20:15:04 +0200 From: Sander Subject: Re: cd colecting Dave Williamson wrote: > And because you pay for some things it's OK to steal others? Guess > shoplifting a couple of items in a high end store because they're > over-priced is OK then as long as you bought something there last week. Any- and all shoplifting comparisons are irrelevant as there's no _loss_ on the other side. You sound as if you're simply parroting the RIAA with those lines. > Just to be clear - if all of this were somehow limited to people copying > their own music, discovering music, making mix CDs of their own music, etc. > - I've got absolutely no issue with it. But technology has allowed people > to go way beyond that. Were it limited to proper and ethical use it would > be one thing. But it is not. What do you base this on? Have some _faith_ in people. The only datapoint I have of which I am absolutely certain is of course myself (since the rise of filesharing I have bought exponentially increasing amounts of new cd's), but as far as I know almost exactly the same goes for everyone I know. Yes, there are undoubtedly people out there who download music and do not buy any new cd's because of it. But as I judge people - as I *know* people, these are only the, as ron put it, "same miserable bastards who would *never* buy the cds if forced to do so." Them _never_ buying the cd's anyway being the point here, not their musical tastes. So there still is no loss, and although that does not make their particular behaviour "right," it does mean that I can not conclude other than overall filesharing doing more good than harm. (The numbers being forth by the music industry have long since been shown to be completely in synch with the overall economy and their own diminishing production.) Maybe I'm living a very sheltered life or something, maybe I completely midjudge random people by judging them by myself, but if you like music you downloaded well enough, then _of course_ you go and financially compensate the artist. It's only the moral thing to do... Doesn't everyone? Do you really believe there are so many people out there who don't?? Sander - who is in the process of ripping his entire cd collection to ogg vorbis (at an average datarate of 200kbs) and wishing for bigger harddisks so that repeating the excercise in a lossless format would become feasible. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:28:37 -0700 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: cd colecting Dave Williamson wrote: > Just to be clear - if all of this were somehow limited to people copying > their own music, discovering music, making mix CDs of their own music, etc. > - I've got absolutely no issue with it. But technology has allowed people > to go way beyond that. Were it limited to proper and ethical use it would > be one thing. But it is not. So there are two possible ways to stop the technology: 1. Hop in the time machine and prevent it from having been invented. 2. Ban all technologies that can be used unethically. Which does, indeed, ban stone knives and bear skins. And, for that matter, earth, air, fire, water, and vacuum. Which proves that blaming it on "technology" is pointless. n.p. An MP3 of a performance that I did several months ago -- the distribution of which has only become possible due to said ostensibly-evil technology. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:54:57 -0400 From: "Dave Williamson" Subject: RE: cd colecting I never blamed the technology or said the technology was evil. I blamed the people that abuse the technology for their own selfish purposes. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-ecto@smoe.org [mailto:owner-ecto@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Zitt Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:29 PM To: ecto@smoe.org Subject: Re: cd colecting Dave Williamson wrote: > Just to be clear - if all of this were somehow limited to people > copying their own music, discovering music, making mix CDs of their > own music, etc. > - I've got absolutely no issue with it. But technology has allowed people > to go way beyond that. Were it limited to proper and ethical use it would > be one thing. But it is not. So there are two possible ways to stop the technology: 1. Hop in the time machine and prevent it from having been invented. 2. Ban all technologies that can be used unethically. Which does, indeed, ban stone knives and bear skins. And, for that matter, earth, air, fire, water, and vacuum. Which proves that blaming it on "technology" is pointless. n.p. An MP3 of a performance that I did several months ago -- the distribution of which has only become possible due to said ostensibly-evil technology. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:05:18 -0700 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: cd colecting Dave Williamson wrote: > I never blamed the technology or said the technology was evil. This is contradicted by your statement "But technology has allowed people to go way beyond that". > I blamed the > people that abuse the technology for their own selfish purposes. So what is your practical suggestion for getting it not to happen? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 22:12:28 +0200 (CEST) From: Yngve Hauge Subject: RE: cd colecting On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Dave Williamson wrote: > I never blamed the technology or said the technology was evil. I blamed the > people that abuse the technology for their own selfish purposes. > I'm not sure who are the most selfish here - the record companies who exploit both their customers and the creators, or the people who on one hand maybe never would buy music in the first place and the other spread music to enlighten others to new music and maybe getting a few of the former to actually buy music. I for one am quite certain on whom I would place the bet. - -- Yngve ****************************************** * E-mail: onealien@mo.himolde.no ********* * Cell: +47 41330571 ********************* ***** Blessed be!!! ********************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:12:07 -0400 From: "Dave Williamson" Subject: RE: cd colecting Don't try to tell me what I'm thinking. If that's how you're reading it, that is not what I intended. That would be like me saying that a gun can commit a murder without a person pulling the trigger. I think not. I don't know what the practical answer is, but didn't read anywhere that it was a requirement to have an answer in order to pose an issue. The Apple approach will be an interesting one to watch, but is currently limited from a platform perspective. More movement in that direction for distribution may help. But just accepting it hardly seems the answer does it? - -----Original Message----- From: owner-ecto@smoe.org [mailto:owner-ecto@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Zitt Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 3:05 PM To: Dave Williamson Cc: ecto@smoe.org Subject: Re: cd colecting Dave Williamson wrote: > I never blamed the technology or said the technology was evil. This is contradicted by your statement "But technology has allowed people to go way beyond that". > I blamed the > people that abuse the technology for their own selfish purposes. So what is your practical suggestion for getting it not to happen? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:43:40 -0700 From: Steve VanDevender Subject: RE: cd colecting Dave Williamson writes: > Don't try to tell me what I'm thinking. Nobody's trying to tell you what you're thinking; we're trying to infer what you think from what you have written, and what you have written can easily be interpreted as blaming technology for allowing undesired copying and distribution. If you don't want us to think that, then be more precise about expressing what you really are thinking. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:53:21 -0500 From: Xenus Sister Subject: HGP Part 5 is ok now It was brought to my attention that Part 5 was truncated (thanks Marvin!). There was a power glitch while I was uploading and since it looked like it was there I just started with Part 6, without checking the file size. I've uploaded it again so the whole thing is there now. (I like the idea of our own Ecto Napster, where artists would get paid per download, after a free sample, of course) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:10:38 -0400 From: meredith Subject: RE: cd colecting Hi, Ah, the music piracy debate rears its ugly head again. It must be an odd-numbered year. I think what's gotten stuck in the craw of many here, Dave, is the impression you gave (whether intended or not, I'm hoping not but I don't want to tell you what you're thinking) that you include the ectophiles under the grouping of "people that abuse the technology for their own selfish purposes." And really, nothing could be further from the truth. From what I've seen in the almost 11 years that I've been on this list, ectophiles overwhelmingly fall into the category of people who download music samples (or, in earlier days, get mix tapes) to discover new artists, and then purchase everything they can by those new artists whenever they come across one they like. The archives contain several examples of the occasional clueless newbie getting put firmly in their place whenever they've mentioned, or even suggested taping an entire in-print album for someone else, or asking that someone do the same for them. That's just not right, and the folks here know that. =============================================== Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth =============================================== Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://muzak.smoe.org =============================================== ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 18:52:27 -0500 From: Xenus Sister Subject: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! I'm going nuts. When we moved in here we bought several file cabinets with the full intention that I would go through and file boxes and boxes and boxes of paper-based STUFF and have I? Hell no. So, in moments of lucidity I think, oh I'll just throw it all away. But then I start going through some of it. A set list from a Victoria Williams concert. Newspaper clippings about kd lang. Flyers from the Cranes. A card file about a new Holly Cole album. Musical magazines. Cover stories (lots of Tori there). Pictures. Postcards. Posters (I would not throw away anything signed). Magnify that kind of stuff by at least 10,000! Does it go in the trash? I hate the thought! Does it go with us? Probably not, because although we haven't found a place yet, it's almost certainly going to be smaller and not have room for file cabinets. It's not a "collection" so musical scholars wouldn't be interested. Nothing's worth putting up on ebay, well, maybe a few things, but we don't have time to separate it out. How can I throw away every music-related bit of paper I've accumulated in the past 20 years? Don't even ask about movies! Tell me how. Please. ("Just do it" won't work. That's what I'm telling myself) V ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:43:55 -0400 From: meredith Subject: the tarting up of jewel kilcher Hi, Jewel v.6.9 was on Craig Kilborn last night. She was interviewed (including the 5 questions) as well as being the musical guest. We had TiVo grab it out of sick fascination. Once Kilborn stopped almost drowning in his own drool, it was actually sort of entertaining, in a watching-a-train-wreck sort of way. She did give a plug for the contest she's running to pick the opening act for her upcoming tour, in which Anne Heaton is a finalist (she's performing in the finals tonight, as a matter of fact -- I'll forward her mailshot about that under separate cover). Jewel made Kilborn promise to have the winner on his show, which would be cool if Anne ends up winning. Oh, and the song? woj said "Kylie!" It actually reminded me of something off _ABBA's Greatest Hits Vol. 2_, which is not a good thing, trust me. Next she'll be changing her name to "Vitamin J", mark my words. It's no longer on TiVo, so if you missed it sorry, we can't help you. I just couldn't justify putting that one on our latest TV Tunes tape for posterity. =============================================== Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth =============================================== Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://muzak.smoe.org =============================================== ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:45:41 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Fwd: News from Anne Heaton 6/19/03 Vote for Anne! Maybe if she gets to go on tour with Jewel, she can find out just WTF is going on in Ms. Kilcher's head nowadays, and enlighten those of us who are flabbergasted... >Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:33:32 -0500 >To: Peppermint e-mail list >From: Anne Heaton >Subject: News from Anne Heaton 6/19/03 > >Hey there, >A quick hello and update on the opening-for-Jewel competition. TONIGHT >(Thursday, 6/19), I'm playing with Jewel (no, I'm not kidding) *thanks to >all of you!* at the Coach House in San Juan Capistrano. All of the >national finalists will be playing two songs each. It should be a lot of >fun and is an amazing venue (from what I hear). Sometime after the show >they'll post our performances on-line (video and audio) for final voting >to determine who goes on tour with Jewel. I'll let you know what is >happening as I find out! :-) > >I. July Schedule >II. A Tiny Message > >I. July Schedule (Oh, and one more June show I put at the bottom) > > Saturday, July 5th > THE BOTTOM LINE > 15 West 4th Street (corner of West 4th & Mercer) > New York, NY > co-bill w/Jen Chapin > *One show only - doors open 6PM for 8PM show. > E-mail Reservations are being accepted for this performance at > mailto:BLTmailbox@aol.com > $15 > 212-228-6300 > * Why should you come to this show in particular? Because it will be > the longest set Frank and I have EVER done in New York City. The Bottom > Line is giving us a full hour to play AND at this show ONLY we are going > to pass out 5-10 copies of several new songs Frank and I recorded in my > living room on the 4-track. Actually, Frank is going to select people > from the audience and pass them out from the stage. So, if you are there > in the audience that night, *you* could have one of only a few copies of > a new song "ep". Good times! Hope to see you at the show! >http://www.bottomlinecabaret.com > > Wednesday, July 16th > THE MUSIC HAVEN (Outdoor Park) > Schenectady, NY > 7pm > > Monday, July 28th > VIXEN > 336 Commercial Street > Provincetown, MA > $12 > 508-487-6424 > 9pm > with "Live From New York" (Edie Carey, Teddy Goldstein, Andrew Kerr, > and me) > > Tuesday, July 29th > Concert Happenings @ TOWN HALL > 400 Main Street > Ridgefield, CT > 6:30pm > with "Live From New York" > > Wednesday, July 30th > TRINITY CHURCH > New York, NY > 12noon (1st show) > with "Live From New York" > > Thursday, July 31st > TRINITY CHURCH > New York, NY > 12noon (2nd show) > with "Live From New York" > > Thursday, July 31st > THE CUTTING ROOM > 19 West 24th Street > New York, NY > 7pm > 212-691-1900 > with "Live From New York" > http://www.thecuttingroomnyc.com > >(June show still to come): > > Saturday, June 28 > THE SPACE 295 Treadwell > Hamden, CT > 7pm door 8pm show > I'm opening for MIGHTY PURPLE (a.k.a. Steve & Jonny Rodgers) > http://www.thespace.tk =============================================== Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth =============================================== Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://muzak.smoe.org =============================================== ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:27:27 +0930 From: jonathan soong Subject: Re: cd colecting As a 'big picture idea' say everyone has computers (which is becoming the norm) ALL music distribution is done via the Internet Britney Spears sells 10 million albums Now, i don't know how much money Britney currently makes from _selling her cds_ (not publishing, endorsements etc - these would still exist). But if she sold each album via MP3 (or some other format) for $1, then she has made $10million. No more record stores, no more middle men, middle company. Artist to listener direct. On a lower scale, your favourite indie artists might only sell 50,000 records. But they could perhaps sell their albums online for $2 each - if you like it, you'd pay 2$. If albums were $1 and $2, i'd be buying a lot more. Hence the indie artist may sell 100,000 MP3 records rather than 50,000 real CD's. + they have another 50,000 people they can go and play live for. Who loses out? record companies? who cares? I know that this isn't the case yet, but with PayPal etc beconming more popular, small, more frequent payments might become the norm. J ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:06:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Nadyne Mielke Subject: Re: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! Xenus Sister wrote: [snip the issue] You can send all of the Tori-related stuff to me. I run an annual online auction to benefit RAINN (sixth auction will be this August) and can use all of the donations I get. You might be surprised at how much some insane collector is willing to pay that sort of thing. :) /nm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:33:53 -0500 From: "Xenu's Sister" Subject: Re: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! At 05:06 PM 6/19/2003 -0700, you wrote: >Xenus Sister wrote: > >[snip the issue] > >You can send all of the Tori-related stuff to me. I run an annual >online auction to benefit RAINN (sixth auction will be this August) and >can use all of the donations I get. You might be surprised at how much >some insane collector is willing to pay that sort of thing. > >:) > >/nm Oh yes! Please! Send me your address! There's nothing majorly rare. I'm keeping my CDs and some favorite things. Nothing's mint. I'm not a "Mint" kind of person. Does it have to be Tori-related? (be careful of your answer :), you might get several boxes of scattered stuff which you then you have to go through) V ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:57:34 -0500 From: "Xenu's Sister" Subject: Re: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! At 05:38 PM 6/19/2003 -0700, Joseph wrote: >Xenus Sister wrote: >>I'm going nuts. When we moved in here we bought several file cabinets >>with the full intention that I would go through and file boxes and boxes >>and boxes of paper-based STUFF and have I? Hell no. So, in moments of >>lucidity I think, oh I'll just throw it all away. But then I start going >>through some of it. A set list from a Victoria Williams concert. >>Newspaper clippings about kd lang. Flyers from the Cranes. A card file >>about a new Holly Cole album. Musical magazines. Cover stories (lots of >>Tori there). Pictures. Postcards. Posters (I would not throw away >>anything signed). Magnify that kind of stuff by at least 10,000! Does it >>go in the trash? I hate the thought! Does it go with us? Probably not, >>because although we haven't found a place yet, it's almost certainly >>going to be smaller and not have room for file cabinets. It's not a >>"collection" so musical scholars wouldn't be interested. Nothing's worth >>putting up on ebay, well, maybe a few things, but we don't have time to >>separate it out. > >How about a potlatch? Maybe on KaTemas or sometime, get a whole lot of >ectophiles and related folk in the Chicago area together and let them >riffle through it. I did something like that years ago, when I realized >that I wasn't going to be able to afford to move all my LPs, and handed >them off to some Ectophiles (I recall Paul Cohen, but there may have been >others) who would give them a good home. It helps to have your stuff going >to people who'll appreciate them, at least. Great idea, but since there are only 3 Ectophiles left in Chicago, and I don't think Mitch or Alberto would want any of this crap, that's not going to work, and even if they did, one or two items isn't going to make a difference. I need to get rid of boxes and boxes of stuff. I just know it's going to get tossed, but I'm dreading the moment. That's only part of it. We have a piano that I can't get rid of. We can't take it and no one wants it (maybe us being on the 3rd floor is a problem, ya think?), plus there's clothes, magazines, videos (anyone want old episodes of "ER" in SLP speed? Didn't think so) and, oh my, I admire people who can live zen. I never could, and really wouldn't want to, but I admire it. V ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 18:08:41 -0700 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: Paralysed by TOO MUCH STUFF! Xenu's Sister wrote: > Great idea, but since there are only 3 Ectophiles left in Chicago, and I > don't think Mitch or Alberto would want any of this crap, that's not > going to work, and even if they did, one or two items isn't going to > make a difference. I need to get rid of boxes and boxes of stuff. I just > know it's going to get tossed, but I'm dreading the moment. > > That's only part of it. We have a piano that I can't get rid of. We > can't take it and no one wants it (maybe us being on the 3rd floor is a > problem, ya think?), plus there's clothes, magazines, videos (anyone > want old episodes of "ER" in SLP speed? Didn't think so) and, oh my, I > admire people who can live zen. I never could, and really wouldn't want > to, but I admire it. Eek. I know the feeling. Having moved about a dozen times in the past couple of decades, I haven't had the chance to build up quite as much of a backlog, but my stuff is still filling much of my mother's basement and garage in New Jersey while I'm living in a small room in Berkeley. I had handed off a whole lot of boxes of records when I left Delaware, and I lost most of my CDs and a whole lot of equipment in two other botched moves. I hadn't realized that Chicago had suffered an Ectophile Exodus. Though, come to think of it, I know a whole bunch of people who used to live there and moved elsewhere for a variety of reasons. ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V9 #175 **************************