I think we all have a few bands that we feel we found and bugged our friends and anyone else who'd listen to hear them. My next article will be on one of the bands that never made it, the Galactic Cowboys, but this is about the ones that did and the excitement of feeling you changed someones listening life.
My first "Discovery" was Bon Jovi. Now I know everyone know them as a cheesy hair band/adult contemporary band, but before that they were a hard working rock band from New Jersey. I first heard them on a late night video show on local PBS when I saw "Runaway" and the hook was so strong that it just had to be a hit... It wasn't. Sure, it's well known for them now, but at the time, not so much. Then they released the much better "7800 degrees Fahrenheit" which may have actually done worse. I was telling everyone about these guys and playing them constantly getting one of my best friends to become a big fan (which he still is). Then came the big record "Slippery When Wet" and they were everywhere! They followed up with 2 more huge records but then made the darker "These Days" record (their best by the way) and all of a sudden I found myself trying to tell people about this band again as everyone seemed to have lost interest. It took a few solo albums and changes of music styles, but the band has been back for years, but I was one of the first...
My second band I found before all my friends (and a lot of the world) was Guns n Roses. I was one of the few that saw the one airing on Mtv of the video of "Welcome To The Jungle" and went out that day and bought the cassette. That guitar riff still sends chills up my spine! I listened to it over and over (which was not a great idea in the cassette age, lol) and then playing that for anyone in any situation where I had the chance to hit "play" on the boombox. But the song that I told people that was going to be huge was "Sweet Child O' Mine" before it was even a single. It wasn't even my favorite song on the album (Rocket Queen, Jungle or Paradise City fought it out for fave) but I knew it was catchy as hell and had another unique guitar sound. Within a month and a half or so everyone was talking GnR and within a year they were the biggest band on the planet, but I was one of the first...
My third time was Extreme. I remember seeing TV ads for the movie "Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure" and hearing this crazy guitar going on underneath it all, but never could hear the singer and the band wasn't credited. One day I just happened to hear on one of our no defunct rock radio stations in Detroit the song and the DJ actually saying the name of the band and the song (I miss those days) as Extreme and the song was "Play With Me" and once again, off to Harmony House I go! What a great album! Full of great guitar playing and unusual lyrics for a "hair metal" band and I couldn't wait for the second record. I had a lot of friends listening, but not buying the first Extreme, but "Pornograffitti changed that... Especially "More Than Words". The album was big and the song was bigger, in fact it held a record for most returned album for some time because some people (mostly of an older variety, haha) would buy it for "More Than Words" and find a very hard rocking rest of the disc that had a lot of adult themes. They followed that up with the great "III Sides To Every Story" which had a couple minor hits, then they went in a dark different direction with "Waiting For The Punchline" which didn't do well at all. Then out of the blue Gary Cherone (singer) is signed on to sing with Van Halen and Nuno Bettencourt (guitar) is doing side projects. They broke up, but in 2008 they reunited with "Saudades De Rock". I never saw them get bigger then theater tours, in fact we saw them at the beginning of the "Pornograffitti" tour at a tiny club in Detroit called "The Ritz with Alice In Chains Opening, but I won't take credit for exposing my friends to them as they were there and we didn't even notice the band til later that year, "Man In The Box" was big and that's when we noticed we saw them and no one even knew, lol.
What bands have you found and forced upon your friends til they finally saw the light? Let me know... I'd love to check them out!
Sunday, July 31, 2011
The 27 club
The death of Amy Winehouse has brought the dreaded "27 club" back into the lexicon. Let's get out of the way first... It's a club, not a curse. If it were a curse there would be a lot more dead. The reason for the "curse" talk is that in general most people claim Robert Johnson was the first member after going to the crossroads and making a deal with the devil to become a great bluesman and traded his soul and that many have done this after him and mate with his same fate. Problem with the theory is that the biggest star to be associated with this deal (at least in my opinion) is Jimmy Page, and he's still kicking around. Also the fame but unusual deaths of stars much bigger then those in the club, but at a much older age (Elvis & Lennon come to mind) makes the idea of a curse seem silly to me.
However one can't deny the coincidence of the age of all these musicians or the impact that a majority of them had. The poster childs of the club are Brian Jones, the founder of The Rolling Stones, Janis Joplin, influential female blues singer, Jimi Hendrix, considered by many the greatest guitar player ever, Jim Morrison, lead singer for The Doors and Kurt Cobain, leader of Nirvana. It's hard to say at this time if Amy Winehouse deserves to be on that list, but she did join the club none the less.
So how does this happen? My personal opinion.... Too much, too young. Maybe that's too easy, but imagine having the world at your feet and more money then you can ever know what to do with and you aren't even 30! And to top it off... No one will dare tell you "No". You are still immature yet you need to make decisions that would stress out an experienced CEO. Band members, road crews, record labels, agents, managers and fans are now depending on you and just a few years ago maybe you were flipping burgers... It's gotta be insane. So you turn to drugs and partying to release the stress, after all... This is what you know, you are too young to understand that you have all the power to tell everyone to just slow down for your own good, heck... You're young... You will live forever!!
I fear we will see this much more often in this TMZ society. The press adds even more pressure to an already volatile situation and it seems our young stars can't fart without a thousand cameras catching it. I see Miley Cyrus and Lindsay Lohan heading down these paths and I'm sure there is more to come. Maybe next time we see a sad pathetic, falling down drunk or stoned star, instead of laughing at them or instead of the courts sending them to jail for 2 hours we take this serious and help them and stop enabling them.
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Shine On You Crazy Diamond
Syd's story is inspiring, influential and tragic at the same time. He inspired and continues to do so with his wild imagination. He was in a constant state of pushing boundaries through his art. It was his vision that caused EMI Records to take note of what his band was doing to push rock in a new direction. He was among the first in all of rock & roll to see how well visuals could be used in a live setting to accompany the music. As far as influence goes, one need look no further than every music performance over the past 3 decades or so. Prior to the stage productions of the Pink Floyd shows of the late 60's, concerts were prone to using "house lights" along with an occasional spot light on a featured band member. Syd had a much larger vision for what a rock performance could be and it branched out from him directly to every other stage on Earth. The alternating, variable lighting and rudimentary overhead projections of the time have made way to other artists constantly borrowing from and enhancing the same scheme to this very day.
After Syd was removed from Pink Floyd, he did go on to create a number of solo tracks which where originally released as his solo albums "The Madcap Laughs" and "Barrett" in the beginning and end of 1970 respectively. These albums, along with several outtakes and remixes of sorts have appeared on upwards of 10 compilation projects through the years.
One of my favorite songs Syd ever released was called "Octopus" (above) from The Mapcap Laughs LP. Recorded and released a few years after he'd been deemed unfit to carry on making music, I really feel that it shows something was still there for Syd creatively. For whatever reason, Syd chose to discontinue making music entirely soon after the original release of the first two solo efforts. At no point did he partake in any further live performances neither solo or with Pink Floyd.
Pink Floyd obviously went on to greater success after Syd's departure. While working on their own Pink Floyd related projects, the members kept in touch with Syd as much as they could. David Gilmour and Richard Wright also lent a hand to the material and overall production of both of Syd's solo efforts. After the monumental album and tour for The Dark Side of the Moon, the remaining members of Floyd did not forget their original inspiration. Their next effort, 1975's "Wish You Were Here" is both a lavish tribute to their friend and scathing comment on the record industry that had a hand in pushing Syd well beyond his limits. At 40 some odd minutes and only 5 tracks long, the record stopped off in the middle for angry tracks like "Welcome To The Machine" and "Have A Cigar" to mark the anger with the music industry previously mentioned. Near the end of the record is the title track which is so universal, it can be applied to just about anyone. But with it's place in the track listing, one can only assume that Syd was front of mind when lyrics like "Did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage?" were written. The album is book ended with "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" (above), a sprawling and brilliant direct tribute to Syd. The song is a tribute and cautionary tale at the same time. Many of the lyrics point to the sheer brilliance that was Syd and others warn of the price Syd eventually paid. Can you read the prior quote from David Gilmour about Syd's decline and not immediately reference the lyric "Now there's a look in your eyes, like black holes in the sky"?
As I said before, a quick Google search will quench any sort of thirst you have for knowledge of Syd's decline so I don't need to focus on that. I choose instead to focus on what he did accomplish, what he inspired, who he influenced and the music he gave us both directly and indirectly. He left our world physically five years ago today. He remains in so many hearts now and forever.
"Come on you raver, you seer of visions,
Come on you piper, you prisoner and shine"
Roger Keith "Syd" Barrett
January 6, 1946-July 7, 2006
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Clarence Clemens: RIP big man
Clarence Clemons January 11, 1942 – June 18, 2011
We lost one of the best known sidemen in all of music yesterday when Clarence Clemons died from complications of a stroke yesterday. He suffered the stroke a week earlier and all indications was he would pull through, but almost a week later the bad news hit and now one of the biggest personalities in rock is gone.
If you have never seen Bruce Springsteen live you will never truly know the impact of Clarence. You can hear stories, you can watch video, but it isn't the same. Clarence was like a big burly sax carrying bodyguard for Bruce always right there with him to his right and always with a big smile on his face. You could always tell he loved being on stage and loved playing in that band.
I've seen the band 3 times. The first time was on the "Born In The USA" tour at the Pontiac Silverdome. The band was at the top of it's game, it was a well known commodity before this, but now they were on a different planet and playing in front of 70,000 people and made it feel like a club that was just over stuffed with friends. Since I had never seen the band I didn't know what to expect, you always heard about these great 3 hour marathon shows and I was thinking "3 hours? This could get boring in the middle, ugh..." But because of the band chemistry and the show that was put on it felt like a short show and Clarence was a huge part of it.
The 2nd time was at the Joe Louis Arena, this time on the "Tunnel Of Love" tour and it was another show where I wasn't sure what we would get. The album was a somber one about relationships falling apart and most of the E street band was not on the record. But the band didn't disappoint. They had several stage props including a bench where Bruce sat with Clarence and sang "Glory Days", but I will never forget the beginning of the show... They had a ticket booth at the front corner of the stage, each band member walked out and bought a ticket and took their place on stage, one by one they come out to applause (by now everyone in the band was recognizable) and then the big man came out and the roof damn near came off the place! He stood there and smiled at the crowd for a second and took it in, I think he was as happy to see us as we were to see him. Of course Bruce was last out, but Clarence had just as big a reception... He was that important.
The 3rd time was on "The Rising" tour at the Palace of Auburn Hills. It had been a long time since I'd seen Bruce live, a few solo tours that just didn't do it for me and a E Street reunion that I was too broke for, but I loved the album and didn't want to miss them again, so we went. It was an odd show because the album was about Bruce's reaction to 9/11 and he wanted some reflective moments which is not a party type thing, but when the E Streeters were out there it was fun and Clarence lead the way.
The last time I actually watched them was on TV at the Superbowl half time show. For me they were the 2nd best performance that the Superbowl has had (hard to beat Prince) and the amazing thing is that up to a week before the show I was hearing Clarence may not be there. He had just had knee surgery and was having a hard time walking, let alone standing, he was a big man after all, and I was telling people that were looking forward to it to not get too upset because it wouldn't be the same without him. Yesterday I read an account from a sports writer who was there. He saw Clarence and some handlers struggling to get him on stage and then once he got up there... BOOM! The big man! If you watch that performance you would never know he was in great pain.
If you have never seen Bruce Springsteen live you will never truly know the impact of Clarence. You can hear stories, you can watch video, but it isn't the same. Clarence was like a big burly sax carrying bodyguard for Bruce always right there with him to his right and always with a big smile on his face. You could always tell he loved being on stage and loved playing in that band.
I've seen the band 3 times. The first time was on the "Born In The USA" tour at the Pontiac Silverdome. The band was at the top of it's game, it was a well known commodity before this, but now they were on a different planet and playing in front of 70,000 people and made it feel like a club that was just over stuffed with friends. Since I had never seen the band I didn't know what to expect, you always heard about these great 3 hour marathon shows and I was thinking "3 hours? This could get boring in the middle, ugh..." But because of the band chemistry and the show that was put on it felt like a short show and Clarence was a huge part of it.
The 2nd time was at the Joe Louis Arena, this time on the "Tunnel Of Love" tour and it was another show where I wasn't sure what we would get. The album was a somber one about relationships falling apart and most of the E street band was not on the record. But the band didn't disappoint. They had several stage props including a bench where Bruce sat with Clarence and sang "Glory Days", but I will never forget the beginning of the show... They had a ticket booth at the front corner of the stage, each band member walked out and bought a ticket and took their place on stage, one by one they come out to applause (by now everyone in the band was recognizable) and then the big man came out and the roof damn near came off the place! He stood there and smiled at the crowd for a second and took it in, I think he was as happy to see us as we were to see him. Of course Bruce was last out, but Clarence had just as big a reception... He was that important.
The 3rd time was on "The Rising" tour at the Palace of Auburn Hills. It had been a long time since I'd seen Bruce live, a few solo tours that just didn't do it for me and a E Street reunion that I was too broke for, but I loved the album and didn't want to miss them again, so we went. It was an odd show because the album was about Bruce's reaction to 9/11 and he wanted some reflective moments which is not a party type thing, but when the E Streeters were out there it was fun and Clarence lead the way.
The last time I actually watched them was on TV at the Superbowl half time show. For me they were the 2nd best performance that the Superbowl has had (hard to beat Prince) and the amazing thing is that up to a week before the show I was hearing Clarence may not be there. He had just had knee surgery and was having a hard time walking, let alone standing, he was a big man after all, and I was telling people that were looking forward to it to not get too upset because it wouldn't be the same without him. Yesterday I read an account from a sports writer who was there. He saw Clarence and some handlers struggling to get him on stage and then once he got up there... BOOM! The big man! If you watch that performance you would never know he was in great pain.
He most recently contributed to Lady Gaga's "Born This Way" on 2 songs, one of them being the single "Edge Of Glory" showing once again that he was more then just Bruce's sideman but also a sought out performer 40 years into his career.
Side men are rarely known unless they have a significant solo career also. Clarence was the E Street band. I don't know if they will play again, this is their 2nd loss (Danny Federici died in 2008 while they were on tour, he was not on tour with them though) and their drummer can't handle the road stress anymore (So his son replaced him, lol) but this feels like the main cog is gone. It will never be the same again.
Side men are rarely known unless they have a significant solo career also. Clarence was the E Street band. I don't know if they will play again, this is their 2nd loss (Danny Federici died in 2008 while they were on tour, he was not on tour with them though) and their drummer can't handle the road stress anymore (So his son replaced him, lol) but this feels like the main cog is gone. It will never be the same again.
I'm going to leave with one of my favorite songs from the band live and it also features Clarence pretty heavily
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Michael Jackson 08/29/58 - 06/25/09
"Was Michael Jackson a friend of yours daddy?"
That's what my (then) 3 year old son said to me when I picked him up at daycare on June 25, 2009. I'd received a text about 30 minutes prior from a co-worker that read "Dude, Michael Jackson is dead". This particular co-worked spent a good amount of time on gossip websites so my immediate thought was "Nah... he read some BS on the internet". So I continued driving, listening to a mix CD in my car and finally arrived at my son's day care. When I turned the engine off, I opened my car door and stopped for a second. Again the thought of "Nah...." crossed my mind. Then I put the key back in the ignition and switched my car stereo to FM. I quickly flipped to one of the "pop" stations and heard the DJ say "...and that's all the information we have right now" then a far more familiar voice sang to me; "Another day is gone, I'm still all alone..." I turned the car off and literally went into shock.
I got out of the car and began to tear up. When I walked into the day care, people could see that I was shaken. They asked "What's wrong?" and my simple reply was "Michael Jackson died today". I could tell that this was news to those who asked because they all stopped what they were doing as well. Some became visibly shaken in the same way that I head. When I got to my son, he asked why I was so upset and knowing he wouldn't understand, I just said "Oh, daddy just got some very sad news, I'll be ok". When we got in the car, I couldn't help but leave the FM station on. I knew, if nothing else that there would be a bunch of his music playing.
When we made our way home, I turned on MTV to find that (as if it were 1983) they were playing Michael Jackson videos non stop. A very good friend of mine began to text me while watching the same broadcast I was across the state, consoling me (each other really) and talking about how shocking the news was, etc. My son sat on the couch next to me, enjoying the music and occasionally rubbing my back and smiling at me when I would get overcome.
Eventually, after hours of silence between us, my son said "Was Michael Jackson a friend of yours daddy?" When he first said it, I had about 2 seconds of shock; those of you who are parents know that "Kids Say The Darndest Things" moment. But I took a few more minutes, thought about it and replied "Yeah, Zakk. He certainly was"
Why did I say that? Why did he know to ask it?
I do not by any means claim to have been "friends" in the traditional sense with Michael Jackson. But what is a friend? Is a friend someone who brings something to your life? Is a friend someone who's there for you when you need it? Someone who lifts you up higher when you're doing great and someone who reaches down to help you up when you're at your lowest low? Seems like a pretty good definition to me of "friend" and I'll tell you what, Michael Jackson has been there for me TEN FOLD in both instances.
Does that mean I consider all musicians or all of my favorite bands "friends"? No, not by any means. It means that those rare tunes and/or artists, those who put it all out there, those who went in whatever direction their heart told them to and somehow, someway, I felt exactly what they were doing or meant to say... those are my friends. I count a song that knows how to bring me up and keep me there, or bring me down and keep me there as a friend. And Michael Jackson had so many of those to share with us and he did all the way to the end.
His passing was a world wide event in the same way that his record releases, tours and videos had been so many times in the past. On June 25, 2009 I had a friend on the other side of the planet stop in her tracks and stick to a TV to see the coverage. I had a friend (and contributor to this blog) who is as metal as metal gets, find a new appreciation for Michael and his music. I had a friend mine across the state who finds humor in EVERYTHING stop what he was doing to console me as much as possible and share in at least 25 years of Michael Jackson memories. I found my room mate and many of her friends gather at our house for a make shift vigil to Michael and his music. And I had my 3 year old son silent, sitting in support, appreciating the music with me in support.
Michael Jackson was something special and that is a vast understatement. This planet will never again see someone with such a wild imagination and so incredibly talented as a performer. As we approach two years without him, sometimes I get angry that he is gone, sometimes I am thankful he gave us everything he did. I sometimes find solace in watching This Is It, the documentary pieced together after his death about the incredible show he was planning. But at all times, I miss him.
To Michael Joseph Jackson, wherever you are, I say THANK YOU. I, along with so many others world wide, miss you so much. But you continually shared your will, determination and raw talent with us. It's so hard to deal with you being gone, but I truly believe that a world without you would've been so much less. They say "It's lonely at the top" and I hope that for all he had to endure, that Michael Jackson at least passed with the assurance that he had "friends" through the magic that he shared.
Michael Joseph Jackson
August 29, 1958 - June 25, 2009
I will miss you always
Your friend,
Russ
That's what my (then) 3 year old son said to me when I picked him up at daycare on June 25, 2009. I'd received a text about 30 minutes prior from a co-worker that read "Dude, Michael Jackson is dead". This particular co-worked spent a good amount of time on gossip websites so my immediate thought was "Nah... he read some BS on the internet". So I continued driving, listening to a mix CD in my car and finally arrived at my son's day care. When I turned the engine off, I opened my car door and stopped for a second. Again the thought of "Nah...." crossed my mind. Then I put the key back in the ignition and switched my car stereo to FM. I quickly flipped to one of the "pop" stations and heard the DJ say "...and that's all the information we have right now" then a far more familiar voice sang to me; "Another day is gone, I'm still all alone..." I turned the car off and literally went into shock.
I got out of the car and began to tear up. When I walked into the day care, people could see that I was shaken. They asked "What's wrong?" and my simple reply was "Michael Jackson died today". I could tell that this was news to those who asked because they all stopped what they were doing as well. Some became visibly shaken in the same way that I head. When I got to my son, he asked why I was so upset and knowing he wouldn't understand, I just said "Oh, daddy just got some very sad news, I'll be ok". When we got in the car, I couldn't help but leave the FM station on. I knew, if nothing else that there would be a bunch of his music playing.
When we made our way home, I turned on MTV to find that (as if it were 1983) they were playing Michael Jackson videos non stop. A very good friend of mine began to text me while watching the same broadcast I was across the state, consoling me (each other really) and talking about how shocking the news was, etc. My son sat on the couch next to me, enjoying the music and occasionally rubbing my back and smiling at me when I would get overcome.
Eventually, after hours of silence between us, my son said "Was Michael Jackson a friend of yours daddy?" When he first said it, I had about 2 seconds of shock; those of you who are parents know that "Kids Say The Darndest Things" moment. But I took a few more minutes, thought about it and replied "Yeah, Zakk. He certainly was"
Why did I say that? Why did he know to ask it?
I do not by any means claim to have been "friends" in the traditional sense with Michael Jackson. But what is a friend? Is a friend someone who brings something to your life? Is a friend someone who's there for you when you need it? Someone who lifts you up higher when you're doing great and someone who reaches down to help you up when you're at your lowest low? Seems like a pretty good definition to me of "friend" and I'll tell you what, Michael Jackson has been there for me TEN FOLD in both instances.
Does that mean I consider all musicians or all of my favorite bands "friends"? No, not by any means. It means that those rare tunes and/or artists, those who put it all out there, those who went in whatever direction their heart told them to and somehow, someway, I felt exactly what they were doing or meant to say... those are my friends. I count a song that knows how to bring me up and keep me there, or bring me down and keep me there as a friend. And Michael Jackson had so many of those to share with us and he did all the way to the end.
His passing was a world wide event in the same way that his record releases, tours and videos had been so many times in the past. On June 25, 2009 I had a friend on the other side of the planet stop in her tracks and stick to a TV to see the coverage. I had a friend (and contributor to this blog) who is as metal as metal gets, find a new appreciation for Michael and his music. I had a friend mine across the state who finds humor in EVERYTHING stop what he was doing to console me as much as possible and share in at least 25 years of Michael Jackson memories. I found my room mate and many of her friends gather at our house for a make shift vigil to Michael and his music. And I had my 3 year old son silent, sitting in support, appreciating the music with me in support.
Michael Jackson was something special and that is a vast understatement. This planet will never again see someone with such a wild imagination and so incredibly talented as a performer. As we approach two years without him, sometimes I get angry that he is gone, sometimes I am thankful he gave us everything he did. I sometimes find solace in watching This Is It, the documentary pieced together after his death about the incredible show he was planning. But at all times, I miss him.
To Michael Joseph Jackson, wherever you are, I say THANK YOU. I, along with so many others world wide, miss you so much. But you continually shared your will, determination and raw talent with us. It's so hard to deal with you being gone, but I truly believe that a world without you would've been so much less. They say "It's lonely at the top" and I hope that for all he had to endure, that Michael Jackson at least passed with the assurance that he had "friends" through the magic that he shared.
Michael Joseph Jackson
August 29, 1958 - June 25, 2009
I will miss you always
Your friend,
Russ
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Music "Business" & iTunes
So yesterday was Record Store Day 2011. It was an awesome experience for me. While I was only interested in the Foo Fighters "Medium Rare" release, it was still great to be involved with. When I arrived at Dearborn Music around 8:30am, I found a line already existed in the rain! We quickly struck up conversation with others in line, discussed what releases each person was there for and just talked music in general with others. It instantly took me about about 20 years to a time when this was just a regular occurrence. It happened every Tuesday morning (but usually the Monday night before), when new quality releases were coming from artists and the fans were excited day in and day out.
However, Record Store Day is not the focus for this entry. Let's go back about 12 hours prior to getting in line at Dearborn Music. While doing a scan of Facebook, I'd noticed that Lady Gaga announced her new single "Judas" was being released 4 days early via iTunes for the price of $1.29. As time went on, the mere thought of this bothered me more and more. I've made my thoughts clear on iTunes and how many things it does counter-culture to what music, art, artists and fans are about, so I don't need to retread that here. But it's this particular practice of exclusive product with inflated cost that has me quite bothered.
It basically boils down to this; How is it ok and applauded by the public to charge a THIRD more for a product or service just because you can provide it earlier than others? Anyone else employing the business model of iTunes would be called on the carpet in public forums. You may say "It's only twenty-nine cents, what's the big deal?" And I would answer in this fashion "That's exactly what they expect you to say" Can you think of one other product or service that this is acceptable from? Electronics stores have exclusive products constantly that range from early movie or album releases, to gadget and even appliance exclusives. Do they up-charge? Sometimes. But 30%? Not that I've ever seen, it's not acceptable and there would be public outrage. In most cases I've encountered, media products might receive a $1 inflation based on an original cost between $10-$25. So you're dealing with one or less than one percent profit being made from exclusivity. Electronics & gadgets tend to be even less. Take a hot new gadget with an MSRP of around $400. The highest I've ever seen items like this at a store stocking it exclusively is around $10. So again, a fair charge to get the product earlier from one venue in particular.
Really think about it and ask yourself; would I consider paying 30% more for any other product if it were exclusive to one venue? Or would you consider this to be shady, under-handed, untrustworthy, etc? Now let's take it a step further; what if that product only worked via a device provided by the same venue charging you 30% more to use it in the first place?
I'll give a fabricated, non-real world example to make my point more clear. Let's say that an energy company manufactured small home appliances. But in order to use their products, you had to have special outlets installed in your home. These outlets didn't work any different than the wide variety of other outlets available, they were just "locked down" so to speak. They only power this company's products and sometimes cause problems with your other, non-compatible appliances. Now add this to the pile; now that you've installed this companies outlet (or delivery system) in your home; now you are locked into buying only their products to work with that outlet. Upon investigation, you find out that their products are several under powered when compared to similar products from other companies. To further compound the issue, you find out that these under powered products are priced two and sometimes FOUR times as much as other, more powerful products.
So far in this example, you've bought into two items that cost more, offer less functionality and often times cause many convenience issues. Now to top things off, you come to find out that you can get an item to use with this appliance a little earlier than elsewhere. In this example, the item will cost $100 elsewhere in a few short days. But the company that sold you on their outlet and their appliance that runs on that outlet will let you have that item a few days early for $130. Would you even consider that? Would you think of it as a favor, a plus or a reason to do business with that company? I sincerely doubt it. In fact, I believe quite the contrary. I honestly believe that if ANY other company on planet Earth used these practices, they would be subject to endless amounts of controversy and they wouldn't have a customer base very long.
Yet for some reason, this practice is not only ok, but expected and accepted from iTunes. You have to over pay quite a bit for any product in the iPod line. You have to install their system resources heavy, exclusive software that only works with the iPod line. And then get a song early that they're already overcharging for (at their regular $.99 price), you have to pay 30% more. It's wrong, it's bad for business and all I can do is hope that someday soon the general public wakes up and realizes it. When something is at such a low price point, it's easier to get away with practices like this. As I said before, you were probably thinking "But it's just thirty cents!" near the beginning of this post. But again, I maintain that it's the practice, not the price that it's important. You wouldn't go to a car dealership to purchase a car that only runs on a certain company's fuel, if that fuel were over priced. And you certainly wouldn't find it acceptable to pay 30% for a $30000 vehicle because they could get it to you a few days early.
So why is it ok for iTunes to do the same thing?
-Russ
However, Record Store Day is not the focus for this entry. Let's go back about 12 hours prior to getting in line at Dearborn Music. While doing a scan of Facebook, I'd noticed that Lady Gaga announced her new single "Judas" was being released 4 days early via iTunes for the price of $1.29. As time went on, the mere thought of this bothered me more and more. I've made my thoughts clear on iTunes and how many things it does counter-culture to what music, art, artists and fans are about, so I don't need to retread that here. But it's this particular practice of exclusive product with inflated cost that has me quite bothered.
It basically boils down to this; How is it ok and applauded by the public to charge a THIRD more for a product or service just because you can provide it earlier than others? Anyone else employing the business model of iTunes would be called on the carpet in public forums. You may say "It's only twenty-nine cents, what's the big deal?" And I would answer in this fashion "That's exactly what they expect you to say" Can you think of one other product or service that this is acceptable from? Electronics stores have exclusive products constantly that range from early movie or album releases, to gadget and even appliance exclusives. Do they up-charge? Sometimes. But 30%? Not that I've ever seen, it's not acceptable and there would be public outrage. In most cases I've encountered, media products might receive a $1 inflation based on an original cost between $10-$25. So you're dealing with one or less than one percent profit being made from exclusivity. Electronics & gadgets tend to be even less. Take a hot new gadget with an MSRP of around $400. The highest I've ever seen items like this at a store stocking it exclusively is around $10. So again, a fair charge to get the product earlier from one venue in particular.
Really think about it and ask yourself; would I consider paying 30% more for any other product if it were exclusive to one venue? Or would you consider this to be shady, under-handed, untrustworthy, etc? Now let's take it a step further; what if that product only worked via a device provided by the same venue charging you 30% more to use it in the first place?
I'll give a fabricated, non-real world example to make my point more clear. Let's say that an energy company manufactured small home appliances. But in order to use their products, you had to have special outlets installed in your home. These outlets didn't work any different than the wide variety of other outlets available, they were just "locked down" so to speak. They only power this company's products and sometimes cause problems with your other, non-compatible appliances. Now add this to the pile; now that you've installed this companies outlet (or delivery system) in your home; now you are locked into buying only their products to work with that outlet. Upon investigation, you find out that their products are several under powered when compared to similar products from other companies. To further compound the issue, you find out that these under powered products are priced two and sometimes FOUR times as much as other, more powerful products.
So far in this example, you've bought into two items that cost more, offer less functionality and often times cause many convenience issues. Now to top things off, you come to find out that you can get an item to use with this appliance a little earlier than elsewhere. In this example, the item will cost $100 elsewhere in a few short days. But the company that sold you on their outlet and their appliance that runs on that outlet will let you have that item a few days early for $130. Would you even consider that? Would you think of it as a favor, a plus or a reason to do business with that company? I sincerely doubt it. In fact, I believe quite the contrary. I honestly believe that if ANY other company on planet Earth used these practices, they would be subject to endless amounts of controversy and they wouldn't have a customer base very long.
Yet for some reason, this practice is not only ok, but expected and accepted from iTunes. You have to over pay quite a bit for any product in the iPod line. You have to install their system resources heavy, exclusive software that only works with the iPod line. And then get a song early that they're already overcharging for (at their regular $.99 price), you have to pay 30% more. It's wrong, it's bad for business and all I can do is hope that someday soon the general public wakes up and realizes it. When something is at such a low price point, it's easier to get away with practices like this. As I said before, you were probably thinking "But it's just thirty cents!" near the beginning of this post. But again, I maintain that it's the practice, not the price that it's important. You wouldn't go to a car dealership to purchase a car that only runs on a certain company's fuel, if that fuel were over priced. And you certainly wouldn't find it acceptable to pay 30% for a $30000 vehicle because they could get it to you a few days early.
So why is it ok for iTunes to do the same thing?
-Russ
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Kurt & Courtney
Being the recent anniversary of the death of Kurt Cobain Hulu.com recently promoted that they had this doc on their website, I had seen it before years ago and thought it may be interesting to see it again since it was a long time since I had seen it.
The doc was done by Nick Broomfield a British film maker, and from the outset you can tell the film was done on the real cheap and you find out why about 1/2 of the way through the film. If you want something slick you will not like this at all.
The film starts as an examination of Cobain's relationship with Courtney Love and a look into his early life. We see the typical Cobain bridge in Seattle shots, we are taken to his school and hear from a teacher of his and an aunt. All say he was sweet but lonely in different ways and all look very unprepared for the meetings (A running theme throughout the movie). We go to a pre-fame girlfriend who has held on to a lot of Kurt's artwork from back then. You start to notice a lot of odd silence in the movie were the interviewee is nervously staring at the interviewer waiting for a sign on what he wants, Mr. Broomfield needs an editor badly.
This gets us to his relationship with Courtney. Looking back it feels like they were together for a long time, however the movie states it was only 2 years. He tracks down an old friend that the couple did drugs with, a friend who was repeatedly (and sadly) shunned by Kurt's handlers. Then it starts to get a little strange. The drug friend seems to be out of it, not that she is on something right then, but you can tell the years of drugs has killed most of what she may have been. Then we get to see some of Courtney's "people"... A father who has basically disowned her and a ex boyfriend/rockstar who claims Courtney's drive for fame drove him away from fame.
Courtney's father comes off in the film as a man angry at his daughter for her wild actions or just trying to peddle his books about the grunge couple. However after further research you find out that this man was a big force behind the Greatful Dead and has published many books on his own, most having nothing to do with Kurt or Courtney. But in the movie he comes off as a revengeful, sour man.
Next is Rozz Rezabek. He is a former Seattle phenom who Courtney tried to push to be famous. It got so crazy that he moved far away and dropped out. His thoughts are that Courtney wanted to be famous riding on the coattails of her famous boyfriend or husband, this is her game plan and he has her old writings to back his theory. Another weird, angry person in this story.
Now the film turns to a conspiracy movie. Did Courtney have Kurt killed? As odd as people had been... We ain't seen nothing yet... Welcome El Duce! We find ourselves in a vehicle being driven by "Divine Brown's pimp"!?! (Yes.... The "Hugh Grant" Divine Brown) And he claims to know someone who claims Courtney offered him $50,000 to kill Kurt and his name is El Duce, a singer for a band called The Mentors. We get some awful Mentors video. As they pull in they are greeted by a broken privacy fence and a barking dog, then a crazy, degenerate looking man who is introduced as El Duce. He says on camera the story of Courtney and $50,000 as best as his drunken self can. He also mentions a man named Alan then says "Ooops.... I'll let the FBI find him!" followed by laughter. It has been assumed by many that "Alan" killed Kurt, we may never know as El Duce dies two days later after passing out on a train track after leaving with some unknown individual.
We also get Tom Grant, a former cop who is now a PI who believes Courtney had Kurt killed. He even has an interesting site about it http://cobaincase.com/index.htm . The movie spends a lot of time with him really focusing on two things, the lack of fingerprints and the amount of heroin in Kurt's system (2 times a lethal dose) the latter is debunked by a doctor by showing a man standing on one leg with what is assumed is the same amount of heroin. There is a mountain of evidence on the site though that is better then these 2 items (Though they are bombshells themselves), I would recommend a look at the site if you are into this type of thing.
The film takes another turn as the films financing starts to be denied. A big financier is MTV and at the time "The People Vs. Larry Flint" is out and in the Oscar hunt, and Courtney is a big star on the rise. She is threating lawsuits against everyone who says or does anything remotely negative about her or Kurt. Nervous people start pulling the plug on the film and no we have gone from relationships and examining childhoods to a murder mystery to a movie about censorship.
We also get a visit with Dylan Carlson, Kurt's best friend and a very odd, screwed up individual. One thing you should keep in mind is that all these people had scheduled interviews and supposedly knew the subject matter, yet almost all seemed oddly lost. Dylan thinks that all the odd circumstances are just coincidence and then makes a very unconvincing threat saying that Kurt couldn't have been killed because if he had been then Dylan would have killed those responsible. We also go back to Courtney's dad for some more crazy threats to her and to the friend who was shunned by the handlers, she says she is scared of Courtney, we get a similar story from a journalist who had done a story on the couple when Courtney was pregnant, everyone in Seattle seems to be frightened of Courtney who is coming off as a psychotic lunatic who now has lots of money. We also go back to the druggie friend from earlier who claims to have pics of all three of them shooting up, which she never produces.
We end up with Broomfield finding Courtney at an ACLU gathering where she speaks of freedom of press as she is shutting down access and threating lawsuits behind the scenes. Mr. Broomfield somehow finds his way to the stage to call out Courtney but is quickly taken offstage after his comments, pretty ballsy stuff.
In the end Mr. Broomfield claims that he has not seen enough to say Kurt was murdered, but he is definitely not a Courtney fan. The doc is OK, a little messy, not very well produced, but worth it for the characters that the film comes across. It would have been nice if it could have used some Nirvana music, however Courtney killed that, but I doubt I had to tell you that, lol. I would recommend watching it if you like the music or are into conspiracies at all, just be ready for a slightly disjointed movie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)