en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ Thu, 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 Thu, 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 60 http://www.audioscrobbler.net/data/webservices http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal The Last.fm journal for Cuggar. Last.fm journals are a place to talk about all things music. http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2011/04/22/4cdkv9_lee_%2527scratch%2527_perry_%252B_bill_laswell Fri, 22 Apr 2011 16:48:52 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2011/04/22/4cdkv9_lee_%2527scratch%2527_perry_%252B_bill_laswell The new album of Lee 'Scratch' Perry, produced and arranged by Bill Laswell with Josh Werner, is to be released in May 2011.

Musicians:
Lee 'Scratch' Perry: vocals
Josh Werner: bass
Aaron Duggan: guitar
Aiyb Dieng: percussion
Bernie Worrell: keyboards
Gigi: vocals
Dr. Israel: vocals
Hawk: vocals
Hamid Drake: drums
Guy Licata: drums
Sly Dunbar: drums
Dominic Kanza: guitar
Steve Bernstein: trumpet
Peter Apfelbaum: saxophone
Jahdan Blakkamoore: vocals
Tunde Adebimpe: vocals

Keep an eye on MOD Technologies:
http://www.mod-technologies.com]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2010/02/15/3f3l6g_porcupine_tree_-_the_incident_on_tour_blog Mon, 15 Feb 2010 01:40:38 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2010/02/15/3f3l6g_porcupine_tree_-_the_incident_on_tour_blog For all the Porcupine Tree listeners out there, here is a nice tour blog with photos and comments from the band:

http://theincidentontour.blogspot.com]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2009/06/21/2tckiq_orban_loudness_meter_public_beta Sun, 21 Jun 2009 17:17:12 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2009/06/21/2tckiq_orban_loudness_meter_public_beta This is a nice free tool to measure the loudness of an album/track:
http://www.orban.com/meter

You can read more about the technology behind it here:
http://www.orban.com/meter/Technology.html

Measure some classic albums, some of your all time favourites. Then do the same tests for a few current major label releases. You will realize that the so called "loudness war" is a real danger to the global music culture.

(disclaimer: I don't work for Orban!)]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2008/09/23/26lcu2_hyperbola Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:30:41 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2008/09/23/26lcu2_hyperbola This is a fantastic blog about space technology and aviation:
Hyperbola]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2007/01/25/5ok5c_least_well_kept_%22secret%22_in_the_world Thu, 25 Jan 2007 18:09:44 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2007/01/25/5ok5c_least_well_kept_%22secret%22_in_the_world Least Well Kept "Secret" in the World: That RIAA prevailing price per download is 70 cents.

Ironically, as the RIAA battles on in its supposed struggle to keep its 70-cents-per-download wholesale price "confidential", in UMG v. Lindor, it has publicly filed court papers, in a discovery dispute before Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy, admitting that the 70-cents-per-download price is "in the correct range" and that "the actual numbers are in the range that you have suggested [approximately 70 cents per download]"

We wonder why the RIAA would struggle to keep such a well known fact "confidential". Could it be that they just want to make it more difficult for other litigants to obtain the evidence in admissible form?

Posted by Ray Beckerman posted at January 12, 2007 http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/blog/least-well-kept-secret-in-the-world-that-riaa-prevailing-price-per-download-is-70-cents/tbping]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/11/02/5ok1z_youtube_%2526_major_record_labels_deal%253F Thu, 2 Nov 2006 01:03:03 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/11/02/5ok1z_youtube_%2526_major_record_labels_deal%253F Some intimate details on the Google YouTube Deal:

"I'm an experienced veteran in the digital media business and thought I'd share my version of events that happened at Youtube. Some of this is based on talks with people involved and some is speculation based on my experience working in the industry, negotiating settlements and battling in court. In the months preceding the sale of YouTube the complaints from copyright owners began to mount at a ferocious pace. Small content owners and big were lodging official takedown notices only to see their works almost immediately reappear. These issues had to be disclosed to the suitors who were sniffing around like Google but Yahoo was deep in the process as well. (News Corp inquired but since Myspace knew they were a big source of Youtube's traffic they quickly choked on the 9 digit price tag.) While the search giants had serious interest, the suitors kept stumbling over the potential enormous copyright infringement claims that were mounting. Youtube knew they had an issue and had offered a straight revenue share deal if the complainants would call off the dogs and give them time. The media companies quickly rejected this path for two reasons. First off Youtube wasn't making any money and was fuzzy about how they would generate revenue in the future. But more important the media companies view is that there was a mountain of past infringement that Youtube had engaged in and built their business on and they felt they deserved some of this accumulated value. And who could blame them. In spite of the media "user generated" puff pieces it was clear to all involved that they generated that content by hooking up their TV tuner cards to their PCs. It didn't take a team of Harvard trained investment bankers to come up with the obvious solution and that is to set aside a portion of the buyout offer to deal with copyright issues. It's not uncommon in transactions to have holdbacks to deal with liabilities and Youtube knew they had a big one. So the parties (including venture capital firm Sequoia Capital) agreed to earmark a portion of the purchase price to pay for settlements and/or hire attorneys to fight claims. Nearly 500 million of the 1.65 billion purchase price is not being disbursed to shareholders but instead held in escrow. While this seemed good on paper Google attorneys were still uncomfortable with the enormous possible legal claims and speculated that maybe even 500 million may not be enough - remember were talking about hundreds of thousands of possible copyright infringements. Youtube attorneys emphasized the DMCA safe harbor provisions and pointed to the 3 full timers dedicated to dealing with takedown notices, but couldn't get G comfortable. Google wasn't worried about the small guys, but the big guys were a significant impediment to a sale. They could swing settlement numbers widely in one direction or another. So the decision was made to negotiate settlements with some of the largest music and film companies. If they could get to a good place with these companies they could get confidence from attorneys
and the ever important "fairness opinion" from the bankers involved that this was a sane purchase. Armed with this kitty of money Youtube approached the media companies with an open checkbook to buy peace. The media companies smelled a transaction when Youtube radically changed their initial 'revenue sharing' offer to one laden with cash. But even they didn't predict Google would pay such an exorbitant amount for Youtube so when Youtube started talking in multiples of tens of millions of dollars the media companies believed this to be fair and would lock in a nice Q3/Q4. [Note to self: Buy calls on media companies just prior to Q3/Q4 earnings calls.] The major labels got wind that their counterparts were in heated discussions so they used a now common trick a "most favored nation" clause to assure that if if a comparable company negotiated a better deal that they would also receive that benefit. It's a clever ploy to avoid anti-trust issues and gives them the benefit of securing the best negotiating company. They negotiated about 50 million for each major media company to be paid from the Google buyout monies. The media companies had their typical challenges. Specifically, how to get money from Youtube without being required to give any to the talent (musicians and actors)? If monies were received as part of a license to Youtube then they would contractually obligated to share a substantial portion of the proceeds with others. For example most record label contracts call for artists to get 50% of all license deals. It was decided the media companies would receive an equity position as an investor in Youtube which Google would buy from them. This shelters all the up front monies from any royalty demands by allowing them to classify it as gains from an investment position. A few savvy agents might complain about receiving nothing and get a token amount, but most will be unaware of what transpired. Since everyone was reaching into Google's wallet, the big G wants to make sure the Youtube purchase was a wise one. Youtube's value is predicated on it's traffic and market leadership which Google needs to keep. If they simply agreed to remove all unauthorized content and saddle the user experience with ads Youtube would quickly be a skeleton of its prior self. Users would quickly move to competing sites. The media companies had 50 million reasons to want to help. Google needed a two pronged strategy which you see unfolding now. The first request was a simple one and that was an agreement to look the other way for the next 6 months or so while copyright infringement continues to flourish. This standstill is cloaked in language about building tools to help manage the content and track royalties, some of which is true but also G knows that every day they can operate in the shadows of copyright law is another day that Youtube can grow. It should be noted that Google video is a capable Youtube competitor with the ONE big difference being a much more sincere effort to not post unauthorized works - and Google fully appreciates what a difference
that makes. So you can continue to find movie clips, tv show segments and just about every music video on Youtube today. The second request was to pile some lawsuits on competitors to slow them down and lock in Youtube's position. As Google looked at it they bought a 6 month exclusive on widespread video copyright infringement. Universal obliged and sued two capable Youtube clones Bolt and Grouper. This has several effects. First, it puts enormous pressure on all the other video sites to clamp down on the laissez-faire content posting that is prevalent. If Google is agreeing to remove unauthorized content they want the rest of the industry doing the same thing. Secondly it shuts off the flow of venture capital investments into video firms. Without capital these firms can't build the data centers and pay for the bandwidth required for these upside down businesses. There are some interesting chapters yet to unfold. One is how much of this will become public. Google is required by the SEC to disclose material financial developments at their company. Working in Google's advantage is their enormous market capitalization and revenues will give them considerable leeway to claim that a 50 million transaction is not significant to their business. If the other video sites have the wherewithal to put up a legal fight any decent attorney will demand access to Youtube acquisition documents. Expect a claim of collusion between Google and the media companies as a defense strategy. Infringement lawsuits will be served on Youtube and the new proud parent Google in the coming months. Google will respond with two paths: an expensive legal fight or a quick and easy settlement with most choosing the latter. Are there any larger copyright holders such as music publishers, movie studios, or unlicensed record label EMI that put up a fight rather than accepting the check? We'll have to watch and find out."

http://www.blogmaverick.com/2006/10/30/some-intimate-details-on-the-google-youtube-deal/]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/10/01/5ojte_british_classical_fans_like_to_download Sun, 1 Oct 2006 18:43:05 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/10/01/5ojte_british_classical_fans_like_to_download Gramophone magazine says that fans of the classical genre are fully embracing the digital music age following a reader survey which the title's editor reckons will "overturn our preconceptions about the kind of person who buys and listens to classical music".

Gramophone surveyed 60,000 of its readers about their music listening habits, and found that 75% used a computer, MP3 player or digital radio to listen to music. And while readers said they still listening to CDs and terrestrial radio, many also said they were now downloading music - with classical fans over the age of 50 having downloaded an average of eleven pieces of music last year. For those fans discovering downloading for the first time, beethoven, Mozart and Peter Maxwell Davies are the most popular choices for a first download.

Discussing the survey, Gramophone editor James Jolly told reporters: "All ages actively enjoy classical music, with the over-50s showing themselves to be particularly dynamic. Not only do they prove that they have considerable purchasing power, but they are also technologically adept."

The survey also asked readers which piece of music they thought should open the 2012 Olympics in London. Sir Edward Elgar's 'Land Of Hope And Glory' was the top choice, followed by Gustav Holst's 'The Planets' and 'Chariots Of Fire' by Vangelis.

source:
http://www.cmumusicnetwork.co.uk]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/09/10/5ojq4_charlie_hunter Sun, 10 Sep 2006 09:09:24 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/09/10/5ojq4_charlie_hunter Charlie Hunter is an amazing musician. Using his custom eight string guitar, he lays funky bass lines and energetic guitar chords and solos at the same time. Imagine three musicians playing together...

Charlie Hunter's music is an excellent mix of different styles - jazz, funk, blues, rock and everything in between. There's wailing notes, soulful phrasing, crazy guitar effects, textures, but above all, serious grooves that make you dance. If you expect the usual conservative jazz guitar playing you will definately be surprised. Charlie Hunter's soundscapes are surreal.

This is magic:
http://www.charliehunter.com]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/08/23/20z5g6_bob_dylan_says_modern_music_is_worthless Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:43:29 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/08/23/20z5g6_bob_dylan_says_modern_music_is_worthless Bob Dylan says modern recordings sound “atrocious,” and even the songs on his new album sounded much better in the studio than on disc.

Dylan, who returns with his first recording in five years, “Modern Times,” next Tuesday had this to say:

I don’t know anybody who’s made a record that sounds decent in the past twenty years, really,” the 65-year-old rocker said in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine.

Noting the music industry’s complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, “Well, why not? It ain’t worth nothing anyway.”

“You listen to these modern records, they’re atrocious, they have sound all over them,” he added. “There’s no definition of nothing, no vocal, no nothing, just like static.”

(from Reuters)]]> http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/08/21/5ojoo_google_begins_tracking_music_preferences%2C_trends Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:22:09 +0000 http://www.last.fm/user/Cuggar/journal/2006/08/21/5ojoo_google_begins_tracking_music_preferences%2C_trends Google Labs has just spun another music-oriented product, designed to track preferences and sought-after artists. Dubbed Music Trends, the service works through the Google Talk IM client and tracks global music consumption patterns. Talk users must opt-in to the service and "share" their music preferences from one of several players, including iTunes, Winamp, Windows Media Player, and the Yahoo Music Engine. Google then archives listening habits and presents the ranked results in a searchable database that is updated every night. Browsers can click on particular songs to access a variety of artist information, and can sometimes use links buy the song through one of several online stores.

Google is steadily aiming to organize the world's information, and the latest initiative is another step towards that goal. In his book, The Search, John Battelle identified the phenomenon of a "database of intentions," a description that neatly fits the latest release. Google noted Wednesday on its blog that "it would be fun for you to see the musical tastes of the broader community," and Music Trends will be interesting and valuable to a number of parties. The offering seems innocent enough, though others are more skeptical about the motivations behind the rollout. ZDNet’s Donna Bogatin noted the company is likely looking not only to "organize the world's information," but also to "sell ads against it." She speculates that Google could leverage its Music Trends data to bolster AdWords sales, and to spur an online music business through its recently unveiled PayPal-like service, Google Checkout.

Source:http://digitalmusicnews.com]]>