Watching Movies Alone with crumbsroom

Tools    





What's to hate? It's one of the best films inspired by the Trump administration around.



What's to hate? It's one of the best films inspired by the Trump administration around.

It's just kind of dopey. And the impact of all of its supposed sins against humanity, were kind of lost amongst all my eye rolling. It feels like it was squeezed out of a particularly highschool aged spleen.



Now, because it's Von Trier, who I basically love against all of my best judgement, I was almost amused by its weird mix of tantrum and what seemed like him trying to come to terms with his artistic villainy (seemingly both justifying it and dressing himself down for it). Or something. Once again, it was afflicted by teenage brain, and the blunt extremity of its positions seemed to be an easy stand in for sincerity. Or coherence.


Admittedly, I was mostly engaged by it. I don't actually hate anything he does. Not even Epidemic, which I generally slag off as being arty posturing nonsense. But even still, the incredible dopiness of this one is a lot to overlook. It was trying too hard. And, as a result, became much to loud to really be saying anything I could take seriously.



minds his own damn business
I feel like so much of the music I enjoy now, despite my advanced age, is from the last ten years and even last ten months of music.
Well, to each his own. I could probably post some clips, or cobble together the top ten yearly lists, and maybe produce a passing resemblance of an adequate decade of music. But personally most of it hasn't had staying power for me, and I'm perfectly content to spend my time pluggin holes in my jazz collection or collecting the odd show by Big Star or Television without resorting to my mortal shame.


I still think that this misses the point I was making, which was less about a lack of talent available for those looking to dig but about the ability of these artists to afford to make it their day job.



I think it's easier than ever (for the listener at least) to live completely outside of "mainstream" music and have a steady flowing river of great, great stuff.
Yes, there's no question about the convenience that modern technology has for the listener, and I don't disrespect that as a listener myself. But the question of whether at least some of these conveniences (downloading, streaming) might make it much more difficult for the artist to produce this work is worth considering. One thing I've noted from the last decade is how quickly many promising artists disappeared after a year or two. The economic data in that Adam video is legitimate. It may be easier for the listener to find niches in which to enjoy music, but it's harder for an artist to develop these niches and maintain a sustainable career. It may get better, as virtually every musician union is negotiating these streaming services for better rates. But all of the working musicians that I know personally or follow online are acknowledging that it's not the most welcoming environment right now for new talent, and that due to the squeeze between downloading and streaming, there's a growing common popular perception that music is not something that's worth paying for, the definition of devaluation, and, as it correlates, is increasingly seen as disposable. At least musicians are the only category of vocation that I can think of that many people think should be free from compensation. Not that you feel this way, but I'm just stressing the financially dire state of things that acts as a deterrent. Maybe that's why I don't like Whiplash. I don't believe that musicians necessarily have to suffer.
__________________



Well, to each his own. I could probably post some clips, or cobble together the top ten yearly lists, and maybe produce a passing resemblance of an adequate decade of music. But personally most of it hasn't had staying power for me, and I'm perfectly content to spend my time pluggin holes in my jazz collection or collecting the odd show by Big Star or Television without resorting to my mortal shame.


I still think that this misses the point I was making, which was less about a lack of talent available for those looking to dig but about the ability of these artists to afford to make it their day job.




Yes, there's no question about the convenience that modern technology has for the listener, and I don't disrespect that as a listener myself. But the question of whether at least some of these conveniences (downloading, streaming) might make it much more difficult for the artist to produce this work is worth considering. One thing I've noted from the last decade is how quickly many promising artists disappeared after a year or two. The economic data in that Adam video is legitimate. It may be easier for the listener to find niches in which to enjoy music, but it's harder for an artist to develop these niches and maintain a sustainable career. It may get better, as virtually every musician union is negotiating these streaming services for better rates. But all of the working musicians that I know personally or follow online are acknowledging that it's not the most welcoming environment right now for new talent, and that due to the squeeze between downloading and streaming, there's a growing common popular perception that music is not something that's worth paying for, the definition of devaluation, and, as it correlates, is increasingly seen as disposable. At least musicians are the only category of vocation that I can think of that many people think should be free from compensation. Not that you feel this way, but I'm just stressing the financially dire state of things that acts as a deterrent. Maybe that's why I don't like Whiplash. I don't believe that musicians necessarily have to suffer.
Well, I think it has always been true that most people don't "make it", even a lot of talented AF people. But a whole lot of talented people that don't fit the mold of what the music industry is looking for now have direct-to-consumer avenues to get their work out there and numerous musicians have turned that into actual fame.
I'm not a Halsey fan, but she's talented as hell and she started with self-released music on social-media. She's now a star and a millionaire. These new technologies aren't just good for listeners they have changed the game for artists. Hell, I watch Jazz musicians I would never have heard of, Classical musicians (my beloved Stephanie Jones for example) listen to hip-hop musicians, rock musicians, pretty much every genre I can imagine because everyone can get their music out there now, and if it's good enough, they're gonna get picked up by the public and probably by the industry as well.
Not to mention all the musicians that are now able to support themselves as YouTubers, people who may not make great creative content but it's just good enough or they teach or they literally just talk about music but now to an audience of thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, sometimes even over a million people. I follow one guitar teacher who's doing so well with his online work he's actually stopped producing regular content to focus on bigger projects.
So, I don't feel like I had to cobble anything together here, this is the music I listen to, these are musicians that without the current format might be unknown and working at the carwash or the coffee shop but instead are at least some kind of stars or get to have careers because of the current environment for music distribution. Inside the music industry, yes it still sucks, maybe it sucks even more than it used to, which was always a lot (ask all the people we think of as having been stars at least for a while, that were dead broke the day the industry dropped them), but there are so many more opportunities now for musicians. And for listeners.
By the way, I also love Big Star and Television. And last night my Record Of The Night was Duke Ellington and John Coltrane Live.



There have always been terrible contracts in music, but at least in the not so distant past, successful acts could make a living on their terrible contracts. The Who, a musical juggernaut in the 60's, had a notoriously terrible contract. And yet, John Entwhistle wasn't having to work as a barista on the side. And they are an example of a band that had been royally screwed over the first number of years of their existence.



Yes, the new structure allows artists the chance for visibility in ways before unforseen. And that is great. If all an artist cares about is being seen. But frankly, fame is an absolutely hollow victory, when an artist who is pulling in views in huge numbers, can't make a living on their art. Sure, there have been a handful who have managed to make it financially through these new avenues (how beyond depressing it would be if we couldn't even find anecdotal evidence of this). But the vast number of artists who are having success, but are having virtually no equitable money to show for this success, is a new layer of screwing musicians. It needs to be called out beyond 'well, this has always been the way'. Business' like Spotify are a cancer and a disgrace.



Looking back on it, even though I'm not one who would ever want to be on Lars Ulrich's side of anything, and Metallica were clearly not the best ambassador's for the Napster battle, they were right in seeing how this was going to be ground zero for the decimation of the industry. And it ultimately has hurt up and coming artists more than it has damaged the cash flow of already established musical monoliths like Metallica. It turns out that, even though they are still ********, their battle wasn't as selfish as it looked at first glance.



There have always been terrible contracts in music, but at least in the not so distant past, successful acts could make a living on their terrible contracts. The Who, a musical juggernaut in the 60's, had a notoriously terrible contract. And yet, John Entwhistle wasn't having to work as a barista on the side. And they are an example of a band that had been royally screwed over the first number of years of their existence.



Yes, the new structure allows artists the chance for visibility in ways before unforseen. And that is great. If all an artist cares about is being seen. But frankly, fame is an absolutely hollow victory, when an artist who is pulling in views in huge numbers, can't make a living on their art. Sure, there have been a handful who have managed to make it financially through these new avenues (how beyond depressing it would be if we couldn't even find anecdotal evidence of this). But the vast number of artists who are having success, but are having virtually no equitable money to show for this success, is a new layer of screwing musicians. It needs to be called out beyond 'well, this has always been the way'. Business' like Spotify are a cancer and a disgrace.



Looking back on it, even though I'm not one who would ever want to be on Lars Ulrich's side of anything, and Metallica were clearly not the best ambassador's for the Napster battle, they were right in seeing how this was going to be ground zero for the decimation of the industry. And it ultimately has hurt up and coming artists more than it has damaged the cash flow of already established musical monoliths like Metallica. It turns out that, even though they are still ********, their battle wasn't as selfish as it looked at first glance.
Well, but this was point with the example of Halsey, who started out putting her music up on social-media and now has a net worth estimated at $15M at only 26 years old.
More and more artists are finding their path and actually diversifying the music we consume this way because they take their product directly to the people and the people decide instead of some record-industry douche. The old system is still firmly in place and the streaming system may not be far to less well-known artists, but the record industry has never made less well-known artists rich or in many cases even self-sustaining.



One thing I find interesting is that Gen Z is now old enough to make records, so what happens now? A generation of kids that have never bought a CD or even paid for downloads is now making their own music. So does their attitude change regarding paying for music, or do they somehow change the rules to keep it "free" while still paying the artist? (I'm sure it'll be a mixture of both. Not implying that all Gen Zers share one brain of course.) It'll be interesting to follow.
__________________
Captain's Log
My Collection



One thing I find interesting is that Gen Z is now old enough to make records, so what happens now? A generation of kids that have never bought a CD or even paid for downloads is now making their own music. So does their attitude change regarding paying for music, or do they somehow change the rules to keep it "free" while still paying the artist? (I'm sure it'll be a mixture of both. Not implying that all Gen Zers share one brain of course.) It'll be interesting to follow.
My real hope is that, through alternate media outlets, they will simply circumvent the record industry. It's a tall order because money always wins, but one can hope.



Well, but this was point with the example of Halsey, who started out putting her music up on social-media and now has a net worth estimated at $15M at only 26 years old.
More and more artists are finding their path and actually diversifying the music we consume this way because they take their product directly to the people and the people decide instead of some record-industry douche. The old system is still firmly in place and the streaming system may not be far to less well-known artists, but the record industry has never made less well-known artists rich or in many cases even self-sustaining.

I don't think anyone is claiming no one has benefited from this system. There are always exceptions. You can find anecdotal evidence of early black jazz/blues musicians who weren't completely and absolutely screwed by the system, but overall, it was deeply corrupt and we shouldn't be looking at the successes to absolve it. Overwhelmingly, artists are not benefiting from these new ways of gaining visibility. The system has only degraded further even as the avenues to getting an audience has improved.



A system that is growingly hostile to allowing artists to make a living through their art, is going to have an impact on artists maintaining any kind of career, even if they are technically a known commodity. This is a ****ed up system, regardless of the occassional Halsey.



It's just kind of dopey. And the impact of all of its supposed sins against humanity, were kind of lost amongst all my eye rolling. It feels like it was squeezed out of a particularly highschool aged spleen.



Now, because it's Von Trier, who I basically love against all of my best judgement, I was almost amused by its weird mix of tantrum and what seemed like him trying to come to terms with his artistic villainy (seemingly both justifying it and dressing himself down for it). Or something. Once again, it was afflicted by teenage brain, and the blunt extremity of its positions seemed to be an easy stand in for sincerity. Or coherence.


Admittedly, I was mostly engaged by it. I don't actually hate anything he does. Not even Epidemic, which I generally slag off as being arty posturing nonsense. But even still, the incredible dopiness of this one is a lot to overlook. It was trying too hard. And, as a result, became much to loud to really be saying anything I could take seriously.

Why did it strike you as immature and try hard? I see the meta reading there but it struck me as Trier grappling with the inability to ever effectively punish the truly wicked and that their acts essentially take on a form of artistry in and of themselves. The “negative” of failing upward seems an integral piece to the fabric of the film.

I found it as involving, affective, thoughtful and self loathing as anything Trier makes. I admire his fearlessness in plunging head on into material that many would deride as being too extreme or too pretentious. I think he earns the territory with artistry and a type of cynical authenticity.

I mean, the flick starts with a protracted conversation about a “broken Jack.” His sardonic sense of humor is fully in place. What’s not to love?



One thing I find interesting is that Gen Z is now old enough to make records, so what happens now? A generation of kids that have never bought a CD or even paid for downloads is now making their own music. So does their attitude change regarding paying for music, or do they somehow change the rules to keep it "free" while still paying the artist? (I'm sure it'll be a mixture of both. Not implying that all Gen Zers share one brain of course.) It'll be interesting to follow.
As a member of Generation Z I would disagree with this idea that my generation has never paid for music, though I indeed have never bought a CD. But then again, I see a lot of people my age even collecting vinyl again while skipping the CD format entirely. It must be said that my friends and I are all artists of some kind, so our stance on legally consuming art might differ from some of our peers.


Also, to come back on your point of "somehow change the rules", I'm not sure that is even a big possibility. If artists could just rebuild the industry into one that benefits them more, I'm sure they would have done it already. One of those Spotify CEO's recently said something along the lines of "our mission isn't to pay artists, our mission was to stop piracy", even calling artists who demanded more money of their own streams "entitled". Pretty much straight up admitting they never really cared about the unfairness of piracy, but only really interested in privatizing it.

It is nice that nowadays there are some more ethical alternatives to support artists like Bandcamp or Patreon (even though I have some very real concerns involving the latter, not really with the concept of it but the people behind the platform and their decision making), but I don't really see how you can eliminate the free streaming from the industry entirely (unless, of course, everyone entirely stops using Youtube and Spotify unanimously, which certainly doesn't only include Gen Z people).



I don't think anyone is claiming no one has benefited from this system. There are always exceptions. You can find anecdotal evidence of early black jazz/blues musicians who weren't completely and absolutely screwed by the system, but overall, it was deeply corrupt and we shouldn't be looking at the successes to absolve it. Overwhelmingly, artists are not benefiting from these new ways of gaining visibility. The system has only degraded further even as the avenues to getting an audience has improved.



A system that is growingly hostile to allowing artists to make a living through their art, is going to have an impact on artists maintaining any kind of career, even if they are technically a known commodity. This is a ****ed up system, regardless of the occassional Halsey.
Well, but Halsey wasn't my only example, I gave several more specifically and generally spoke of many more, likely in the thousands who are benefitting from the ability to get national and international exposure without any interaction with the record companies at all. People that might have been turned away from the industry altogether and ended up as English teachers but the world found them through YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, SoundCloud, etc.
Look I'm not arguing that the record industry and streaming industry in particular aren't bull****. But so many smaller artists who are angry that they get jack from streaming or YouTube would literally have had no outlet whatsoever before streaming and YouTube and these other outlets. They would simply not be musicians anymore they would have other jobs. One of my best friends is a professional guitarist and a singer-songwriter and actually got a couple of albums made but the industry decided he wasn't marketable and that was the end of his career for like 2 decades and he became a landscaper. And then with all these new avenues to distribute his music, suddenly he was able to resurrect his career, now he lives in Switzerland and is constantly touring Western Europe with regular gigs in his hometown as well and has been able to get a new album made, etc. He's able to get some revenue streaming, admittedly not much, but both streaming and YouTube have helped to raise his profile so much that he's no longer a landscaper, he's a full-time self-supporting musician again.
Look, I'm not saying either of y'all are wrong, I think streaming absolutely bones artists right in the butt unless they are the absolute top artists. I also think those top artists should share but that's another story. I think YouTube can be real ******** to artists as well. I was just trying to point out that there is another side to this.



As a member of Generation Z I would disagree with this idea that my generation has never paid for music, though I indeed have never bought a CD. But then again, I see a lot of people my age even collecting vinyl again while skipping the CD format entirely. It must be said that my friends and I are all artists of some kind, so our stance on legally consuming art might differ from some of our peers.
Yeah, I hoped it was clear that I was wildly generalizing based on the youngsters that I'm acquainted with and their habits. One example is my friend's son, who has recently taken up bass guitar but literally does not have a "music collection" of any kind. Everything he likes is available online so the closest he comes to owning anything is various Spotify playlists. So in the event that he decides to pursue a music career, I wonder what kind of perspective he'll have.

And I want to clarify that my post wasn't an old guy grumbling about Gen Z, if that's how it came across. In previous years we've had old dudes like Lars saying "we used to get paid for stuff but now we aren't". So I'm interested in how things will develop now that the incoming musicians have never known the model Lars is accustomed to. (Again, generally speaking.)



The trick is not minding
Sorry to steer this away from music, but I wanted to go back about Spellings list he provided and also share one I have.
Last year during the shutdown, my job was down to 3 days a week of work so I bought a book titled “Twice the Thrills! Twice the Chills!” Horror and Sci Fi double features from 1955-1974.
It isn’t a complete list, as there are some glaring omissions, but I thought it would be nice to help me with a deep dive from that era. It’s a nice mix of British hammer horro, Mexican Horror, Japanese Kaiju and other countries mixed in for flavor.
Note: some are known under different titles.
Also, I apologize for how long this in advance. Sorry if this bothers anyone, particularly Crumb, since it’s his thread.


1. Revenge of the creature
2. Cult of the cobra
3. It came from beneath the sea
4. Creature with the atom brain
5. Day the world ended
6. Phantom from 10,000 leagues
7. Invasion of the body snatchers
8. The atomic man
9. World without end
20. Indestructible man
21. The black sleep
22. The creeping unknown.
23. Earth vs the flying saucers
24. The werewolf
25. It conquered the world
26. The she creature
27. 1984 (1956 version naturally)
28. The gamme people
29. Curucu, beast of the Amazon
30. The mole people
31. Voodoo island
32. Pharoah’s curse
33. Attack of the crab monsters
34. Not of this earth
35. Voodoo woman
36. The undead
37. Zombies of mora Tau
38. The man who turned to stone
39. Kronos
40 she devil
41. The curse of Frankenstein
42. X the unknown
43. The giant claw
44. The night the world exploded
45. I was a teenage werewolf
46. Invasion of the saucer men
47. Beginning of the end
48. The unearthly
49. The monster that challenged the world
50. The vampire
51. 20 million miles to earth.
52. The 27th day
53. The cyclops
54 daughter of Dr Jekyl
55. The unknown terror
56. Back from the dead
57 the amazing colossal man
58. Cat girl
59. From hell it came
60. The disembodied
61. I was a teenage Frankenstein
62. Blood of dracula
63. The Viking women and the sea serpent
64. The astounding she monster
65. The brain from planet arous
66. Teenage monster.
67. The screaming skull
68. Terror of the year 5000
69. Giant from the unknown.
70 she demons
71. The return of dracula.
72. The flame barrier
73. War of the satellites
74. Attack of the 50 foot woman.
75. The haunted strangler
76 fiend without a face
77. The revenge of Frankenstein
78. Curse of the demon
79. The space children
80 Colossus of New York
81. Horror of dracula
82. The thing that couldn’t die
83. The crawling eye
84. The cosmic monster
85. Attack of the puppet people
86. war of the colossal beast
87. It! The terror from beyond space
88. Curse of the faceless man
89. The fly
90. Space master x-7
91. How to make a monster.
92. Teenage cave man
93 the blob
94. I married a monster from outer space
95. The brain eaters
96. Earth vs the spider
97 monster on the campus
98. Blood of the vampire
99. Monster from green hell
100. Half human
101. Frankenstein’s daughter
102. Missile to the moon
103. House on haunted hill. (1959)
104. The cosmic man
105. Horrors of the black museum
106. The headless ghost
107. The four skulls of Jonathan drake
108. Invisible invaders
109. Gigantis the fire monster
(Actually a Godzilla sequel)
110. Teenagers from outer space.
111. Womaneater
112. The h man
113. The killer shrews
114. The giant Gila monster
115. The wasp woman
116. Beast from haunted cave
117. Return of the fly
118. The alligator people
119. A bucket of blood
120. Attack of the giant leeches
121. The incredible petrified world
122. Teenage zombies
123. The Mummy
124. Curse of the undead
125. 12 to the moon
126. The electronic monster
127. Brides of dracula
128. The leech woman
129. Battle in outer space
130. The electronic monster
131. 13 ghosts
(12to the moon appears a second time)
132. Last woman on earth.
133. The little shop of horrors
134. Cal tiki the immortal monster
135. Tormented
136. Dr bloods coffin
137. The snake woman
138. The curse of the werewolf
139. The shadow of the cat
140. The devils hand
141. Bloodlust!
142. The devils partner
143. Creature from the haunted sea
144 the head
145. The black pit of Dr M.
146. The phantom planet
147. Assignment outer space
148. The horror chamber of dr Faustus
(Better know as Eyes without a Face)
149. The manster
150. Hand of death
151. The cabinet of dr caligari (1962).
152. The brain that wouldn’t die
153. Invasion of the star creatures
154. First spaceship on Venus
155. Varan the unbelievable
156. Corridors of blood
157. Werewolf in a girls dormitory
158. The old dark house
159. Maniac
160. Gorath
161. The human vapor
162. The horror of party beach
163. Curse of the living corpse
164. The evil of Frankenstein
165. Nightmare
166. Castle of blood
167. Hercules in the haunted world
168. Witchcraft
169. The horror of it all
170 Godzilla vs the thing
171. Voyage to the end of the universe
(Known to some as Ikarie XB-1)
172. The horrible dr hichcock
173. The awful Dr orloff
174. The gorgon.
175. The curse of the mummy’s tomb
176. Face of the screaming werewolf
177. Curse of the stone hand
178. The human duplicators
179. Mutiny in outer space
180. The lost world of sinbad
181. War of the zombies
182. The curse of the fly
183. Devils of darkness
184. Creature of the walking dead
185. Attack of the Mayan Mummy
186. Frankenstein meets the space monster
187. Curse of the voodoo
188. The black torment
189. The brain
190 the vampires coffin
191 the robot vs the Aztec mummy
192. Die monster die
193. Planet of the vampires
194. Dracula, prince of darkness
195. The plague of the zombies
196. Queen of blood
197. Blood bath
198. Rasputin the mad monk
199 the reptile
200. Billy the kid vs dracula
201. Jesse James meets Frankensteins daughter
202. The She beast
203. The embalmer
204. The navy vs the night monsters
205. Women of the prehistoric planet
206. The blood drinkers
207. The black cat
208. Tomb of torture
209. Cave of the living dead
210. Death curse of tartu
211 sting of death
212. Castle of evil
213. Blood beast from outer space
214 the deadly bees
215. The vulture
216. Prehistoric women
217. The devils own
218. The projected man
219. Island of terror
220. Frankenstein created woman
221. The mummy’s shroud
222. Bloody pit of horror
223. Terror creatures from the grave
224. They came from beyond space
225 the terror naughts
226. It!
227. The frozen dead
228. Curse of the doll people
229. The vampire (Mexican version)
230. Brides of blood
231. Blood fiend
232. The living head.
233. The witches mirror
234. Berserk
235. Torture garden
235. Kill, baby….kill!
236. Sound of horror
237. The man and the monster
238. The bloody vampire
239. The brainiac
240. The curse of the crying woman
241. Nightmare in wax.
242. Blood of Dracula’s castle
243. Mad doctor of blood island
244. The blood demon
245. The vampire beast craves blood
246. Curse of the blood ghouls
247. Bloodthirsty butchers
248. Torture dungeon
249. Horror house
250. The crimson cult
251. Trog
252. Taste the blood of dracula
253. War of the gargantuas
254. Monster zero
255. Night of the witches
256. Dr Frankenstein on campus
257. The body beneath
258. Guru the mad monk
259. Scars of dracula
260. The horror of Frankenstein
261. Beast of blood
262. Curse of the vampires
263. I drink your blood
264. I eat your skin
265. War between the planets
266. Super Argo and the faceless giants
267. The blood on Satan’s claw
268. The beast in the cellar
269. The beasts of the yellow night
270. Creature with the blue hand.
271. Blood suckers.
272. Blood thirst
273. Cauldron of blood
274. Crucible of horror
275. The velvet vampire
276. Scream of the demon lover
277. Godzilla’s revenge
278. Island of the burning Damned
279. The rats are coming! The werewolves are here!
280. The man with two heads
281. Blood from the mummy’s tomb
282. Night of the blood monster
283. Twins of evil
284. Hands of the ripper
285. Vampire circus
286. Countess dracula
287. Daughters of satan
288. Superbeast
289. Dracula A.D. 1972.
290. Crescendo
291. Carnival of blood
292. Curse of the headless horseman
293. Ssssss
294. The boy who cried werewolf
295. The beast must die
296. Seizure
297. Count Dracula’s great love
298. The vampires night orgy
299. Legacy of Satan
300. Blood
301. Frankenstein and the monster from hell
302. Captain Kronos Vampire Hunter



minds his own damn business
I would buy that discount 25-disc (extended play) DVD box set for 25 dollars if Walgreens had the guts.



minds his own damn business
One example is my friend's son, who has recently taken up bass guitar but literally does not have a "music collection" of any kind. Everything he likes is available online so the closest he comes to owning anything is various Spotify playlists.
One of the more insidious aspects of the internet is its illusion of infinity and perpetuity. Obviously, we denizens of now multiple shuttered message boards should be a little wiser by now, but unfortunately many people still feel that any and everything that they could possibly want is and will be available 24-7 on the internet. Lord knows, enough s#it is. But I've constantly heard horror stories from both older services (iTunes, Zune) and new (Spotify, Tidal) where music will sometimes just disappear. iTunes may be the worst because you pay for individual tracks or albums, and I don't know a single person who's used iTunes who hasn't had music - that they've paid for - go missing after a software update, and Apple isn't too keen on correcting these issues. Youtube is another place with billions of clips, but there's always that one day when you can't find a simple clip that you're looking for. My favorite part is when you ask someone about the frustration of not finding something, and they look at you like you're the weirdo for wanting to find something that apparently no one else cares about. And I think we may all even remember those hilarious jokes about "what's a CD?" by other mid-life crisis actors who are subtley trying to coerce your borg conformity and dependency. I remember some dude on RT calling me a "hoarder" for still wanting a physical library in the 21st Century.


But I'm not a Luddite because I refuse to get a wifi toothbrush. I love the conveniences of digital technology as much as the next person, except I don't expect my technology to act like a nanny or custodian (or a friend - just imagine!) that I invariably have to ask permission to use my library for the low low low price of constant surveillance. Sure, this kind of talk will get me memes of Grandpa yelling at clouds. Why? Because kids are stupid, and they don't understand why they're watching Stranger Things on their phones while waiting in the student loan lobby. It's not the kids fault that we're circling the drain, we screwed them. But they're old enough to start figuring it out.



I'm so out of it I don't even subscribe to Spotify. (proud Rhapsody subscriber since 2006!)
I learned my lesson in the great Zappa purge a few years ago. He released approx 400 albums and I don't like ALL of them, so I was using Rhapsody's rating system to keep track of the ones I liked. Or even individual songs on albums I otherwise didn't need. Every now and then I'd scroll through the 4 and 5-star albums and buy the CDs from somewhere.

Then I logged on one day to find no Zappa albums. The ZFT was about to rerelease everything again, and in the meantime Rykodisc lost their distribution rights, so there was just nothing available for a couple of years. Eventually the ZFT versions showed up, but all of my carefully curated ratings were gone. Good thing I didn't sell all of my CDs like some of my friends had.

My favorite part is when you ask someone about the frustration of not finding something, and they look at you like you're the weirdo for wanting to find something that apparently no one else cares about.
I get this all the time.
Along similar lines, I often complain about the buffering between songs when streaming an album. Try listening to the Abbey Road medley when there's a second's pause between each song. Infuriating to me, but the reaction I get from others is "is it THAT big of a deal?" Yes, dammit. It is.



Actually, a few years ago Rhapsody changed their name to Napster, which only makes me seem even more ancient. Do you know how embarrassing it is to tell people "I have a Napster subscription"?



One of the more insidious aspects of the internet is its illusion of infinity and perpetuity. Obviously, we denizens of now multiple shuttered message boards should be a little wiser by now, but unfortunately many people still feel that any and everything that they could possibly want is and will be available 24-7 on the internet. Lord knows, enough s#it is. But I've constantly heard horror stories from both older services (iTunes, Zune) and new (Spotify, Tidal) where music will sometimes just disappear. iTunes may be the worst because you pay for individual tracks or albums, and I don't know a single person who's used iTunes who hasn't had music - that they've paid for - go missing after a software update, and Apple isn't too keen on correcting these issues. Youtube is another place with billions of clips, but there's always that one day when you can't find a simple clip that you're looking for. My favorite part is when you ask someone about the frustration of not finding something, and they look at you like you're the weirdo for wanting to find something that apparently no one else cares about. And I think we may all even remember those hilarious jokes about "what's a CD?" by other mid-life crisis actors who are subtley trying to coerce your borg conformity and dependency. I remember some dude on RT calling me a "hoarder" for still wanting a physical library in the 21st Century.
.
Dude this has happened to me so much and it kills me. And like you say, people act like I'm crazy.
For example, I took a video of Lucius' Tiny Desk concert and ran it through Garage Band, breaking it up into individual tracks, and then put it back into iTunes as a sort of mini-album and it was one of my favorite things to listen to as they are my favorite versions of the songs.
And then iTunes updated and replaced each song with the album-version that iTunes carries. And I had already deleted the GarageBand file. So I either have to do it all over again or just let it go.
Furious.