Michael Braun's Blog

The full title of The Bird and the Bee’s new album is too long to fit in the title – “Ray Guns Are Not Just The Future.” It’s a bit awkward, but the album is great, nonetheless.

Fans of their eponymous debut from 2007 will not be disappointed by the new album. Inara George’s vocals remain poppy, clean, and oh-so-pleasant. I find her voice, especially with carefully layered harmonies, to be a pop gem unmatched by most other vocalists today. And the production/instrumentals from Greg Kurstin remain catchy and fun. More importantly, they seldom overreach the mostly quiet vocals, but fill out the sound for complete wall of pop deliciousness.

Interesting to note, this album seems to steer away from its Imogen Heap style production and move into more Lily Allen cheekiness and Feist intimacy. On tracks like “Lifespan of a Fly,” George seems to coo her vocals much like Emiliana Torrini or some of the quieter tracks of Feist’s. Tracks like “Love Letter to Japan” seem a mix of Gwen Stefani and Utada Hikaru. “What’s In The Middle” could very easily be a Lily Allen track (it should be no surprise that Kurstin has also produced for Allen).

The album is longer than their debut, but no song feels like filler. Still, it lacks the tautness of the debut, even as it feels more relevant in its reduced styling. Overall, with less focus on heavily processed and produced vocals, we get a greater sense of George’s vocal skills. And it also makes better use of the group’s love of jazz. After all, when George and Kurstin first got together, they played jazz standards, and the group is signed with Blue Note.

Whether you’ve heard their first album or not, this is a solid follow-up and hopefully a sign that 2009′s music will be great. Franz Ferdinand’s new album (which also came out on Tuesday) is also great. I’ll review that later.

Today, in comm. arts colloquium, Emily, a student in my department will be soliciting ideas for her dissertation topic. Academic discussions are all well and good, but I don’t think they are as helpful as turning to the stars (or in this case, chance) for the answers. That is why I have crafted an origami fortune teller!

Picking colors and numbers will reveal our fortune! In this case, the fortunes are research questions for amazing dissertation. Emily does research on children and teens and body image. She’s done some research with magazines but is now branching out into television. The possible topics are listed below. Which one will be her dissertation? I’m so excited to find out what the stars hold in store for her!

How does television affect kids’ favorite colors and animals?
Does “Gossip Girl” lead to anorexia?
Does television make children unpleasant?
Do Bratz dolls lead to big-headed expectations?
Does Sponge Bob make kids squares?
Can television make kids vanish (in addition to distracting them)?
Does economic recession change ideal body image (skinny = broke)?
Do American Girl dolls lead to increased patriotism?

These topics are so great that they would serve as good topics for most anyone! I’m sure Emily will choose one, meaning there are seven others just aching to be investigated. I encourage anyone looking for a dissertation topic to choose from among those listed above.

Readers – in an effort to undermine the corrupting influence of Rick Warren and his Saddleback Church, as well as Christianity in general, Dan Savage, the Savage Love column, and Savage Love readers have coined a new term.

Saddlebacking: sad•dle•back•ing \ˈsa-dəl-ˈba-kiŋ\ vb [fr. Saddleback Church] (2009): the phenomenon of Christian teens engaging in unprotected anal sex in order to preserve their virginities

After attending the Purity Ball, Heather and Bill saddlebacked all night because she’s saving herself for marriage.

Any links to this website from your own blog would be much appreciated.

I don’t have any information about how common an event like this is, but President Obama went down to Capitol Hill today to meet with Republicans about their beefs with the stimulus plan. Imagine that – there’s a piece of legislation that the president supports. Rather than talking to the media and demanding “a straight up-or-down vote” as Bush did time and time again, Obama went down to talk to those people who disagreed with him. Who is this guy, some sort of confident, open-eared, super-president?

Even more impressive for Obama is the fact that he doesn’t need much Republican support at all for this measure. The Democrats have the mandate from the people – we want change, not excessive compromise. Yet each and every time Obama meets with Republicans, it is one less charge they can make against a Democratically controlled Congress and White House. How are the Democrats abusing their power when Obama sits down and discusses things with Republicans? Not as a stunt either – this was all behind closed doors.

When discussing this with my dad a couple of weeks ago, I stumbled upon what I think is Obama’s viewpoint in regards to seeking criticism. If each position that he has established comes from well-reasoned logic and facts, then he should be able to put full support behind the stance. Yet he credits others with having the same basis for their contrary opinions, and thus he wants to know what logic and facts have informed their positions. It’s as if he recognizes that it is very difficult to have a complete picture on any issue without first listening to those with opposing viewpoints. How reasonable!

Maybe this wouldn’t be such a big deal if Bush had lived up to his promise to be “a uniter not a divider.” But when Bush took partisanship as if it was a new lover, we didn’t see this kind of listening and compromise. Obama is truly one for the record books. A president who listens? Whoever thought we’d see the day?

With everyone in an uproar about the 5,000 people laid off at Microsoft, I can’t help but think about the software giant’s place in this recession plagued, ever-changing technology landscape. Obviously, I have no love for Microsoft. I use none of their products on a regular basis (and then only Microsoft Office very seldom). The most I get from Microsoft is a file format – .doc – which I am forced to use when someone sends me a document. For my own needs, I use iWork from Apple. When I need to send a document, I prefer sending it as a PDF. For word processing, I prefer RTF, though often compromise with .doc.

So what happens if you ask a Microsoft skeptic (at best) what words I associate with Microsoft Corp.? They aren’t flattering, but they may be telling. “Slow,” “clunky,” “obtrusive,” “stupid,” and “pointless.”

Slow – when I run Office on my computer, it seems to hog a lot of system resources. PowerPoint, especially, takes a long time to load. Is this my computer (all in all, I don’t have that much RAM) or is it the software? And the company too, slow to respond to problems from their consumers, like all the drivers that didn’t exist for Vista, or the various XBox issues that have plagued the company.

Clunky – their design seems so consistently awful. I really dislike how the Zune looks. And the XBox is still way too big to ever earn a place on my shelf. And remember those original XBox controllers (the really huge ones)? Who designed that? Plus, the look of their software. XP looks so wretched and Vista wasn’t much better. So clunky is true, but even worse, a lot of it just looks cheap. Maybe that’s only because it’s different from Apple and I know Apple is expensive… but nevertheless, burnt into my brain is a connection between cheap and poor quality.

Obtrusive – I may be running a less-than-purchased copy of Microsoft Office. Occasionally, I get warnings that another user is using the software, forcing my copy to shut down. This is irritating. But my impressions of Microsoft’s intrusions into their users’ lives extend beyond that suite of products into their operating systems as well. I assume that a Vista machine will not be my friend. Instead, it will fill my screen with constant pop-up messages that I am smart enough to know don’t apply to me but am not smart enough to get rid of without worrying that my computer is now trolling the internet searching for viruses to download.

Stupid – a lot of what Microsoft does is pretty stupid. Like how they name their products. From Millennium to XP to Vista to 7 – where is the scheme? Cats may not be your favorite thing, but Apple’s naming has a lot of understated grace. And the Zune? Still sounds weird; you might have thought iPod sounded weird at first (I did), but now it seems to roll right off the tongue. And how about releasing software that’s years from ready? Says David Pogue, Windows 7 is Vista that works.

Pointless – anecdotal, but nevertheless, have you read about this new Microsoft Songsmith product? Just take a look at the link and tell me how much of those videos you could stand to listen to? I couldn’t make it past 30 seconds with any of them. Microsoft is busy laying people off, but they kept the people around who made this product?

Microsoft has no chance of ever winning me over (it’s unlikely any time soon, anyway), but these complaints might still be important for them to hear. I have the feeling that I’m not the only person who feels this way. After all, they’ve been leading the pack for some time now and seem to keep stumbling. Next round of layoffs might be a little more drastic (or include the death of the Zune).

On the topic of cynacism, during high school I joked with Tony that a funny idea for a column in my briefly run student newspaper (the Algoma Student Press, aka the ASP) would be from the perspective of someone who found no good in anything. Tony wrote something from this cynical perspective, which I published in 2002. Enjoy!

‘Forensics Fiasco’ Fallout
By: The Burning Pen of Justice

Recently my distinguished compatriot Michael Braun published an article entitled Forensics Fiasco (Note to self: alliterative titles are more professional. Think one up later). When I say that Mr. Braun is distinguished, I am of course referring to the fact that weak writing and swiss-cheese logic distinguish him as an habitual airplane glue abuser.

Academics the top priority? Let’s face reality, Mr. Braun. Pure academics are best left to universities. High school is meant to prepare the vast, unwashed masses for success in the workforce. You complain about the unimportance of forensics skills and about Mr. Loos’s tactics in dealing with students and teachers. Now ask yourself, which is a better lesson for success: Trigonometry, English literature, and thermodynamics or the art of public speaking, power brokering, and intimidation? Before you try to answer that, take a look at who is in power in our state and national governments. There’s a point in life when you must eschew foolish dreams and idealism and touch base with the hard truth. The number of future scientists, mathematicians, and scholars churned out by the Amalgamated Drone Factory (sorry, the Public School System) is in the vast minority to the number of office clerks, mid-level managers, and small businessmen. Is knowledge of the works of Virgil or Socrates or Kafka going to earn Joe Suitentie his next promotion? Preposterous. You think that by teaching kids about the lives of Galileo and Aristotle you will spurn a New Renaissance? Absurd.

I ask you again, which more accurately mirrors working life, forensics or academics? On a geometry test, every student has the potential to get a perfect score. In forensics, performers are rated against each other. Your opponent’s failure is your advantage. At the end, there is only one real winner, and they get the biggest trophy. Is my point clear enough yet?

Now let me render my suggestions. Students: You can either cut it academically or you can’t. Most of you can’t. Why waste a couple years and tens of thousands of dollars in college to confirm the fact. If you’re not planning on doing heavy lifting for the next 40 years, you better to start picking up the critical skills you need to survive in the business world. One of the most important skills is the ability to speak and convey ideas effectively. Administrators: Let’s start offering some courses that we can apply to real life. Instead of World History, teach Machiavellian Tactics. Instead of Accounting, teach Creative Accounting.

Fancy ideals are fine for the privileged, but give the working stiffs a break. Oh, and Mr. Braun, don’t trip over your soapbox on the way out.
–TBPoJ

P.S.—Support free speech in schools!

In an article in this week’s New Yorker (abstract), Ben McGrath writes of individuals expecting (and even hoping for) the collapse of American society. These people are not Islamic terrorists or freedom-hating Frenchmen (wait, since Bush is out of office, is this style of ironic writing funny anymore?), but rather red-blooded Americans who like to predict doomsday. One of the most interesting people profiled is Jim Kunstler, who writes the blog “Clusterfuck Nation.”

Ah, the delight of the cynic. Mr. Kunstler was one of the soothsayers who predicted Y2K would bring about the end of the world. When it didn’t, he quickly credited this to those who listened to the warnings and fixed everything. As a person who predicted the exact opposite (that nothing would happen), I can’t help but laugh at the dirests. It seems to me they always have the perfect excuse, the cynic’s delight. If someone goes wrong, as they predicted, they relish in their ability to see the future (“I knew it.”). If their predictions fail to come true, they can be glad the world didn’t end, and then make a new prediction while their followers breath a sigh of relief (“Just wait and see.”).

I agree with a lot of what Mr. Kunstler thinks about this nation. Like him, I worry that our plans for “fixing” the banking system will simply put us back on the path that lead into this mess. The American economy is not much different than the housing bubble/mortgage crisis. We keep pouring money into something only to see if finally collapse. Lenders had to know that giving money out with no preconditions was likely to lead to future problems. And those buying the bundled mortgages had to know there is no such thing as free money. And when people were predicting that the housing bubble was going to bust back in the early 2000s, you had to turn a deaf ear to not be at least a little worried.

Maybe Mr. Kunstler, and the others featured in the article, are correct. Maybe the United States is on the verge of collapse. Soon enough, we may find ourselves growing our own food, using an ox to plow the fields. Computers will be relics of the past as we don the clothes of the Amish and look to them to teach us how to live right. Either that or life will go on. So far, technology has outpaced its need. As need increases, expense goes down. We could all have garbage burning generators to power our city blocks, for cheap too if enough people need them. There’s money to be made in preserving the earth; we could all invest in the rain forest to make money when carbon credits become more expensive. When need catches up to those with true foresight, the dirests will still be stuck complaining about society’s eventual crumble.

Mr. Kunstler, it’s quite easy to complain (e.g. most of this entire blog), but not as easy to propose solutions that will work, get people to support them, and put them into action. You do the complaining very well. How about putting some effort behind your writing? If your ideas are any good, you ought to get some pleasure towards working to enact them. Then again, for cynics like you, progress is never much of a delight.

Writes Steven Pinker, in an op-ed in the New York Times:
Language pedants hew to an oral tradition of shibboleths that have no basis in logic or style, that have been defied by great writers for centuries, and that have been disavowed by every thoughtful usage manual. Nonetheless, they refuse to go away, perpetuated by the Gotcha! Gang and meekly obeyed by insecure writers.

He mocks Chief Justice Roberts for flubbing the oath, and for being a stickler for grammar. While Roberts may have tried to get things right in a strict grammatical sense (by not splitting the verb “will execute” with the adverb “faithfully”), Roberts has also professed to interpret the Constitution strictly. He didn’t do that with his liberal re-writing and thus made himself look like an ass.

The important thing to remember is that language is flexible. Its main purpose is to communicate information; if the rules of grammar can be bent but information still properly conveyed, then the rules don’t matter. Saying “will faithfully execute” makes just as much sense as “will execute faithfully,” even if grammar bully Roberts doesn’t think so. I fully agree with Pinkler’s point above, and urge us all to not be like Chief Justice Roberts. In this one case, grammar idiocy should be put aside and the Constitution STRICTLY INTERPRETED!

We all know that the US government, as ordered by ex-President George W. Bush, spied on some American communication after 9/11. Bush has refused to apologize for this blatant violation of our civil rights and has said that such action was necessary to prevent another attack. Even with no evidence to suggest that there was another attack planned, based on Bush’s statements, we can infer that he was scared. And as poor leaders are apt to do, he ran to quash our freedoms while proclaiming that the terrorists hate them. Who’s the terrorist, really?

Now, allegations have emerged from former National Security Agency analyst Russell Tice (read them here) that state Bush and cronies spied on all Americans (as opposed to “just” spying on communication out of the country, as previously admitted) and targeted, of all people, journalists. While no other figures in the former administration (and wow, does it feel good to write “former), I was not surprised to hear this claim from Mr. Tice. If Bush can admit he ordered war crimes committed at a nationally televised press conference, I’m not surprised that he thought it was okay to spy on all Americans.

What is more troubling, though, is the allegation that the ex-administration targeted journalists specifically. This seems to go against any rational previous offered. Did someone have reason to suspect that journalists were aiding terrorists? Or perhaps that journalists might be terrorists themselves? Or perhaps that journalists had received vital information about an impending terrorist attack, but were not releasing it? Any amount of rational thought would indicate all these questions groundless. What benefit would there be for a journalist to aid terrorists?

If indeed true, it indicates that Mr. Bush, current front runner in my worst president ever contest, acted like a scared dog with very sharp teeth after 9/11. Rather than move with careful rationality, he acted with brutal haste, explicitly violating his oath to uphold the Constitution. He targeted any and all people he considered to be an enemy, including the majority of Americans who did not elect him. He hit back at journalists out of irrational fear of a free press. And he did so with no justification other than his own convictions (and no doubt, the paranoid fears of his entire moronic cabinet).

Bush should have been impeached. Since that didn’t happen, he MUST be referred to the International Criminal Court for prosecution. It is the only way for our country to heal the festering wounds Mr. Bush created when he slashed the Constitution to shreds.

The Daily Show was live yesterday, which would have been exciting if the show hadn’t been so truly awful. Whereas several episodes last week featured tight writing, with Jon ending each segment with a poignant joke, last night’s episode featured too many of the awful commentators. Do you remember when the show had actors like Steve Carrell and Stephen Colbert? Check out some of their old clips on the Daily Show‘s website – truly hilarious.

Second worst of the segments last night (first went to Samantha Bee acting excited and Jon making crude sexual puns – WHAT WAS THE POINT?) was Jason Jones talking about Obama’s rhetoric, which Jon repeatedly said (and demonstrated) wasn’t any different from Bush’s. The core of his argument is true, just as all presidential speeches that warn of tough times use the same platitudes. But Jon Stewart, for all his criticism of the Bush administration, still seems clueless about the power that words carry, especially when paired with actions.

View the clip here or just keep reading.

The problem with Bush’s rhetoric about freedom, terrorism, American ideals, et cetera, is that his words contradicted directly with his actions. When he talked about promoting freedom, we all knew that he meant to do this by waging endless war on nebulous enemies, including countries whose leaders tried to kill his “daddy” yet had no links to terrorism. When he talked about fighting terror, it meant illegal wiretaps of Americans, spy systems to monitor what library books we checked out, and new, unregulated powers for the Executive branch. When he talked about ideals, it meant that no one had the right to look into the actions he had taken. It meant torture ordered by Bush himself.

When Obama vows to defeat terrorists, and Jon Stewart mocks him for sounding like Bush, he forgets that Bush did not coin the phrase “terrorist.” Many societies around the world were dealing with terrorists long before 9/11. Yes, Bush has stolen these phrases and perverted them in his Orwellian way. But he’s done enough damage to this country for us to not reclaim them.

Imagine if we let Bush win. Anytime someone talks about America as a great nation or freedom as an ideal we must fight for, some half-assed comedy pundit like Jon Stewart will be there to snicker. He’ll do his little Bush voice, complete with laugh, and the audience will light up with the “laughter” sign. Jon – I know you want to keep Bush in office so you and your writers can sit on your asses doing NOTHING. But take some cues from your more-talented spinoff, Stephen Colbert. Jokes about Obama may need to take a new form from the laziness you’ve been writing for the past few years, but they are possible. If you expect to keep riffing on presidential rhetoric, you’d better get more clever than sophomoric comparisons between Obama and Bush.

We don’t yet know if Obama will live up to expectations (today is just his first full day as president), but we have no reason to expect him to be like Bush in action, even if his words sound like so many presidents past. If Jon Stewart is too stupid to recognize this, I hope for a quick and painless end to the farce of comedy the Daily Show has become. Either that, or maybe someone needs to tell his writers that the strike ended months ago. They need to get back to work.

I’m not as excited for the inauguration as I was on the day of the election, but that simply means I’m not dancing around yelling “Obama!” Close though. This may very well be the biggest and best inauguration of all time. Over a million people will assemble in Washington D.C. to witness this momentous occasion. The Mall was packed before 9 AM, according to pictures on CNN.

As the inauguration goes on, I will be in class. I’m hoping we may watch, as it’s just the first day, but I’m sure I will see enough replays of the moment that not seeing it live will be okay. The important thing is that we all take time to think about what this day means. Barack Obama is the first African-American president, something that many Americans thought they would never live to see. He’s also the first (openly) mixed-race president. And he’s the first president to take over with two active wars and economic collapse, taking the reigns from one of the most unpopular president in history and one of the worst presidents in history. No other president has ever had more to do to fix the country. Obama’s election is about a lot more than race.

I hope you get a chance to see some of the inauguration, even if that means YouTubing it tonight. It really doesn’t get any better than Obama.

The inauguration of Barack Obama as our nation’s 44th president is nearly upon us. Tomorrow, Tuesday, January 20, 2009, at 11:00 AM Central, Barack Obama is scheduled to take the oath of office. After that, he’ll give his highly anticipated inaugural address, then kick Bush out and start reversing the 8 years of catastrophic damage Bush has wrought on this nation.

People are excited. I heard three women at the Y debate what they should do to catch the inauguration while juggling work schedules. I saw on ESPN an interview with Obama in relation to Martin Luther King Jr. Day. CNN has had nearly nonstop coverage of the festivities. Many television stations will begin live coverage at 8 AM tomorrow. I don’t remember much about Bush’s inauguration, but I don’t think it was this big an affair.

Even more exciting than news coverage is the way the internet lets anyone get a first-hand account of all the goings-on. For example, my friend Mary, a former Latin classmate of mine and current D.C. resident, posted some pictures on Facebook of the concert in front of the Lincoln Memorial yesterday. You can see those (maybe) here. Other D.C. residents that I know (Megan, Courtney) – where are your photos? Get to sharing!

The New York Times also has a good photo sharing page setup. You can email them your photos and they will post them. They have pictures from all over the world. You can see their gallery here. I read somewhere that the Times’ website is programmed very carefully by a few developers who write all their own code, and thus it always looks nice. I am not sure if that is true or not, but kudos to them for such a well-done site. This new inauguration picture feature is really top-notch.

America is ready for a change. We are ready for the nightmare of the last eight years to end. We are ready to hope again. Even if it takes years until the country is back on track, I will wait. Bush has done more damage than anyone could have possibly imagined. Think of this: remember how Fahrenheit 9/11 was careful to document how many businesses Bush had driven into bankruptcy? At the time, I thought it was a little mean-spirited and very funny. But now, the parallels are painfully clear. Bush has driven this country into the ground just like everything else he’s ever been in charge of. THANK GOODNESS OBAMA WON!!!

Evidently, Peet’s Coffee and Tea corporate powerhouse headquarters up in Berkeley, CA caught wind of my blog review. And Katie’s future roommate is a manager at the Peet’s in Memorial Union, so she was the recipient of my blog post, which they all had a good laugh about. I’m glad they’re laughing, if it means some serious changes.

Additionally, “Sarah” on the last post, wrote this:
Give them a break! They just opened! You’d probably pay more at Starbuck’s anyway.

I agree. My review would have been more accurate had I waited until they had at least been open a few weeks. No doubt, the employees are gaining valuable insight into the brews they serve and will demonstrate better knowledge as time goes on. Because of this, I vow, at some unstated date in the future, to return to Peet’s Coffee and Tea in Memorial Union and offer a new review. So be ready, Peet’s employees. I will expect details about your coffee!

As for the prices, I don’t think they are likely to change, no matter how much I grouse. And as far as “Sarah” says, if I purchased coffee at Starbuck’s, I would probably pay an equal amount. But, I don’t buy coffee at Starbuck’s, so your point is moot. In fact, as I said in the post, I buy coffee at Espresso Royale, where I can get a refill for just $1.00. Or I buy coffee at the Union for $1.24. The fact that Peet’s prices are equivalent to Starbuck’s makes me want to avoid them even more.

Anyway, nice to see some corporate action on a bum experience. Corporate readers, if you would like to give me free coffee for life, I will accept. Leave your contact information below.

As some readers may have noticed, Wisconsin is under an intense cold spell. Today, Lauren and I felt it best to drive to campus, rather than take the bus. When frostbite sets in after 10 minutes of exposure, waiting for the bus seemed like it could become dangerous. In this cold, yesterday, I didn’t want to walk outside anymore than I had to, so I visiting Peet’s Tea and Coffee in Memorial Union. The experience was a disappointment.

I have no complaints about the coffee that I got. It was not notable in any way, but it was warm and tasted just fine. Even if it wasn’t memorable, it was better than diner coffee. I’m pretty sure it was brewed from ground beans. And it was caffeinated. I’m not picky, usually.

Their prices, on the other hand, were a complete joke. At the Union Deli locations around campus, you pay $1.24 for a refill (meaning you bring the mug). That cost is further reduced if you use their punchcard, providing a free mug for every five purchased. At Espresso Royale, a coffeehouse just a couple blocks away on State St., a refill costs just $1.00. Completely throwing off similar pricing, however, Peet’s charged me $1.64 for a refill. I don’t believe that the Union Deli in Memorial Union is going to cancel their coffee offerings, meaning Peet’s may have trouble selling their drip coffee at such a high price.

Further competition may come from their lack of knowledge/selection of drip coffee. At Union Deli locations, you can get at least two flavors of coffee (and often three, plus a decaf). And the coffee is GOOD. They get their beans from a local roaster. I came to love the many nuances and flavors of drip coffee because I bought my coffee at the Union and read their descriptions of the different brews. I asked the clueless woman at the Peet’s counter what kinds of coffee they had. She paused, glanced behind her at the carafes, and said, “We have regular and decaf.” It’s shocking that they didn’t have any more to offer. It’s even more shocking that this coffeehouse employee didn’t know anything about the coffee she was serving. After tasting, I can say it’s a medium roast, pretty clean tasting, with low acidity; she couldn’t even offer that information.

If you are looking for a coffee, I urge you to avoid Peet’s Tea and Coffee. At their Memorial Union location, anyway, they seem quite clueless and their prices are out of control. With any luck, we can drive them out or force them into some changes. Madison doesn’t need another coffeehouse, least of all one with clueless employees and inflated prices.

Enough excuses. I’m hoping Amos and I can collaborate on some music and, in the next 6 months, record enough for an EP. My desire for creative output is hindered, so severely, by a lack of musical training. And time, and laziness, but overall, if I could play a guitar or piano well, I would make more music.

I’ve been playing around with GarageBand more lately (didn’t use it much last semester) and have found it is pretty easy to record simple things using the “Musical Typing” feature. It turns your computer keyboard into a piano keyboard. This helps overcome the lack of things like a bass guitar. With some additional input from a skilled musician (Amos), I think we can assemble a track without much difficulty.

I’ve been listening to the Misfits the last couple of days. I bought their first recorded album from 1978, though not released in its entirety until 1997. I’ve also been reading a history of American Hardcore Punk Rock. This has lead me to look back at some lyrics I have written and see how easily they would become punk songs. Some were written for my hypothetical punk band, Your Mother Is Dead. Others just for fun.

Anyway, stay tuned for some sort of musical production coming this way within your lifetime.

Messing Around with GarageBand