The smoking bans. It’s about fucking time. Many who are no longer allowed to smoke in public venues are afforded the unique opportunity to realize that they do indeed have that will power to cease smoking for that particular time interval and often find they can quit all together. What a double standard our society puts on money making machines. I find it very difficult to understand how something that not only causes cancer to the user, but to innocent bystanders is still allowed to be readily available? Then lets throw in all the chemicals they put in it to make it addictive.

The drug war?? Why try? We sell that shit OTC, and we package it so we can attract the next generation of smokers.

Also where did they record – I love the in-stereo drums effect.

On the future of music front: There’s an interesting book called THE FUTURE OF MUSIC. One of the proposals it puts forth is one where music is a utility not unlike electricity (or, maybe more aptly, websites). You pay a single uniform fee for access to all music, no matter where it comes from, and it gets distributed by the provider to the appropriate sources in proportion. I believe something like this goes on in Korea already, with $5/month all you can download or something. (I could be totally off base. I could also be repeating something somebody else said on this blog.)

There’s a lot more that I have to say on the topic but I’ve commented too much tonight already. Some blog in the future I’ll dredge up the memory of my short-lived record label.

I have a pathological hatred of smoking and a deep seated libertarian leaning (although much less deep than it used to be). Therefore, smoking bans cause me cognitive dissonance in the amount they satisfy me. So, too, does the interstate highway system.

Okay, time to sleep. Must remember to buy Jonx albums next time I’m in the States.

On the free music thing – I get so bored with copyrights and publishing nonsense I don’t know what to do. But I’ve noticed something interesting about free music, particularly like if somebody is handing out free cd’s at a show or something like that. Well I notice that music often gets devalued by the recipient. As if by giving it away you are saying it is cheap. So there’s something to be said for putting a financial value on your work in some situations.

And of course I just put out this compilation on a CD. That costs money. You want to see a return – and I’m just talking about covering costs. But I felt to give the idea of the compilation worth it had to be more than download-able mp3′s, something more tangible. I don’t know I’m on the fence. I’m in both worlds figuring out which way to go next. But always always ya got to think about getting out there and playing. That’s a given.

“Essentially my philosophy about music is that in a perfect world, it would be free to everyone. Of course, in a perfect world, I wouldn’t have to work a day job, and I could sit around writing songs all day and people would bring me beer and food without me having to pay for it”

This, of course, is irrelevant to the immediate technical question of how artists are to be compensated for their creations in the coming decades of digital proliferation.

My own feeling is that ironically, the ubiquity of digital music will devalue recordings relative to live performances, such that the latter will become one of the only ways that musicians can be compensated. So we’ll all be anonymously playing for bread and beer, just like the good old days. As ol’ Warhol so wisely intoned, “in the future, everyone will be famous…” – if, by famous, we mean throwing our pathetic little coins into the digital ocean and making a wish.

That having been said, it will be nice to someday play a show without coming home smelling like a fucking ashtray.