It’s nothing personal, but i absolutely loathe Bank of America.

The kindly girl helping me close my account today had to get on the phone to request my account be shut down. She said that i would be “ending our relationship.”

I’m sorry. Relationship? I’m just closing an account.
But let’s not be too hasty. I suppose it was a relationship. 2007 was the start of a very rocky one.

After getting married, i couldn’t simply add my wife to my account. I had to close that account, re-open a new account, change all my information (linked accounts), etc.

In 2008, while i was on vacation, they suspended my account for irregular spending (i’ll give ‘em that one). Unfortunately, BofA had the wrong answers to my security question. In giving them the correct answers, my account was summarily shut down and i was disallowed access.

And, that same trip, when my brother and i were commissioned to photograph the lobby of the new BofA tower in NYC, we had all our paperwork submitted two months in advance to do the job. We even had to take out a Five million dollar insurance policy to do that job. We had specific hours . What did BofA do? They had absolutely NO record of us coming to do that job.

My other grievances:

• The fees are ridiculous for completely arbitrary things.
• With my brother’s business, they un-linked the savings account from the checking, and charged a fee for the checking dropping below a point. Then, that fee incurred several other fees totaling over $300.
• At a branch, anytime i wanted something other than dealing with money, they put me in a room, on the telephone.
• Their customer service is completely incompetent. The right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing.

So, I was thusly trying to end this whole relationship since 2008, but after the economic collapse, i simply hadn’t found a bank i could trust or that had necessary conveniences.

Fast-forward to today. This poor, polite, kindly young lady helped me, but in classic corporate fashion, was spitting out the last ditch, unheartfelt efforts, those desperate pleas. Oh really? Now you want me back? You’ll promise to treat me better?

Well, in classic bad-relationship-ending form, she got one last jab at me. In a metaphorical “i’m keeping the cd’s you left here”, she took a $9 fee since i was draining my savings account to my new bank.

Sorry, baby, keep it. I’m gone for good this time.

I’ve thought about writing about the Westboro Baptist Church for some time.
But (and i hate to seem shallow), they’ve finally pushed me over that line of silence. They will be protesting at Steve Jobs’ funeral.

For those of you who live under a rock, these are the people that use funerals or major events to put forth their anti-homosexual message. They use signs like “God hates f*gs” and “Thank God for dead soliders.”

Here’s the kicker.
These people announced their “event” with an iphone.
If they were so against Steve Jobs on principle, they would have boycotted his products (our most powerful asset in the free market…more on this later).

This saddens me on so many levels.

First, they use tragedy to put forth a completely unrelated agenda. Military personnel, Steve Jobs, etc have nothing to do with the social trend towards homosexuality. I would liken Westboro to the most despicable form of remora. They don’t create their own events, but use large media events for their own publicity. Many heartfelt apologies to remora.

Secondly, they are a complete and utter misrepresentation of God and His true followers.  Have these people ever opened a bible?

Matthew 9:13
But go and learn what this means: ‘I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT SACRIFICE,’ for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

To delight in someone’s death is un-God-like:
II Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Ezekiel 33:11
Say to them, ‘As I live!’ declares the Lord GOD, ‘I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?’

Even if the people at whose funerals Westboro picketed were sworn enemies, Jesus taught that we are to bless our persecutors, and pray for our enemies. In stark contrast, Westboro adds persecution upon pain. I cannot even fathom the twisted notion that this is even remotely acceptable.

If anyone hates Christians, i’d say you have good reason to. But if you aren’t a Christian, please consider and keep in mind, these people are not me; they are not a lot of Christians. There are so many ways in which Westboro flagrantly disregards and completely rebels against the teachings in the Bible…so much so that they are not only inaccurate reflections, but nearly antitheses of what a follower of Christ ought to be.

To put simply,
God does not hate.
He does not delight in people’s pain and death.
He tells us to love and bless our enemies.
And He is compassionate towards even the most desperate and depraved.

You are what you do, and these people are a type of Anti-Christ.

Invoking a coming judgement?
Be careful what you wish for Westboro.

James 2:13
For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy.

There’s a classic line in the not-so-classic-but-quite-entertaining Muppet Treasure Island. The Electric Mayhem was trying to figure out whose side they were on, and Dr. Teeth replies, ”Just play the gig, man. Never get involved in politics.”

I’ve been thinking a lot about where i toe the line here. I have strong beliefs. They make me what i am. Most of my passions lie in the true church, the truth, how we relate to God, and all that that entails. I write a lot concerning these issues.  But who am i to write about these things, and why should people listen to me rant in musical form?

I often think that people don’t want to hear it, and they really don’t relate to this kind of stuff. And to some degree, i get annoyed by musicians who use the stage as a bully-pulpit.

I read a quote from Chuck Berry once that basically said that music used to be just about having fun, dancing, etc. and that musicians now take themselves too seriously.

Yes, Rock certainly had its roots in just having a good time, getting out on the dance floor. But what about anything from the 60’s - war protests, manifestos of free-love, the denunciation of materialism? What about gospel and spirituals crying out for equality in the 50’s and 60’s? Where do we put Hendrix, Credence, the Byrds, Bob Dylan, John Lennon, the Clash, Sex Pistols, U2, Bruce Springsteen, Sinead O’Connor, Rage Against the Machine (ew), Henry Rollins, and so on?

Even though we don’t know the context of a lot of these songs - they happened before our time or in a different region of the world, etc - but for some reason, they resonate with us on a deeper level. Perhaps it is the passion of the musicians that speaks to us, and tells us that they are talking about something that is important to them. Maybe they just make us feel more informed?

I really don’t know. (I am just thinking off the cuff here.)

But somehow, these incredibly political and social statements - full of passion and vinegar, whether you agree or disagree - these are the zeitgeist of each era. They encapsulate all the feelings and conflict of their places in history. They are timeless and even necessary to our culture.

To be honest, the great party songs are the most fleeting, and generally my least favourite. These days, they are quickly produced, quickly consumed, and summarily vomited…discarded by the next fad.

I guess my point is this:
Musicians. Artists.
Go deeper. Think. Be passionate and convince me.
But just remember, i reserve the right to turn you off.

Interesting article on the retro-craze (particularly with music):

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-retro-rock-20110710,0,3613794.story

If you don’t want to read this article, let me summarize:

Everything has gone retro.
We are not seeking to make anything new, but only to delve into the past.

To some extent, i agree. The current folk and 80’s craze is driving me nuts.
People. It’s already been done. We have these songs already. Why re-hash this?

But I also have a few counter-points:

1. First off, there’s nothing wrong with delving into the past - listening to the stuff that’s already been created. The OLD STUFF is AMAZING.
I see no problem with re-mastering and re-packaging if it’s going to get into the hands of a completely new audience. Or even with the old audience, if it makes you re-listen and pick up on new things that you’ve never heard before (i’m speaking with regards to remixes and remasters).
What’s wrong with kids delving into the our rich musical history? What’s wrong with them listening to vinyl? What’s wrong with dusting off the old tapes, remastering, and bringing them into the new millennium?
History is important for us to move forward.

2. With regards to longing for “new sounds”…
Honestly - what is new and progressive?
Musically speaking, it just seems to me that something “NEW” is something that was repackaged, re-contextualized, or blended incongruent styles.
Rock’n'roll was simply taking blues, R&B, jazz and swing, and mixing it all together with a prominent backbeat.
Rockabilly was just mixing country beat with rock.
Jimi Hendrix, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin - they were all putting their own spin on an age old sound of the blues.
I think today - the White Stripes, the Kills, Adele, Zoe Keating, Seasick Steve are all taking bygone instruments or styles and giving them a new sheen, mixing them with new sounds and new “aggression.”
We’ve heard them before, but we haven’t.

3. I’m sure the danceable blues, the weird sounds of psychedelia, high-energy of punk, the ferocity of hard rock and metal, were fascinating and electrifying when the gates broke open. And they were all assisted by new “technologies” - amplification, electricity, synthesizing, etc. Yes, technology can push us to new sounds.
But what happens when the lights go out? We rely too heavily on technology for new sound. When everything is stripped away - you’ve got an old piano or guitar, a floor, your feet, and your voice.

All we have are words and the means by which we communicate them.
This never changes, nor does it grow old or out of fashion.
If you can find a new way to say something, that will be the thing that grabs us and becomes original.

When there’s nothing new in what i have to say, i must make up for its staleness by something new in the way i say it.
-Paul Rand quoting HW Fowler (From Lascaux to Brooklyn, p 42)

This is a lazy blog post, consisting mostly of youtube vids.
But, hey, it’s educational.

Ok - quick refresher course.
Guitars can be gritty from what’s going on in the amplifier
as exemplified here:

The KINKS (don’t need to watch the whole thing)

LINK WRAY (again, don’t need to watch the whole thing, but why wouldn’t you?)

OR they can get gritty with the assistance of stompboxes (foot-pedals)
as exemplified here:

ROLLING STONES w/ the Maestro Fuzztone (i blogged about this a while ago):
(definitely don’t need to watch the entire thing)

Ok, next stompbox on the block.

The formidable Sola Sound TONEBENDER
Designed by Gary Hurst around 1965, it was based on the Popular Maestro Fuzztone FZ-1A (the aforementioned “satisfaction” pedal).
Except, with a few modifications, it had tons of sustain.
And it was relatively “smoother” than the fuzztone - not so much like frying bacon.
To me, it’s much more usable, responsive, and articulate.

Everyone else thought so too - Jeff Beck, Pete Townsend, JIMMY PAGE, even the Beatles.
This is the fuzz tone everyone tries to emulate these days.

What does it sound like? Listen to the first 2 Zeppelin albums.
Or get the cliff’s notes here from Jimmy Page (watch this whole thing):

Watch this clip too. About a third of the way through, Jimmy Page pushes hard into the tonebender.

Still want to read more? Here ya go:
MORE READING
http://www.musictoyz.com/articles/chop2100.php

http://www.led-zeppelin.org/joomla/studio-and-live-gear/312

I once heard a studio engineer complain about the degradation of music quality.
I’m referring to the fidelity of music in a purely aural sense.
(The quality of modern music itself is left for another discussion.)

For the engineer, it’s an understandable frustration.
A studio engineer and a host of others work hard to capture the essence of sound, or to manipulate it to new heights, new sounds, etc. (It is truly a CRAFT.)

Once created, tweaked, and gussied-up, a song/album makes its way through distributional pipelines. These days, it makes its way onto a tiny digital device (a computer or mp3 player), compressed and crushed digitally, and we listen to the aforementioned engineers’ hard work through tiny white earbuds. The sound is thin and missing details that we don’t normally give consideration. These nuances that engineers work so hard to capture -  these things are stripped away by convenience and portability.

What exactly do i mean? Well, if you listen to a CD versus an MP3 encoded at 128 Kbps, there is, without question, a significant decay in sound quality (less so at 256 Kbps). Listen through a decent set of headphones. You will notice there is something different - a certain “je ne sais quoi.” In the compressed MP3, listen, in particular, to cymbal crashes. You will hear a warbly sound. This is because the MP3 is trying to save space and is thus, throwing away data in the upper and lower ranges. Cymbals encroach on these frequency ranges, and you can hear the result. The same thing happens with bass frequencies, or the pick-attack of a guitar. All these small details become muddied or lost altogether.

So, an engineer’s frustration is not without credence.
And yet, i must submit a counter-point.

Music used to be played in mono. It was played on crackly, intermittent AM radios.
Tapes wore down, losing high-frequencies. Records wore out from repeated use.
Speaker technology was still only in a fledgling stage.

But let’s face it - music will never sound as good as it did in the Studio. These companies and engineers have tens, if not hundreds, of thousands invested in high-quality equipment. (Sidenote: If you are ever in a studio, ask a sound engineer to play his/her favourite song on their large speaker system. Fun stuff.)

Back to the main point: From studio to earbud. It’s like driving a new car off the lot. As soon as those rear tires touch the dirty asphalt of the outside world, the value plummets. Likewise, in music, as soon as a recording studio releases those pristine final mixes into the world, it’s all depreciation.

But take heart ye sound engineers.
The longevity in music will always be in the strength of the composition (the song) itself.
You can still hear aching, no mattter if you’ve lost crisp detail.
You can still sing along without a care in the world.

Think of anything by old bluesmen (Robert Johnson, Son House), recordings by Alan Lomax, lo-fi punk outfits, vintage classical music or opera recordings. The equipment just wasn’t “there” due to one factor or another. Yet the ESSENCE permeates and penetrates, transcending the deficiencies. If it was successful, it communicates and it moves us.

And we can all go home happy.

I decided to preface all my posts with the overall subject. Your time is precious, so this will help you know what you want to read or skip henceforth.

i read this verse this morning:
I Peter 2:14. For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men.

Every day i read news articles online. Anytime you see an article about religion, Christianity, evolution, or George W. Bush, there is sure to be a firestorm of vitriol on both sides - comments on these hot-button issues that turn into fountains of hate spouted in the guise of debate (didn’t mean for that to rhyme). The end result is a conversational polemic that is 20 times longer than the original article.

I hate reading these comments, yet somehow i do everytime.

We have two boxers here - one claims God on his side, and the other intelligence.

I often share a non-Christian’s frustration with religion, and am often ashamed of those who misrepresent Christ and gain notoriety from it. Yet to dismiss religion completely on the basis of logic or intelligence is ignorant in itself.

I’ll say it again: Truth is not guilty by association. You can’t throw out the entire bag of trail mix because of the nuts. Translation: although tempting, the few cannot negate the whole.

Yet, here is partially why i believe the ignorance may exist:
We, as a Christian whole, have neglected the aforementioned verse. We’ve chosen the comfortable truths of our religion and neglected those that might silence the ignorant:

• to bear up under trials
• to submit to our human institutions
• to live holy and distinct lives
• to maintain good conduct among non-believers
• to keep ourselves from fleshly lusts

Shoot - these are only the truths/commands listed in I Peter 2! Jesus commanded us to sell our possessions and give to those in need, to love our enemies and to heap blessing upon them, and challenged us to live a life of faith, knowing that God the Father provides for our daily needs. He exemplified the lack of fear in touching the untouchable, regarding women, and questioning corrupt religious authority & tradition.

Could it be that the way we live our lives could be the evidence to the contrary of people’s claims against God and his followers - so much so that it would silence them?

There will always be nay-sayers, cynics, mockers, and even hateful, spiteful people.
But time and time again, the Bible makes it clear that: the best argument is not an argument at all and the loudest words are our actions.

Blogging, for me, is a daunting task.

My dear wife keeps prodding me to write more, however, and gave me this one piece of advice:
Stop trying to write Masters’ Theses.

Let’s return to guitar effects pedals, but in smaller chunks.
Ok, we talked previously about the beginning of modified electric guitar sound.
Electric guitar amplifiers had featured Vibrato and Reverb since the 50’s, and were also capable (unintentionally) of an overdriven or distorted sound. Again, to re-cap, the vacuum tubes were unable to handle the power of the signal, and thus a beautiful analog phenomenon happened yielding a gritty and aggressive guitar sound. This would have a profound effect on rock music henceforth.

Here’s a nice gritty guitar sound, all due to what’s going on inside the amp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk3Ei_yoI4c

But let’s move on to pedals/stompboxes. I’ve been trying to find out who pioneered effects units. There’s really no solid documentation about it. I suppose it was just a “movement” (but i’ll recant this view if i find out otherwise). Several people started experimenting with building basic effects, and as guitarists began to integrate them into their sound and style, the doors would swing open wider and wider.

Wikipedia actually has a pretty good history of effects if you want to check it out (go to the section aptly titled “history”):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_pedal

Some of the earliest effects units were fuzz.
What is fuzz? Well, if you bred a bee and a chainsaw, this is basically the sound this creature would make.

Many cite the Maestro Fuzz-Tone as one of the earliest incarnations of a fuzz pedal. Its popularity would be massively intensified by this song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6Ts8XS_UO4&feature=related

I’m trying to keep this a bite-sized portion, so we’ll take a short break and be back in a week.

More info about fuzz pedals:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzbox

As an aspiring musician, i know i shouldn’t dabble in politics nor religion.
Lyrically, i’ve already dabbled in the latter. So, why not go in a little deeper?

The other night, Jon Stewart (The Daily Show) had a guest (Sam Harris). Link: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-october-4-2010/sam-harris .  Mr. Harris claimed in his book that moral values ought to be (and can be) scientifically quantifiable. In its simplest form, his theory purports that science and math can determine which “morals” will make a society flourish. (I’ve read similar theories that explain altruism as an innate trait for collective evolution.) An example Mr. Harris gave was that a burka is something we know innately that suppresses women - this suppression is bad for society, and the human race.

‘Twould be a nice theory, as it’d simplify life a little.
But, there were so many fallacies in the interview, and so many flaws with this idea; i don’t even know where to begin.

First of all, truth is not guilty by association. The nuts contained within a religious body cannot negate the whole religion. Yet, Mr. Harris waved this flag like an Alabama boy unabashedly waves “Dixie.” You simply cannot judge truth by this. Similarly, we cannot negate science by the nuts therein contained.

Secondly, with this theory, we’d only be changing the face of our religion. We would simply be substituting the human religious hierarchy with scientists.

We would be making scientists and mathematicians the clergy in a “sciocracy” (my own made-up word) - people to whom we would go to judge a matter, to whom we would go for answers. In the grand scheme of things, we (scientists included) are small, insignificant, intellectual pissants. To claim that we would know long-term, scientifically quantifiable effects on society is both arrogant and ignorant.

What appears as objectivism, in its interpretation would only result in subjectivism. We see this in religion as well. Again, the scientific determination would just be a replacement for man-made religion - the human interpretation of truth.

If we determine what is good for one society, is it good for another?  Is it good for the whole human race? Is it good for the ecosystem? What if another comes to a contradicting conclusion? How do we thus solve conflicts or wars?

My head hurts.

Many secular folks are justified in pointing out difficult passages in Scripture. I am perplexed by so many of them.  I am confident that any theologian who claims they know the answers will get a rude awakening in their “facetime” with God.

Let me close with this thought:

TRUTH exists outside of human interpretation.
I hope one day, when we shall cease to look in a mirror dimly, we shall know it as it TRULY is.

Put another ten in the jukebox
Part 3 : Searching

I have to admit - for me, the turn of the millennium was a very bleak time in music. All my favourite bands were breaking or broken up. Cush was around for a couple years, Violet Burning was a mainstay through the early 2000’s, but my adherence to Christian music was slipping - there was nothing significant, profound, or artistic happening.

It forced me to move on… which sometimes requires that we look back.

I began to soak in everything - the roots of rock. The foundation was already laid in me with the blues, but i began to imbibe everything from Johnny Cash, Ray Charles, Nat King Cole, Miles Davis, Dave Brubeck, Patsy Cline, Hank WIlliams, the Beatles, Cream, Hendrix, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Joan Jett, Pink Floyd, The Clash, The Ramones, Sex Pistols, The Stooges, The Buzzcocks, The Pixies, U2’s entire catalog, etc. I took it all in like a child on the 4th of July. And this is just scratching the surface.

Some of it i still don’t understand. I grew up in a different era, not understanding their context and significance. And it’s hard to compete with the intensity and the “sound” of music these days - it’s a well-engineered machine. But i learned these two things:

1. where technology is involved, “evolution” happens. I don’t think music itself evolves, but technology certainly makes it easier and broader (the 2nd law of thermodynamics is still intact). Understand, music would not be where it is today without that which came before.

2. When i’m alone in a room with nothing but a ratty old guitar…when i’m in a car with no radio, forced to hum my own version of a song…this is where the strength of a song will always win out over technology. I think these writers, entertainers, and bands transcended that - they wrote amazing songs and music with what was available to them.

If you’ve some extra money and want to buy some songs on itunes, here are some of my favourites:

ROCK N’ ROLL / JAZZ
hank williams - ramblin man, lovesick blues
johnny cash old stuff - Cry, Cry, Cry, Hey Porter, Rock Island Line
Nat King Cole - The Very Thought of You, Stardust
ray charles - the mess around, i got a woman (don’t watch “Ray” - you’ll swear off his music forever)
Miles Davis - hmm, hard to pick one song. Definitely an acquired taste.
Dave Brubeck - Take Five, Unsquare Dance

CLASSIC ROCK
led zeppelin - what is and what should never be, rain song, Dyer Maker, the ocean,
cream - sunshine of your love (of course)
The Who - Baba O’Reilly, Happy Jack (unfortunately, the Who is now ubiquitous, and makes a bad halftime show)

PUNK / POST-PUNK
the clash (one of my favourite bands) - armagideon time, clampdown, the guns of brixton, Train in Vain, umm…the Self-titled album, London Calling, and (gasp…) Combat Rock
the ramones - kkk took my baby away, do you remember rock n’ roll radio?
David Bowie - Rebel Rebel, Jean Genie
Siouxsie & The Banshees - Hong Kong Garden, Peek A Boo
The Cure - Lullaby, Close to Me

PRE-90’s ALTERNATIVE
pixies - dead, here comes your man (or just buy the entire doolittle album!)
u2: ultraviolet, please, bad, seconds, running to stand still, do you feel loved, north and south of the river

(For all you music snobs, i’m not talking to you. First of all, we’re scratching the surface. And secondly, I simply want to relate some obscure songs that i happen to love and that are more accessible.)

Next installment : Garages and girls