On Lured to College Thanks to the Ability to Rent a Matisse

The Lawrence trivia contest thing is kinda silly, though, because 70 miles to the west is the World's Largest Trivia Contest at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, which is even longer/bigger. I mean, Lawrence is definitely a better school, but if trivia's your reason for picking a college, might as well commit, right?

Posted on October 28, 2013 at 12:07 pm 0

On The Chelsea of New Orleans? (French Quarter) The Queens of LA? (Venice)

@ranran Then I was like "it also says that across the street is DUMBO" and he was like "DUMBO is a bunch of yuppies."

Posted on May 1, 2013 at 2:14 pm 0

On The Chelsea of New Orleans? (French Quarter) The Queens of LA? (Venice)

@ranran ok got it guys I asked my roommate who used to live in New York and now lives where I live and he said "Fort Greene has a bunch of yuppies. Well it's not all yuppies. But some yuppies." IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW! maybe I should ask him when he's not drunk I guess.

Posted on May 1, 2013 at 2:13 pm 0

On The Chelsea of New Orleans? (French Quarter) The Queens of LA? (Venice)

Wait, on the map it says I live in "Fort Greene" (although on the border of DUMBO) but then there's no explanation what does that meeeeean?

Posted on April 30, 2013 at 8:03 pm 0

On Austin, On Less Than $20 a Day

Trying to get the most out of SX by pretty much staying downtown and going home at midnight is an...interesting approach.

Posted on March 21, 2013 at 3:26 pm 0

On Places I've Lived: Some Okay Places, And Then The Eighth Circle of Hell

@Ellie Hyde Park! Pretttttty sure that's the apartment building where my friends lived and where our band practiced and got yelled at a lot. I lived one block north. Best location.

Posted on February 28, 2013 at 12:57 pm 0

On Streaming Services Don't Pay Much for Music

@jfruh OK, that's definitely a valid distinction. That's not actually what I was intending to say -- I think you're talking about a comparison between someone streaming a song and a dj playing it over the air, in that both of these people are choosing to play a particular song. I was talking more about people turning on the radio, happening on a song they like, and listening to it, because I'm trying to make a comparison based on options that the average person has for listening to music. In the sense that I'm referring to, the radio listener makes no impact on how much the songwriter is receiving in royalties.* You are definitely correct that songwriters receive royalties from radio airplay, and though my radio days are juuuust far enough behind me for me to remember how much, I don't doubt that it's a higher rate than streaming. However, radio royalty rates are still relatively low, and typically don't make a huge difference for the artist. Additionally, these are paid not directly to the songwriters, but to ASCAP and BMI, who then take their share and pass it on -- so if you're not part of either of those organizations, you have no means of getting these public performance royalties. *OK, technically part of the formula used to calculate public performance royalties involves the radio stations number of listeners, but one person listening is not going to make a difference -- both in that it's not going to significantly change the listener base size and that they have no way of actually measuring what station you're listening to.

Posted on November 15, 2012 at 2:32 pm 0

On Streaming Services Don't Pay Much for Music

I think Damon Krukowski's post is fantastic, and the response on Detroit Gorilla -- "Boo fucking Hoo" and whatnot -- is vile. But I do think there is a point to be made that there is a new financial model in music, and touring is an integral part of that. Yes, to suggest that touring will solve all of a musician's problems is absurd and comes from a point of privilege -- although to be a musician requires a certain amount of privilege, unfortunately. But touring, merchandise, and licensing are the ways that bands make money now, and while some of Johnston's points are completely valid, others are not. (I could offer "Just don't play in Nova Scotia" as a solution to several of her points, ESPECIALLY #4, which strikes me as an absurd argument against touring and a fair, though obvious, one in favor of sensible tour planning.) Buying music directly from an artist is fantastic, and certainly preferable to streaming or any other form of acquiring music. Please, do this. But streaming is no worse for an artist, financially, than listening to the radio, taping a friend's record, downloading music illegally, buying a used record (which I never hear anyone complain about for some reason), etc., and probably comparable to buying an album on a major label. I will repeat two things I have said on here before: 1. I have interviewed so many musicians, from very successful to barely holding on, and they've all said the same thing: they do not care if someone downloads their music illegally. A direct quote that pretty much sums up their attitudes: "I don't give a fuck. I could never care." 2. The best explanation of how royalties work for a band on a major label is still Tim Quirk of Too Much Joy's incredible, hilarious post from 2009: http://www.toomuchjoy.com/index.php/2009/12/my-hilarious-warner-bros-royalty-statement/ Basically, if the band you're talking about is or was putting out records on a major, they're probably not going to see any of your money no matter how you get their music. I just want to note that I spend far more money on music than most people do, and this is not me trying to justify some bad behavior of mine in any way. But I have zero problem augmenting that with streaming and, yes, illegal downloading, which often leads to purchasing an album.

Posted on November 15, 2012 at 11:36 am 0

On The Logistics of Paying for Your Education Yourself (Mostly)

I find it really interesting that SO many of these are framed as a question of expensive private school vs. affordable public school. I don't doubt that it's a thing for a ton of people, and I assumed it would be for me, but it actually...wasn't at all. After I got in, early action, to the expensive private school I really wanted to, I applied to my state's public university because I hadn't gotten a financial aid offer yet and didn't know if I'd be able to afford the tuition, which was, at the time, about the amount of my parents' incomes combined. Turned out that after scholarships need-based grants, my cost was almost exactly the same at both. I gradated from what's apparently one of the 25 most expensive colleges with about $5,000 in loans, and I think that was all from my two years in the dorms -- by the time I moved off-campus, my grants were basically covering my living expenses. I fully realize that it doesn't work that way for everybody, or even most people, but I'm always surprised that I don't run into more people with the same sort of experience.

Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:24 am 0

On Things to Eat in Austin For $5 Max

Just wanted to add a suggestion: 2 samosas w/ chutney + donut + beverage at Ken's Donuts = I dunno, def less than 5 bucks. And available 24 hours.

Posted on July 20, 2012 at 2:02 pm 0