(06.29.07) Recommends:

Concert Photography, Vol. 9.
a first opening band,
Fair to Midland,
a headlining band,
Slim's,
San Francisco, Calif.
06.29.07.

So the cool folks over at Sneak Attack Media invited me out to see Fair To Midland at Slim's. I didn't know anything about the band, but their publicity photo has the band in a swamp with a banjo-wielding lead singer:



So eschewing the whole "don't judge a book by its cover/don't judge a band by its PR photos" I headed out to Slim's. The first thing I noticed was that the band is proud to be from Texas:



Texas is home to lots of good music, so in my mind I was expecting something along the lines of Southern headbanging bluegrass. Bluegrass, because of that banjo pic. Headbanging, because as I wandered through the crowd, my mind kept repeating one line: "I love you but I've chosen darkness..." This crowd was rocking mohawks (I'm not talking about those obnoxious hipster fauxhawk things, I'm talking honest-to-god three foot mohawks) and lots of black and etc. This seemed like handbanging people. Oh yeah, also headbanging because:



The bassist looked like a cross between Slash and Iggy Pop. So the band came out and started their aural assault on the crowd. The crowd really seemed into it (but then, maybe everybody was into just because it was one of those rare occasions where you can wear your three foot high mohawk and people would give nods of approval rather than rolling their eyes, or shielding their children). I was mainly just confused, and stubborningly holding out hope for some heavy metal bluegrass in the middle of the song.

Now, some of you readers may be scoffing at the notion of heavy metal bluegrass. My love of bluegrass is well documented on this blog. Same goes for my love of alternative forms of bluegrass. In fact, certain blog readers will recall my days as the manager of the infamous, debaucherous, peerless (naysayers may claim "wholly" "fictitious") China Man Bluegrass Band. I managed them starting from their legendary Shanghai Lonesome Sound Tour to the day of that untimely and fiery crash that ended the band in Sandusky, OH. Playing Chinese Bluegrass in the middle of Sandusky, OH. While it may or may not have actually happened, that, my friends, is Alternagrass. Around the same time as CMBB, I fell into the Bloodshot Records scene with Split Lip Rayfield and others playing that indie-rock-country-punk for which the label is known. I'm telling you, in the early 2000s cowboys with tattoos screaming Hank Williams songs was way more dangerous than MTV generated gangsta rap. And that's probably still true today. So all of this is a roundabout way of saying that Heavy Metal Bluegrass seemed completely plausible to me.

Meanwhile back at the show...

I'm not sure how this music is officially classified by those on the internet who have finely calibrated music labeling apparatuses (apparatti?). Does this music qualify as screamo? I think it does. The lead singer is very emo. I don't know if he's emo in real life, but when he steps on stage he has the role of Emo Lead Singer down pat.



But he also really reminded me of the lead singer of local heroes Magic Bullets. As by this I mean he was insanely frantic the entire set.

The wind up:


The delivery:


The pitch:


FTM left the stage, and all the mohawks went wild for the next band. But two songs into the headlining act I left Slim's, head down, slightly dejected. I guess heavy metal bluegrass will have to wait for another day. Until then, I still have Cookie Mongoloid.

(06.28.07) Recommends

Web Royalty Redux.

I thought that today I would add a little more meat to the bones of yesterday’s post. I want to look at the mechanics behind the royalty rate increase "controversy."

The first thing to think about is how the Copyright Act is implicated when you, e.g., listen to a CD (I know that it is so old school to actually listen to CDs, but just play along). There are at least two copyrights in a CD: first, there is copyright in the "musical work" (what you think of as "the tune," both the underlying arrangement of notes and any accompanying words), 17 USC 102(a)(2); secondly, there is copyright in the "sound recording" (the actual recorded sound that comes out of your speaker), 17 USC 102(a)(7). The copyrights are not necessarily held by the same party: copyright in the musical work is initially owned by the party who wrote the music – the composer and lyricist – while copyright in the sound recording is initially typically held by the producer who arranged for the song to be recorded. Of course, the holder of the right may be determined by contract, with the record label often owning at least the latter copyright, if not both.

Okay, so now that we understand that there are two distinct copyrights in play, what rights actually attach to these copyrights? Copyright owners hold four basic rights, the right to: reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute, and to publicly perform. 17 USC 106. The "musical work" copyright gets all of these rights. The "sound recording" gets the first three, and a modified version of the fourth. The modified version is the right to perform publicly by means of a digital audio transmission, and this right did not come into being until the Digital Performance in Sound Recording Act of 1995.

So what does all of this mean? Well, let's go through an example. When a terrestrial radio station plays a song, it is publicly performing the musical work and the sound recording. It pays the song writer (or whoever owes the musical work copyright) for its use of the copyrighted musical work, but it does not pay for its use of the copyrighted sound recording. Why? Because copyright in sound recording only applies to digital transmissions, which by the terms of its definition in the Copyright Act exempts terrestrial radio. When an internet radio station plays a song, it has to pay for use of both of the copyrights. Arbitrary, you say? Of course it is. But, anybody who has ever paid taxes or been pulled over for speeding when every car around them was going faster has experience with an arbitrarily written or enforced law. Arbitrary laws are nothing new in this country. But to be clear, this sound recording performance right result cannot be justified on the basis of copyright law; it is solely to be chalked up to the power of the terrestrial radio lobbying efforts (let me repeat this for all of you out there who think the recording industry is the root of all evil: radio broadcasters using the political process to reach a result that is favorable for their side, but that makes no sense from a legal standpoint).

The rate increase "controversy," then, is dealing with the price of that digital sound recording performance copyright. Webcasters (as is true with the musical work fee paid by terrestrial radio broadcasters) pay one statutorily based rate - a per performance "compulsory license" -- for each performance, rather than having to negotiate a different rate for each performance (if I didn't write that sentence clearly, think of it this way: rather than broadcasters having to negotiate, and therefore pay a lot more, to play an Elvis Presley song than an Elvis Perkins song, there is a single rate that is paid per performance, regardless of the song).

The Copyright Act provides a mechanism to reach that royalty rate. First, it encourages the copyright holders and the internet broadcasters to privately negotiate and reach a desirable rate on their own. 17 USC 114(e). Only after these negotiations fail do both sides come before a Copyright Royalty Judge who commences trial-type proceedings, 17 USC 114(f). This means that both sides put on witnesses and evidence, just like they would if they were having a trial, and at the end the Copyright Royalty Judge comes down with a ruling.

So let's apply this to the "controversy" at hand. At first, the copyright holders and broadcasters came together to negotiate. Some of the initial members of the internet broadcasters included: Microsoft, America Online, Yahoo, and Clear Channel Communications (it is worth keeping this in mind when you see coalitions such as Save Net Radio framing the issue as Big Govt vs. Mom and Pop Radio). Both sides presented a proposal, bolstered with evidence and witnesses. Included among the internet broadcasters' witnesses included economics professors, finance experts, and corporate executives. At the end of the trial, the Copyright Royalty Judges (there were three that presided over the hearings) came down with their ruling.

In this case, the copyright holders proposed a rate of either 30% of gross revenues or a per performance rate starting at $0.0008 and increasing to $0.0019 by 2010 (the statute calls on the Copyright Royalty Judges to set rates in five-year blocks), whichever was higher. The internet broadcasters offered various revenue-based percentages, and various per performance rates, starting at $0.00025 per performance (so note that when critics of the fee increase call the rate "outrageous" they are talking about a difference of $0.00055 per performance; I'd calculate the percentage difference in those two numbers but I don't have a calculator that allows me to enter that many digits on the right side of the decimal point). Both sides presented their proposals and evidence and witnesses, and after a 48-day hearing, the judges came out with the numbers I presented yesterday.

The biggest complaints I've read regarding this "controversy" are that this is an example of Big Govt v. "Little Mom and Pop" and that the music industry was the only player in setting the rates; that somehow the internet broadcasters were not at the table in the rate setting discussion. Plainly, both of these are just false.

And, on a personal note, whenever I see shadowy coalitions talk about "Little Mom and Pop," and then fail to mention that "Little Mom and Pop" includes parties such as Microsoft and Clear Channel, I start thinking that the "controversy" is nothing but a big budget PR campaign (see, generally: smoking is not bad for you, presented by shadowy coalitions brought to you by tobacco companies; lawyers are bad for you, presented by shadowy coalitions brought to you by insurance companies).

Think what you want to think about these rates, leave me comments, email me, etc. But at least take a few minutes to read the ruling before you buy into the conspiracy.

(06.27.07) Recommends:

Reading Rules Before Complaining About Them.

I don't know how your web surfing has been going lately (btw, do people even use that word anymore -- websurfing? So quaintly 90s, right?) but I'm growing increasing exasperated at all these blogs complaining about the Copyright Royalty Board's implementation of new royalty rates that webcaster's must pay to play music. A bunch of web radiocasters engaged in a Day of Silence in protest. Coalitions have been formed, to get people aware of the "problem."

Here's the thing. Go ahead and Google this problem. What do you come up with? A bunch of blogs complaining of "outrageous rates" that are "putting webcasters out of business" and "taking food out of people's mouths" by charging "more in fees than we can possibly make up in revenue."

Which is all very concerning. Except that none of the blogs or articles say what the rates are, or what the rates were, or how much money they are losing. Editor's note: this is not a good way to convince people of your point.

So, for my sanity, if not yours, today I present the CRJ's Final Determination of Rates and Terms. Now, I'm not completely finished hashing through the opinion, but here's something that immediately jumps out at me: it includes the rates! And here are the rates:

$0.0008 per performance, 2006 (the fees are retroactive).
$0.0011 per performance, 2007.
$0.0014 per performance, 2008.
$0.0018 per performance, 2009.
$0.0019 per performance, 2010.

These numbers are conveniently left out of all anti-fee discussion I have seen. Why? I'm not sure, but here is a possibility. For people who live in the Bay Area, and pay...

$3.50 per gallon of the cheapest Rotten Robbie gasoline;
$4.00 per grande cuppashittychino;
$10.00 per cheapest six pack of beer;
$1000 per month for small one bedroom apartment;

...it would be awfully hard to work up the energy to write passionate blog posts about zeros and zeros of cents. But it's much easier when we can scream : the govt is interfering with our lives, harming the little guy and making the rich richer! Editor's note: Everybody stop your damn screaming.

Read the opinion first. I'll be sure to wake you up in the middle up it, because I'm pretty sure you'll fall asleep reading it -- it turns out the reality is much more boring -- and much less outrageous -- than the screaming blog posts suggest.

Copyright Royalty Judge -- Final Determination of Rates & Terms -- pdf.

(06.26.07) Recommends:

Miranda July.

She's like an artistic octopus: filmmaker, performance artist, musician (on no less than Kill Rock Stars), writer, and at least four other things to make the analogy complete. Her new collection of stories is "No One Belongs Here More Than You," and while it is still currently merely on my "To Read" list, I have unrealistically high hopes based on its promotional website -- easily one of the most perfect uses of the internet ever. Seriously.

Miranda July -- No One Belongs Here More Than You -- website.

(06.23.07) Recommends:

Brian Michael Roff, the track "The Underpainting" from the album "The Underpainting" (CSP, 2007).

This is a lovely song that magically appeared in my email this morning, from the vital Cat Bird Records. So I wanted to share it with all of you.

Brian Michael Roff -- The Underpainting -- mp3.

(06.22.07) Recommends:

Seymore Saves the World, s/t (Royalty, Etc. Records, 2007).



Seymore Saves the World is my Band of the Month for June. Here's how it came to be. So, everybody who has a Myspace page gets about ten friend requests each day from bands. As a fan of music, I have no problem taking a few minutes out of my day to go to the band's page and listen to what they have streaming...before usually cringing, denying the invitation, and never thinking about the band again (I know, I'm a horrible person, but I'm only one person, and there is a fixed amount of room in my head to store the constant onslaught of information we are given everyday. I'm trying, people.). I try to be an optimist with things like this, but sometimes the sheer volume of requests gets on my nerves. So then I started a new policy: anytime I get a friend request from a band, I reply saying if they send me a copy of their CD/demo/whatever, I'll take a listen and review what I receive.

So enter Seymore Saves the World. I shouldn't be surprised that the first band to take me up on the offer would be from Minneapolis, home of reasonable people and great rock bands. And for the amount of crap that one wades through on Myspace, I've been pleasantly surprised with this album. I received it way back in the long-ago days of May, but have designated them as my Band of the Month for June, because they have a classic summer sound. Very pop-rock, with keyboards, and "do-do-doo" harmonies. They could be played in the Two For Tuesdays slot on any Classic Rock Station in the country without the listener realizing that the classic sound is being made in the Here and Now. And there's something to be said for that.

Seymore Saves the World -- Summer 2005 -- streaming audio.

(05.19.07) Recommends:

Dawn Landes.

So you've probably seen the bluegrass version of Peter,Bjorn, and John's "Young Folks". If not, it's really a must-hear. This Dawn Landes is new too me, so it's a developing story! I'll have more about her to write soon.

Here's the youtube:


Dawn Landes + WST Bluegrass Band -- Young Folks -- mp3.

(04.18.07) Recommends:

A VC.

I don't know what it is exactly about this blog of a New York City Venture Capitalist that has me obsessed, but I probably check this thing twenty times a day. He is a VC who focuses on the internet and technology sector (probably that's just one sector? internet is technology, right?). He's a big music fan. He's very enthusiastic and seems genuine and gentle. I rarely understand the business behind what he's talking about, but I'd say once a week I feel like I learn something, or glean some insight. Like I said, I've become obsessed with it.

(04.17.07) Recommends:

A Reflection on Taxation.

Today we will hear lots of noise regarding the tax debate. They’re too high and they stifle an efficient flow of labor and capital! They’re too low and they prevent an equitable and just society! The debate has been ongoing for decades, and will continue to rage on for decades to come. And really, at this point, the debate is by and large boring, because it’s not a really a debate. Rather, it's a series of rants supported by ostensible facts and wholly dismissive of the other side. And of course, we all know that the facts don’t matter if you don’t agree on the issue.

So today, on this Tax Day, I want to leave the traditional tax debate behind. Instead, I would like to share with you all something I came across recently. To me, this video demonstrates the value of taxes. Not only that, it demonstrates the awesome potential of this country of ours. It demonstrates that while we may be in the midst of fighting a War on Terror, no fucking terrorists can ever destroy the spirit of this country. It demonstrates that while we’re entering the beginning stages of a shitstorm of a Presidential campaign in which both sides will insist that this is the Most Important Election of Our Time, the winner ultimately does not matter, because it is the people of this country who gives this country of ours its awesome strength.

In April of 1973, Stevie Wonder appeared on Sesame Street. The following video is the blistering result. This video to me is such a beautiful and strong distillation of the power and potential of our country that watching it literally brings me to tears. Here is a blind, black man invited to be the musical guest on a show that features a reality where humans interact with all manner of strange puppets. It’s a show that features a monster who eats – but cannot swallow – cookies. It’s a show that features two puppets – one orange and a lover of duckies, one yellow and the wearer of a unibrow – who might be roommates, or who might be gay lovers, or who might just be puppets made out of cloth. It’s a show that features a monster who lives in a trash can and is generally angry, yet always shows patience and compassion for his pet worm. It’s a show that features a big bird (Big Bird), and a big dog (Barkley) and a big wholly mammoth thing (Snuffleupagus). I could go on and on about the wonderful and charming characters, but it’s what those characters have done that’s even more remarkable. They’ve taught generations of children about letters and numbers and spelling and friendship and emotions and that it's okay to be a little weird or odd or a freak or an outsider or disabled or to be from a different country or to be a different color. It's taught about having and dealing with imaginary friends (the type that aren’t physically there) and imaginary friends (the type who you think are nice to you, but really aren’t). They’ve taught about tolerance. They’ve taught about the incredible power of language.

Fact: I remember the first time that I saw the “Letter B” skit, where a band of puppets sings “Letter B” as a play on the Beatles’ “Let it Be.” I remember watching this at maybe age three or four. And I remember realizing that language could be taken, and tweaked, to humorous effect. I was three or fours years old and I've tried to use that lesson every day of my life since. Are we really willing to say that TV does nothing but rot the brain?

And my god, look at the kids dancing in this video! The show has also taught generations of kids to get down with their funky selves! Stevie Wonder, a black man born blind in Michigan in 1950. He shows up on Sesame Street and puts on a performance, at age 23, that can unit kids and adults, puppets and people. White sax players and black drummers. This is the kind of thing that changes the world.

All of this goodness from Sesame Street. And how does this show get funded? Well, it gets funded from many different sources, but – and here’s the point of today’s lecture – lots of the funding comes from the Federal Government, and the Federal Government gets lots of its money from our tax dollars. So today, I am happy to give my Hard Earned Dollars to the Government. Because I know there is waste in the government. And I know there is inefficiency. Do I care about this? I do care. But my god, I want to give because every time I give it allows for the possibility of the funding of something as beautiful as Stevie Wonder performing “Superstition” on Sesame Street in 1973 to happen. The tax system isn’t perfect, and the government isn’t perfect, and Stevie Wonder isn’t perfect, and Sesame Street isn’t perfect. But, let's all remember the goal of the Founding Fathers in the preamble of the Constitution (this will be convenient since I’m sure you people already have your Constitutions out in order to justify your belief in the necessity or illegitimacy of taxation): they wanted to create a more perfect Union. More perfect. Perfection might always be out of the reach of us mere humans, but Stevie Wonder on Sesame Street in 1973 made things more perfect.

(04.16.07) Recommends:

Is Justin Timberlake a Product of Cumulative Advantage? by Duncan J. Watts.

Duncan Watts, a sociology professor at Columbia, describes his research thusly:

My research centers around the development of new models of large, complex networks that capture the general features of networked social systems, and a coherent set of metrics for characterizing them. The overall goal is to explore the role that network structure plays in determining or constraining system behavior, focussing on a few broad problem areas in social science such as information contagion, financial risk management, and organizational design. I am concerned with issues such as systemic robustness and stability with respect to cascading failures, efficient distributed information processing, and effective procedures for conducting global searches in networks using only local information.

Luckily for us, he takes that dry-sounding knowledge and applies it some of our most pressing issues, like How did Justin Timberlake become this generation's Michael Jackson? And how might the next generation's Justin Timberlake come about? This NY Times article is a mixture of Malcolm Gladwell, Steven Levitt, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, and Paul A. David (whose article "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY" on path dependence in the adoption of the QWERTY keyboard is easily one of my favorite academic articles of all time and really should be required reading for anybody who has ever pondered how a society arrives at choices it makes), and signals the arrival of Watts on my radar screen. I look forward to checking out his books and reporting back on them in this space.

(04.15.07) Recommends:

The Jock Exchange, by Michael Lewis.

Portfolio is a new business magazine that Conde Nast is launching this month. Michael Lewis is one of our most interesting and thoughtful writers. His first contribution to the mag is a look into creating a stock exchange on which professional athletes are bought and sold. For regular readers of Lewis, there isn't much new ground covered here. But Michael Lewis could write a grocery list, and I'd still recommend reading it.

(04.14.07) Recommends:

N = {fb(cm)*fb(tc)} + fb(Ts)+fc*ta.

Okay, this is too perfect to be real, but too ridiculous to be fiction. The NY Times has recently revealed the Perfect Bacon Sandwich. If somebody goes out tomorrow and discovers WMD or the whereabouts of Bin Laden, one might argue that such discovery could not possibly be as relevant or important as what the Times is bestowing upon us. This is the Rosetta Stone of modern nutrition. Open your umbrellas; a weary nation weeps in joy:

(04.13.07) Recommends:

Concert Photography, Vol. 8.
The Photo Atlas
Popscene, San Francisco, Calif.
04.12.07

I previewed the show the other day. Now I'm back with evidence from the crime scene. This band isn't for everybody, but I gotta say, they are a very tight unit live. I judge a band by whether they can blow the roof off of a small bar on a random weeknight. And these guys whipped the crowd into a frenzy. Plus, what I really loved, was that in this day of indie rock lead singers wearing massacre or girl jeans or too cute outfits, this lead singer appeared to be proudly wearing an indie-rock double chin. I, for one, can totally get behind that fashion statement. Have a look:














As always, click to enlarge.

(04.12.07) Recommends:

Kid 606's contribution to the Xiu Xiu cover/remix compilation "Remixed and Covered" (Kill Rock Stars, 2007).

I tend to receive a disproportionate amount of messages about East Bay music, and the other day I was pointed to Kid 606. I'll let Wikipedia do the introduction. Anyway, Kid 606 contributes a track to "Remixed and Covered," an album full of bands, well, remixing and covering the songs of Xiu Xiu. Kid 606 tackles "Fabulous Muscles" and the result is pretty mesmerizing.

Kid 606 - Fabulous Muscles - mp3.

(04.11.07) Recommends:

Meeting up at Popscene.

You've been to Popscene[1], right? Tomorrow night The Photo Atlas, the indie-pop-punksters from Denver, grace the stage at 330 Ritch Street. I'll be there slurping up Red Bulls, desperately trying to stay up past my bedtime. I'm not quite sold on the Photo Atlas just yet. I've heard their debut "No, Not Me, Never," and I gotta say, parts of it really rock. But other parts of it seem too emo or pop-punk for my tastes. But I'm going to give them a try live, because sometimes I can "understand" a band better once I see them live. Does that make sense? I'm not sure. So let me try an example. British Sea Power. I wasn't sure what I was supposed to do with "The Decline of British Sea Power" the first time I heard it. But then I went and saw them play[2], and everything made sense. I doubt a month now passes without me listening to BSP. I don't think we have Arcade Fire's "Funeral" or their live show, without "The Decline of BSP" and BSP's live show.

And, for that, I'll give the Photo Atlas a chance. Plus, plus, plus: rumor has it that everyone's favorite blogger-turned-music mogul will be flexing her iPod goodness as guest DJ.

So, show up. I might even buy you a drink.



[1] "San Francisco's premier indie nightclub." Okay, I don't know exactly what that means. Popscene's more of an idea, isn't it? (Almost) Every Thursday, the people behind Popscene present an up-and-coming indie bands and after the show, samesaid Popscene peeps then take the party to the DJ decks and spin jams for the kids. It all goes down at 330 Ritch Street, a really cool space. But 330 Ritch is a space independent of Popscene, right? And anyway, sometimes Popscene is at a different venue. This is why it confuses me that Popscene calls itself a "nightclub." Why not call it San Francisco's premier indie-music party? But anyway, semantics aside, it's a fun way to pass a Thursday.

[2] A band called Kaito opened. What the hell happened to that band? They were awesome.

(04.10.07) Recommends:

Laura Veirs, Saltbreakers (Nonesuch, 2007).

Tuesdays have been particularly good to music fans in 2007. Today I've been fawning over the newest release from Laura Veirs. She is based out of Portland, OR and this album of restrained indie-pop music will immediately resonate with fans of other Northwestern bands (The Decemberists, Death Cab, The Shins, M. Ward, and on and on and on...). Here's the video for "Cast a Hook in Me." I think this is my favorite track off of the new album.



Her homepage.
Her myspace.

(04.09.06) Recommends:

Stumbling upon Joshua Bell busking in a Washington, DC subway station.

Here's a really cool article from the Washington Post.

(04.08.07) Recommends:

Fountains of Wayne, the track "Fire in the Canyon" from "Traffic and Weather" (Atlantic, 2007).

I don't know too much about Fountains of Wayne other than every time they put out a new record there are one or two tracks of nearly perfect alt-country-pop-rock. "Fire in the Canyon" is the newest piece of awesomeness that will soon be lodged in your brain. Enjoy.

Fountains of Wayne - Fire in the Canyon - mp3.

(04.04.07) Recommends:

Elvis Perkins, Ash Wednesday (XL, 2007).

So yesterday I mentioned the fun new Horrors record. Today, I need something ... gentle. So enter Elvis Perkins. This record -- his full length debut -- is fantastic. It's straight ahead folk rock music. Great lyrics. Catchy melodies. This is an album that you can listen to every track, in order. You get to the end, and you can repeat. You won't get bored. This might be my favorite release of the year, thus far.

Elvis Perkins - While You Were Sleeping - mp3.
Elvis Perkins - All The Night Without Love - mp3.

His website.
His myspace.

(04.03.07) Recommends:

The Horrors, "Strange House" (Stolen Transmission, forthcoming May 2007).

I've been waiting for this record since I stumbled upon the band's EP last year. So I was excited to have the new album show up in my mailbox this week. The full-length is not quite as constantly explosive as the EP, but it's still a pretty entertaining 35 minutes. It takes us way back to those heady days of circa 2001, when overly fashionable bands were being called on to save rock 'n roll. The history book shelves will eventually be stuffed to the gills with books dissecting the crazy intervening years since 2001. In fact, I think if you were to try to stuff those years into music, it might come out sounding a bit like the Horrors -- crazy, chaotic, on the verge of collapsing all around us. And -- this is the hopeful thing -- there's momentum in this music. And -- wait for it... wait for it -- it seems like momentum in this country is shifting. Things happened in November 2006. I predict things will continue happening in November 2008. So there you have it. You heard it here first: The Horrors sound like our past and our future. And that sounds good enough for me.

The Horrors - Count in Fives - mp3.
The Horrors - Little Victories - mp3.