Subjectivity

I hate racism, sexism, ageism and basically all forms of discrimination. This is not because I'm a morally reputable, virtuous person; I'm not. It's because these discriminations fly in the face of science, logic and that which is correct.

I care a lot about the right answer - be that to a scientific problem, an artistic ideal (the resolution to a suspended chord; the phrasing of a sentence) or even a societal interaction. There is always such an answer.

Here's why.

Proposition 1 - All is Matter
Every single thing in existence is made up of quanta. I refer not only to physical objects, but also to abstract notions and concepts. The word 'concept', for example, physically exists in a multitude of places: my brain; yours; paper and digital publications - to name a few.

Proposition 2 - Reality is Stateful
Every single thing in existence has a state space. Quantum Field Theory (and specifically, Quantum Mechanics) tells us that the eigenstate of an observable is fixed only at the moment of observation. However, a correct answer requires full knowledge of all variables. This paradox may be resolved once one considers that as the decision involves processing these variables, they must first be observed in order to be utilised, and therefore have a fixed state at the point of decision.

Lemma I - Objectivity Exists
Objective: adj; Of or relating to a material object, actual existence or reality; Not influenced by the emotions or prejudices; Based on observed facts.

Given that all is matter (proposition 1) and that all matter has a defined eigenstate at the point of observation (proposition 2), any problem may have an objectively correct solution, given a means of reaching such a solution and full knowledge of all variables at the point of decision.

Proposition 3 - Context is Everything
All problems exist only within the scope of their context. The most basic, seemingly clear problem - "What is 2+2?" only exists within the implied context "according to classical mathematics and assuming no unstated interference". Likewise, "can I trust this man?" is a question only valid in further implied context - the answer may be "yes" for medical advice and "no" for mechanical.

Conclusion
All problems have a correct answer. Given that problems exist only in their context (proposition 3) and that this context is entirely made up of observable matter (lemma I), all that is lacking is a means to process these observed states. Formal Logic provides a true conclusion given true propositions (et al.).

--

The above, whilst interesting, is of little utility in the majority of scenarios. If nothing else, the Uncertainty Principle states it is physically impossible to measure all required variables in a problem in unity.

This brings us to the area of subjective logic, for which I can only recommend the Wikipedia article (written nearly entirely by Jøsang, who defined the field).

Subjective logic offers a means for obtaining the correct answer to a problem with uncertain or unknown inputs. It also allows for the representation of belief - however, if a problem is fully defined within its context this is already taken into consideration, so this aspect of subjective logic is of little interest to this thesis (though obviously may be used in formally defining a context).

The answer to a problem with uncertain inputs is no longer a scalar, but a probability distribution. This distribution may be arbitrarily skewed, and of any dimensionality. The maximum value of the distribution, or the entire distribution itself, may then be used in taking a decision (cf. decision theory) but a correct answer has been ascertained.

--

We may now answer any question - from "what is 2x2?" to "is this art?" or "what brushstroke/chord/word should I use next?" correctly. Subjectivity does not imply an answer may not be found, just as objectivity does not imply that there is only one correct answer to any given problem. The objective reality of the full context of the problem both defines, and answers that problem.

I'm still not going to iron my own shirts though.

Xx

--

Finally, of potential interest, a lovely (if not quite so scientific) rant on subjectivity in art criticism.

I Want To Learn Something In A Day

Help me.

There are 18 days left until I leave for the excitement of London life with a new job; working every day and playing every evening - I don't plan on having much spare time. Right now however, I've got literally nothing to do and, given that there's only so much time I can spend staring vacantly at Jeremy Kyle and Flash games before their appeal ever so slightly starts to dim, I'd like to learn something.

Something, anything - I don't know what. Some skill, ability or trick that I didn't have at the start of the day, but I'll have at the end. I don't want to start learning something; to learn the fundamentals of an activity - I'd like this to be a complete exercise.

There are limitations. Something which requires a group of people will be very tricky, but I'm amenable to the prospect of having to get some resources/equipment first. Obviously, things I can get quickly would be better (I don't want to wait around for Internet shopping) and cheapness would be preferred. Something which would involve me visiting a specialised location isn't ideal, but could also work.

So, ideas?

My Favourite Bridge

On the slim off-chance that any residual coolness from my university days is still lingering about the place, here's a blog post about a toll bridge in Bath. Not that toll bridges aren't immensely cool, but still making blog posts in 2009? Seriously?

On with the joy.

On a recent trip which in no way involved Bath, I happened to be in Bath for a couple of hours. Those of you who've made the thrilling journey from Bathampton to Batheaston (fabulous naming scheme by the way) will know exactly what's coming up, but let's build the suspense a bit for those who haven't yet had this life affirming experience.

I want you to imagine that you have a pressing, burning desire to get from Bathampton to Batheaston (the reverse is rarely true). You're sitting there, nearly in tears at the thought of having to take the A4 all the way to Bath proper, only to come back on yourself along the A36. "There must be another way", you cry, "I just can't bear this".

Enter the ruthless, inspired, creative genius that owns The Old Mill, together with its bridge. This man (it can only be a man) lets people drive across his private bridge for the princely sum of 60p, if it's sunny and he can be bothered turning up to work. If not, there's an 'honesty box' for you to contribute your fare, so the automated barrier of invisible karma can rise.


_{Click on the picture for an amazingly large version. Seriously.}

This bridge, this beautiful, tiny bridge, can only fit one car along its road surface. This leads to long queues in one direction, and then the other. The reason for this? Two excessively wide stretches of pavement (never used), one on either side of the bridge.

Finally, in a desperate bid to be accepted by the bigger kids over on the M6 and on the Welsh border, the masterminds behind the Bathampton toll have now got a list of charges for various types of vehicle. So, a car (crossing time, 5 seconds) will cost you 60p, but a car with trailer (crossing time, 5 seconds) will cost 90p. Dare to bring a caravan (crossing time, 5 seconds) and you'll be up to £1.20. Bring a lorry and it'll be about £100 for recovery I imagine.

If all this wasn't enough to sway you, I should point out that this bridge is really pretty. Really, very pretty. Unfortunately, in the 5 minutes of queueing to get on it, all you'll see is an Audi's exhaust pipe. In the 5 seconds of crossing it, you'll be too busy worrying about the narrowing at the other side, and the exceptionally high chance of losing some of your paintwork.

Xx

Original Documents

I'm moving to London. Exciting.

Less exciting, however, is the process of doing this. Specifically, dealing with letting agents and a new landlord. I don't mind the letting agents stealing my wallet every time I enter their premises. I don't mind that the landlord is trying to slip a clause into the contract saying everything I move into the house becomes his property. I don't mind that all amounts in the contract are actually written in an obscure currency which has a symbol nearly identical to £, but means I pay triple what I expected - this is all fairly standard fare.

What I do mind, is the constant requests for 'original documents' and 'paper proof'.

I don't have any bank statements. I don't have any bills with my address on them. I don't have any 'formal letters' (whatever they are). I use the Internet* for everything. On the off-chance someone does send me something in such an archaic format as paper, I generally throw it in the bin unread.

Whilst we're on the subject, I don't have a fax machine. I don't want to print off the attachment you've emailed me, sign it and then fax it back to you. A fax machine isn't more secure than a scanned email. A digital signature is legally binding. The 80's are dead.

Frankly, the past couple of weeks would have been a hell of a lot easier if I just forged a document every time someone asked for one. I wonder when someone's going to notice I've just Photoshopped the signature from my driving license into every document they asked me to print, sign and scan. I wonder if they do notice, if they'll question quite how ridiculously insecure an unwitnessed signature is.

Finally, I get annoyed that 'insecure' next to 'unwitnessed' looks horrible. But I still don't think we should standardise anything. Except power supply connectors.

--
_{*And I'm still cool enough to capitalise the 'I'}

Crazy People

It makes waiting for buses (and the subsequent journeys) so much more interesting when instead of a sullen Brummie looking annoyed at everything, there's a crazy* person repeating the same thing over and over to anyone who might vaguely listen. Top of the list, of course, is an old lady who wants to tell me how lovely my hair is; but crazy people are a close second.

There were two such folks who got the bus in with me today; one alternately shouting and singing "You can't go in this afternoon, mate" and the other with a more elaborate spiel about how "You only ever have one exam, that's music" (although he did then go on to contradict himself, saying how he'd failed two assessments).

That's not the interesting part.

These two, apparently entirely independent people were waiting at the bus stop at 8.30am (ok, 9.30am - but if my supervisor asks, I was in work at 9). They got the bus in to town. As I stepped on the bus at 5.30pm (fine, fine - 4.30pm) - they were both there again, shouting and singing their way home.

What kind of magical, wonderful day did they have? Were they perhaps just getting buses to and from town all day, entertaining the passengers? Or did they get to town, walk into the office and have a full, normal day's work before resuming their alter-egos? Maybe they're brilliant physicists who were doing important research all day, and just do the shouting for a laugh.

Or, even better, is there a club for such people? Do they have a full day at the club, with various shouting and walking oddly and talking to strangers rooms and sessions? Do they pop home at 5 to have dinner and get ready for the club's evening party, where they dress up in their best and bring their partners along for some couples shouting?

Next time I see one of these folks and I'm not so busy, I'll follow them and let you know.

Xx

--

*'Crazy' probably isn't the PC term any more, but I may as well continue my downward spiral into immorality.

Your Erdős-Bacon Number

Your Erdős-Bacon number is the sum of your Erdős number and your Bacon number. With an opener like that, I'm sure I've got your attention - now to elaborate.

I've been looking into social network topology for a paper I'm writing (more on that later) - if that doesn't mean anything to you, try and recall the time you saw '6 degrees of separation' in some junk mail; the wildly unsubstantiated and poorly researched idea that everyone in the world is separated by just 6 links.

This has been a topic of some quite interesting research by a number of fairly important chaps you haven't heard of, and it seems a few of them either a) snapped or b) had a sense of humour. I'm banking on a).


_{Paul Erdos - he could easily have been in films with a face like that}

Post snapping (or Schnapps) some mathematicians came up with the concept of an Erdős number - this is your academic degree of separation from influential mathematician Paul Erdős. Your Erdős score is 1 if you've co-authored a paper with Paul, 2 if you've co-authored a paper with someone who's co-authored a paper with Paul...and so on.

A later take on this was a Bacon number - your degree of separation from actor Kevin Bacon. If you've starred in a movie with Kevin, score 1. If you've starred in a movie with someone who's starred in a move with Kevin, score 2...and so on.


_{My favourite bacon related picture on the Internet}

Your Erdős-Bacon number is the sum of these.

Unbelievably, there are a whole range of people who actually have an Erdős-Bacon score. There's a messy list of them here - some people have Erdős-Bacon numbers as low as 4 or 5.

I think this goes to prove two points:

1. Some of your favourite actors may be closet mathematicians and..
2. The mathematicians that didn't make it into Hollywood have way too much time on their hands.

Also, consider this post a standing offer from me to buy drinks for the evening for anyone who can prove they have an Erdős-Bacon number.

NUS Nazi Newsletter

A copy of the NUS newsletter just arrived in my inbox today, and I was quite surprised to find it entitled:

Vote Nazi?

A lot of the it was the typical tripe you'd expect from someone who loves cuddles and rainbows and everyone being nice to one another - 'let's all not talk to the BNP or invite them to our sleepovers'.

Now, I can't say I'm a particular fan of the BNP. For starters, their policies on expanding the country's technological framework are sketchy and badly thought through. However, I did find this newsletter to be frankly disgraceful.

It starts:

"NUS is an organisation which represents all students."

Now, I personally know (of) some students IN the BNP. Where's their representation here? Will a percentage of NUS newsletters be devoted to promoting the BNP, its aims and literature?

We then hear:

"We believe that everyone should be given the opportunity to participate fully in a society that celebrates diversity."

...everyone that is, except the BNP. They even encourage students to deny the BNP speaking platforms, events et cetera - hardly an incitement to democracy.

And so on. I could pick apart the newsletter point by point, but hopefully you get the idea.

Finally, I also love how on the NUS Campaigns Home Page there's a section nicely entitled 'Black Students'. Way to break down those barriers guys. In fact, why stop at some websites aimed solely at black students? Perhaps we could brand them all like cattle too..

--

Since emailing the NUS back this afternoon I've had two people grab me to bitch about how awful the newsletter was, and one ask me to proof-read her email back to them. I love you guys <3

Edit 28/03/09: I'm not in the BNP, I don't hate all black people, stop messaging me if you're incapable of basic reading.

---

People are asking for the full newsletter. The majority of it is available here and I've advise you to mail your discontent to either susan.nash@nus.org.uk or campaigns@nus.org.uk.

Except black students.

The NUS doesn't think black students should be treated the same. Black students should instead email the black students' officer - bell@nus.org.uk.

Happy Mothers' Day

Mums are awesome, especially mine. Also, putting the apostrophe in the right place in Mothers' Day is awesome too. Ever feel like burning down card shops that are stuffed with poor grammar? I do...but enough about arson.

Mr T. - Treat Your Mother Right


Possibly the worst song on YouTube. Utterly addictive though and video is to die for. Skip to the last minute if the middle's getting boring.

Now, I'm off to call my mum :)

Xx

Considerations

In relation to my Trading project (actually it's a project based on Trust and Reputation...) - I've had cause to question a few assertions I made earlier on in the year, even though they were backed up by some credible sources.

Some items for consideration which I, at least, find really interesting at the moment:

When trading online, how much do the opinions of others about a potential trading partner influence your decisions, if you already have experience trading with that partner before?

Is there a limiting point as to how much others can influence you? Consider that you've had a bad experience with a trading partner. Would 100 people saying 'this partner is good' be any more influential than 50? Than 25? Than 5?

When trading online, how much does a potential trading partner's reputation (eg, eBay rating) influence your decisions, if you already have experience trading with that partner before?

How good is your memory of people you've traded with in the past? How much does this depend on how the community is set up? Do very good or very bad experiences stay in memory much longer? How much longer?

--

I've got some good answers for most of the above, but any thoughts are always appreciated. Any academically referenced thoughts are really appreciated :P

Now for the hard part - expressing all this mathematically. Ouch.

Grammar (I'm Right And You're Wrong)

Recently, as an aside to another post, I showed a moment's weakness. Yes, that's right - not a moments' weakness or a moments weakness, but a moment's weakness. In this post I asked you to tell me which of the following three was correct:

• Three minutes time


• Three minute's time


• Three minutes' time (my choice).

Folks commented, emailed, rang and texted* me to give me their opinions - which generally ran along the lines of me being wrong. This is why democracy doesn't work and hippy communes never make good profit returns on their marijuana plantations. Instead of everyone giving opinions, I should just tell you all what's right - that is the purpose of this communication medium, isn't it? That was rhetorical, it is.

The grammar is clear, if "time" belongs to "three minutes" then the apostrophe must surely follow the "s" of "minutes". The argument was that there was no genitive relationship; that two nouns had simply been dumped at the end of the sentence and left to their own devices to make sense. I never agreed with this, but I now have a counter example, the idiom:

"A Moment's Notice".

Now, listen here, nowhere** respectable I can find online or in print would ever write that idiom in any other way. Even the wonderful John Coltrane jazz composition is to be found with the apostrophe. The weak noun "notice" is very clearly possessed by the temporal concept of "moment" - just as "time" is possessed by "minutes" in my original example.

So, let's have no more debate on the matter. I, for my part, will endeavour never again to question my own brilliance, and I'd ask you to do the same by not planting little seeds of doubt in my head.

--

Yes, most of the grammar above is a bit tongue in cheek (Edit: Who am I kidding? It's hilarious. I bet none of you get it). But, here's a clarification on a word you'd otherwise hate me for, and one pun I couldn't resist drawing your attention to:

* I don't like it either, but that horrible verb and conjugation are here to stay.
** See what I did there? No? This is why I get to do the writing.

Love notes

Upon returning home and turning it back on, I discovered the following filling my computer screen:

Hey babe, we needed somewhere to watch the IT crowd
and whatnot, and your computer was on. I hope you dont
mind. I havent clicked on anything HONEST. I think you
meant to lock it when you went out, so I will do
before I leave.

Love
<anonymised>
xxxx

PS: I tried on some of your pants on.

I then logged into my inbox to find a bunch of genuinely nice comments on various old blog posts from persons other than the usual suspects. A previously unseen Christmas present graced my desk, my bedding had been freshly washed and someone had sent me a free copy of his latest recordings.

It's these little gestures that make someone smile on the inside - rather than just the little grins you get during conversation. So, go do something nice for someone today - and I'll try and do the same once I'm awake.

Xx

Interview Time

I've just had my first interview - in phone format, with a lovely lady from Qinetiq. Tomorrow I'm off to Cambridge to meet some other folks from Red Gate Software - so they can find out if I can still remember how to write any code.

I find myself being drawn to these two (and a couple of other) companies, simply because of the professionalism they're showing in their recruitment process. Others, notably IBM and Tesco.com so far, have done a pretty awful job. Confusing websites, ridiculous questions on the application process and if you do ever manage to put a human face on the communications, it's not someone you're very keen about dealing with again.

But, should I base my final decision on things like these? Will a job at <x> be awful just because the recruitment agency they hired wants to ask me inane questions? On that point - please, someone, tell me why the full name of my High School or the grade I got at GCSE Welsh are useful in the recruitment stage?

On the one hand, it's symptomatic of a lack of professionalism within the business. If a company is happy to put sub-par quality processes live, then they're probably happy to do the same with their shipping products and customer interactions. On the other hand, I know perfectly well they have some great products and switched-on staff...should I base my decision on the fact that they're let down by poor HR?

It's not a big/small divide either. I've seen small companies that simply don't bother to respond to their emails and big companies where you get a personalised touch - and replies straight away even at 8pm.

Right, off to find some more places to apply to. I'm not applying anywhere new that can't code a basic website though.

More Jazz Recommendations

People often come up to me and say "I think I'd like jazz, but I don't really know where to get started or what to listen to - it's not like other music where you can just put on the radio. Can you recommend some stuff?". I'm not fooled, I know they're just desperate to be seen talking to me, to find out if my hair colour really is natural, to stare into my eyes...

..I digress.

1. Ramsey Lewis - Sassy Stew
Ramsey Lewis is a pianist probably most famous for his hit, The In Crowd - a perfect example of what a traditional jazz trio should sound like.

Sassy Stew, on the other hand, is more of a jazz funk track - a bit more Herbie Hancock than Bill Evans. The drums are great, the bassline and changes gorgeous and the alto sax hits notes that are barely even audible to anyone other than children and dogs. What I love best about this though, is that it's a pure jazz funk track, but the pianist's playing a real piano all the way through - rather than the keyboards that dominate the genre.

Well worth a listen.

2. Cal Tjader - Mambo Mindoro
Latin jazz is always popular. We've had club hits from Azymuth, Mas Que Nada has been on a million adverts and covered by some awful pop band. Recently, Bebel Gilberto has been letting down her father and her namesake (both Latin jazz greats) with some chart music.

Mambo Mindoro featuring percussionist Cal Tjader on the vibraphone is a great, and much less well known example of the genre. It's also highly worth a listen if, like me, you cringe at the mere word 'vibraphone' - mostly thanks to how awful it sounds within the music of the Modern Jazz Quartet. Trust me, he does it well.

3. Victor Wooten & Carter Beauford - Zenergy
This is not only a fascinating video - watching top-class musicians at work, but it's also a great track, easy to listen to whilst being extremely technically impressive. If the names Wooten & Beauford aren't enough to get you to listen, then note that Béla Fleck is playing banjo in this track too. Yes banjo. Yes, it works, yes he's that good. Just go listen already:



4. Lianne Carroll - Fever/This City Never Sleeps
It would be remiss of me to only mention past greats, and to just link you to freely available tracks that the artists possibly get pennies a year from. There's a decent jazz scene in any town, and if you're willing to make the effort to travel (central London's the only real UK hotspot) you can hear some unbelievably good performers.

Lianne Carroll is a pianist and vocalist playing around London and the UK, and is amazingly passionate and talented. For a preview of the recommended track, and a chance to buy your own copy, head over to her Amazon album page.

Better yet, go see a gig.

---------------

That's all for now. Enjoy.

I was planning to also recommend you go and see the Tie-Dye Quartet at The Yardbird tonight, 8.30pm, free entry, but that would be a bit tacky, so I won't.
Xx

I love mass production

Take a look at this video from the BBC:

Inside a frozen pizza factory

When I first saw the link I was expecting some Panorama style hidden camera tour of immigrants working in amazingly unhygienic conditions - as with the ready meals for supermarkets a while ago. Instead, we're at the other end of the spectrum of journalistic integrity, with a straight-up presentation from a product development manager for the factory.

I prefer fresh food, though I'll happily eat frozen stuff like this. What I really love though, is seeing these mass-production factories in operation. There's something incredible about the precision and efficiency and ingenuity that's gone into every tiny part of the system...I almost wish I'd taken up engineering rather than compsci.

When I worked there, I was always really impressed by the level of detail that went into the efficiency of processes in a McDonald's restaurant. I still am, to some degree, but it's all too often ruined by the human element - which leads me to wonder why on earth such establishments are not more automated. The quality would be better, the waiting times lower and the food safer.

Plus, it'd kill off a bunch of low paying jobs and ensure that graduates weren't just ending up on the dole. Seems to be win-win for the economy. Get to work folks.

Toys for cats

After an exciting trip to Maplin today, we popped into Pets At Home to laugh at the animals who were so unloved by their owners that they're up for adoption. They had some great stuff there...

1. A new friend
Whilst looking at the hamsters, it occurred that I hadn't yet gotten our house's cat - Roscoe - a present for his birthday yet. Now, he's not much of a hunter outdoors, and has yet to bring me back anything dead as a present yet. Quite a disappointment I'm sure you can imagine. So...how about a hamster?


_Rawr

I was thinking we could make a YouTube video, called 'really super cute hamster'. We could film the hamster washing himself, eating little bits of cucumber and playing with bits of string. And, just when the teenage girls have called their mother, little sister and favourite doll over to watch the video, we let Roscoe into the room.

He can chase the hamster around for a bit, catch it, toy with it for a while and then, having ripped its heart out, present it to the camera - smearing the blood all over the lens.

Alternatively I could just get him a little toy mouse stuffed with catnip.

2. Litter Kwitter
"Toilet train your cat" read the box. "Guaranteed results within 6-8 weeks". What?



This little box contains three separate rings which are placed in the human toilet (and hopefully remembered and removed when people are sitting there), and taken away one-by-one until the cat is taking up the bathroom for 15 minutes at a time and filling out all the answers in the crossword in the Sunday papers.

Seriously.



You might think it's a bit wrong to watch this video for more than about 22 seconds. Don't turn it off...you'll see.

Contradiction/Affirmative Action

I'm applying for some graduate jobs at cool places, the eBay family (eBay, PayPal, Skype and others) amongst them. On their form, I found the following two sentences, very close together:

"As such, eBay Inc. is required to take affirmative action to employ qualified minorities, women, and veterans."

"eBay Inc. maintains a policy of considering all qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, ethnicity, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, disability or veteran status."

Now, I don't bring this up to pick holes in their logic (or their spelling of 'colour'), but more as an example of quite how ridiculous 'affirmative action' is, in my opinion*.

If a company is found to be actively discriminating against say, people called Jim, then I agree entirely that they should be punished for this. This is known as 'anti-discrimination legislation' and has nothing to do with 'affirmative action'.

However, if a company just happens to have no Jims on its staff, then it's ridiculous to say that they should take 'action to remedy this'. You see, action to remedy this lack of Jims will have to involve actively discriminating against the Steves of this world. And then the company needs to be punished for discrimination again...

Affirmative action is, quite frankly, a joke. There's stopping discrimination, and there's advocating it - and I don't see quite how the twain are supposed to meet.

eBay should always employ the best suited person for the job. Given their success, I don't doubt that this is exactly what they do. So, why on earth are they being asked in the first sentence above to 'take action' to ensure they employ certain demographics? And how do they reconcile that legal requirement with their equal employment policy set out in the second sentence above?

Seriously, I have no idea. Anyone?

--

* <sup>I write 'in my opinion' only to make that sentence scan a bit more nicely:

a) Of course it's my opinion, I'm the only one who writes here.
b) My opinion is right. Always. Don't get the impression I lack faith in my beliefs simply because I added those three words.</sup>

Improvisation

A rock or pop song is generally very well written indeed. Everyone knows exactly what notes they should be playing, in what way, and at what time. At a live performance, there may be a little elaboration on the solo, the band may drop out so the crowd can sing the chorus and there might even be a nice big ending..but the song will pretty much remain the same.

Alas, not with jazz.

The soul of jazz, the reason it survives so well in a live music environment, is improvisation. There are countless examples of albums which contain two versions of the same song - not out of laziness, but simply because the two takes - by the same band, in the same studio - are really quite different, and wonderful in their own way.

This makes recording with just three people very challenging indeed. On some pieces we have six instruments playing, so clearly just recording a live 'take' of the song won't work. As such - what do we do? Play through the piece, improvising, with just three instruments, and then try to play over the top later with three more?

We want to preserve the feel of the improv ideal, but also be able to improve and perfect upon every section of every song, so that we have something which really epitomises the piece we're playing. It's a difficult set of choices to make.

We've ended up with a few different approaches for a few songs, but mostly what I think we'll be doing is playing with all the instruments, but only recording the one which really drives whichever song it is. We'll then do new takes of the other instruments, so that the person playing knows exactly what is coming up, and has a few chances to get it right.

Hopefully it'll work out :)

Restraint

With the wealth of possibilities opened up by a recording studio, it's become a very real temptation to make the 12 tracks we're going to be laying down overly complex, and/or structured. With a live show that only comprises of three or four instruments at a time, the thought that we can suddenly have 9 playing along at once seems a very sweet one, but it's important to remember that all that really matters is the aesthetics of the piece.

Likewise, some changes, some difficult technical passages and super-high notes that just can't reliably be done in a 'live' environment are now opened up. In some pieces, like Somnesia, this is a breakthrough which means the piece can finally see daylight. In others, it's an ever increasing risk that we'll lose the simplicity that gave the songs their feel, by showing off how clever we can be musically.

Although jazz is, by its very nature, a genre more suited towards the ear of musicians than lay-folk, I'm also trying hard to make sure that (most of) what we record is accessible, and enjoyable for all. There'll be some hidden nuggets which a musician will (hopefully) love, and a gentile will skip over - but it's difficult to make things so that someone without a solid grounding in jazz and musical theory won't just think is simply weird.

One of the pieces I think this hard-earned restraint will really help is a little-known track we're covering, by Jill Tracy, entitled Evil Night Together. She gets real depth in her recording, with wild strings and full piano dominating the piece. We're going for a much more laid back feel, which gives the song an entirely new texture, whilst still staying surprisingly true to the original. Hopefully that one will not only turn out well, but will also sound unique enough to have been worth the effort - because there's no point in simply playing back someone else's composition as it's written...it'll never sound quite as good (with some very rare exceptions).

We've also got a lovely little piece called 'Dreams', which isn't even two minutes long and just has guitar and vocals. Sounds gorgeous and...should be a doddle to record ;)

Paper

Sometimes, people mistake me for an environmentalist. It's probably something to do with the sandals, long hair and spectacular annoyance directed at people who print out things that were sitting perfectly happy on a computer screen.*

Seriously, I've seen people who will print out a document (that we can both see perfectly well on the screen in the room), scribble (in pen) the changes that we want to make, type the changes back into the document...and then print it out to see if everything is OK. To quote Mil - I have not the words.

Then we've got lovely, sweet, dear, Aston University. The Computer Science department in particular, who I'm sure you'd believe were a bunch of hip, switched on, technologically inclined folks. Right?


_{Woooooo, an orange triangle. That timeless symbol of intellect.}

We've started using a new system on placements now, called Profile, which allows students to keep an electronic diary of their placement. Tutors can view this in real time, and leave helpful feedback, as well as constant marking - rather than one big batch at the end of the year. This is implemented and working well in over a dozen Universities, including Aston. Just not in the Computer Science department...

Over here, the electronic system is completely ignored. Twice a year, students are ordered to print out the information (that the lecturers can access electronically whenever they wish) and Post It In. After much complaining, they now accept CDs...so I sent one in. They couldn't read it. So I emailed in my work. That's not good enough, it has to be paper or CD. Why? For a good reason? No, because the rules (that they wrote) say so. I suggested that they simply print out my email if they want a paper copy, I wonder how well that bit of logic will go down..


But I don't mean to rant.


I wanted to talk to you about the beauty of paper, and the few times I actually encourage its use. See, I'm not some eco-hippy after all. Despite the haircut.

Music. I quite like music, as you may have inferred. I'm up in Birmingham practising some music for a couple of weeks at the moment (more on that later), and now that the music itself is coming along nicely, I'm adding in some of the fringe details. Like lyrics for the vocal tracks.

Somehow, it just wouldn't feel right to write ('right to write', should be a campaign of some sort) these on a computer, no matter how hard I try. I don't quite see why - all of my other creative writing is done on a screen - perhaps it's simply that I enjoy the purity of music, and find that best represented through the human touch, and its untidiness (especially in my handwriting) and innocence. Perhaps it's that technology is one major part of my life, and music another, and I naturally separate them.


_{From the 'sketches' series at TDH}

I also love the drawings on Tie-Dye Heart (by the way, did you know I had a comic? Did you? Click the damn link), with simple strokes of pencil on paper. I know there's plenty of webcomics out there that harness the full power of digital art & effects, with each new image a triumph of technology..but somehow the purity and personalisation of this simplicity is far more satisfying to me.

Thoughts?

--

* _{This is an example of an unattached modifier. I leave it there, offering myself as a sacrifice, in order to bring this blight on the English language to your attention. Please, never commit this heinous crime in your own writing.}

Another Copyright Dilemma

A great part of playing jazz is meeting up with strangers, semi-acquaintances, good friends - it doesn't really matter - and improvising for hours on end. Doing this with no particular direction, when you don't really know one-another's compositions won't produce the best results, and will get wearing after a short while.

So, we have lead sheets.

A lead sheet (pronounced 'leeeed' sheet, it's not a 'led' sheet you'd put on your roof) is just one page which gives the reader, at a glance, the 'theme' or melody of a particular piece, with the underlying chord changes. This differs from classical sheet music in that it's just a guide, a structure - rather than an explicit declaration of what is to be played. Here's an example:


_{Click to embiggen}

Now, the problem with lead sheets, as with guitar tabs and most music that's scribbled down and passed amongst friends is...copyright violation. I'm fairly sure that the person who jotted down the above didn't have a contract with Sonny Rollins, and that Mr. Rollins won't get a payment for every person you looks at it.

This normally doesn't bother me when it comes to grabbing the occasional sheet - but I recently decided to go and purchase The Real Book (6th Edition), a collection of 500 lead sheets.

However, upon reading many comments from people who had bought the above, I discovered something. This '6th edition' is, in fact, the first legitimate edition around. The previous 5 were just bootlegs that musicians would copy and share amongst friends. This edition's fully licensed and copyright-friendly...and rubbish.

Really, really rubbish.

_{It even has the same cover as all the old pirate editions. Wonder if the original designer gets paid royalties? I think not.}

So, what do I do? Do I take the '6th edition', which builds on 30 years of piracy to make a bit of profit, and satisfies the law..but will get me laughed out of any gig? Or do I go and get myself a copy of the seminal '5th edition', which nets no-one any money, but means I can play the music I love?

Should I really care that this new edition has royalties being paid to Miles Davis (died 1991), John Coltrane (died 1967), George Gershwin (died 1937) and Thelonious Monk (died 1982)? Should I get a copy of the 5th edition, and then send a token payment to the estates/record labels of all 250 or so artists represented therein?

Well, I think the tone of this post conveys my final decision. Contact me if you'd like a copy of the 5th edition.