Warning: mysql_get_server_info(): Access denied for user 'indiamee'@'localhost' (using password: NO) in /home/indiamee/public_html/e-music/wp-content/plugins/gigs-calendar/gigs-calendar.php on line 872

Warning: mysql_get_server_info(): A link to the server could not be established in /home/indiamee/public_html/e-music/wp-content/plugins/gigs-calendar/gigs-calendar.php on line 872
Indian E-music – The right mix of Indian Vibes… » 2019 » January » 09


Delivered... Spacelab - Independent Music and Media | Scene | Wed 9 Jan 2019 7:00 pm
Edie Brickell and New Bohemians, Priests, Yung Lean, Angie McMahon, Kevin George, Two People, Jvcki Wai and KOKOKO!, all top the lineup additions!

FCC to Examine the Process for Awarding Construction Permits for New NCE and LPFM Stations – And Some of the Rules that Apply Once a New Noncommercial CP is Awarded

Delivered... David Oxenford | Scene | Wed 9 Jan 2019 6:00 pm

As we wrote on Friday, the government shutdown affects many aspects of FCC operations – and could affect the ability of the FCC to hold its regular monthly meeting, now scheduled for January 30. With the FCC likely shut down for most of this week, just before closing, the FCC released its agenda for the January 30 meeting (which would normally have been released this week – 3 weeks before the meeting). One interesting item on the agenda was a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to change certain aspects of the criteria used to evaluate applicants for new noncommercial broadcast stations and LPFMs, and the operations of those new stations after a construction permit is issued. The draft NPRM is here. As with all draft items released with the agenda of an upcoming FCC meeting, the draft is subject to change before that meeting.

It appears that the NPRM was not prompted by any single group representing noncommercial broadcasters, but instead raises a number of issues and problems that have been raised before the FCC in comparative cases in the last decade, which use a “points system” process to determine which mutually-exclusive noncommercial applicant should have its application granted. The point system relies on paper hearings to determine which applicant has the most points, awarding applicants preferences on factors such as whether they have few other broadcast interests, whether they are local organizations, and whether they are part of state-wide networks. The NPRM also looks at the restrictions on what successful applicants can do, once they receive their construction permits to build new stations – including the length of LPFM CPs, the transferability of those CPs, and restrictions imposed on changes to certain NCE technical facilities after a CP grant.

The FCC looks for comments on the following issues:

  • Whether it should eliminate the current requirement that NCE applicants include in their governing documents specific provisions obligating the applicant to maintain localism and diversity in order to receive points as “established local applicants” and for “diversity of ownership.”  The current obligation requires that applicants, to receive a “diversity credit” in their application, need to have articles of incorporation or by-laws that specifically state that they cannot acquire new stations that would affect the credit they received in the FCC review of the applications. Localism must be maintained by provisions in organizational documents restricting the residence of board members. The FCC suggests that these obligations are unnecessary – the actual conduct of the applicant can be weighed by the FCC whether or not the company’s governing documents contain explicit restrictions.
  • Can the FCC improve the NCE tie-breaker process and reform the process for establishing mandatory time-sharing plans where ties in the comparative process remain? Full-power NCE station applicants who are tied in the FCC points system end up in a tie-breaker process (see, for instance, our article here that discusses the process). Where that process does not produce a clear winner, according to the NPRM, parties are often allowed to negotiate for years over the terms of a time-sharing agreement before the FCC intervenes to force a sharing arrangement. The FCC asks if there should be a hard time limit on sharing negotiations. Should the FCC set the sharing restrictions if there is no resolution? Should there be circumstances where, if no settlements can be reached, all applicants should be dismissed? The Commission notes that in the LPFM process, a more definitive process exists for forcing time sharing, and asks if portions of that process should apply to full-power NCEs as well. Minor changes to the LPFM time sharing process are also proposed.
  • Should the FCC clarify aspects of the “holding period” during which NCE permittees must maintain the characteristics for which they received comparative preferences.  One of the specific issues to be reviewed is the requirement that, if an applicant receives a “307(b) preference” for serving areas that have no noncommercial service or service from only one other noncommercial station, the applicant cannot change transmitter sites where it would lose service to some or all of the areas of proposed coverage for which it received a preference, even if that lost service is made up by service to new noncommercial white or grey areas. This restriction has prevented some successful noncommercial applications from constructing their new stations when proposed transmitter sites became unavailable and no alternative sites covering the exact same underserved areas were available.
  • The FCC proposes to reclassify as “minor” (1) all ownership changes to governmental applicants, provided that the change has little or no effect on such applicant’s mission, and (2) gradual board changes in non-stock and membership LPFM and NCE applicants.  This eliminates issues that sometimes arise with long-pending applications when gradual Board changes result in a majority of the governing board of an applicant changing, which under FCC processing rules would result in a dismissal of an application. The FCC has from time to time been forced to waive that rule (for instance in connection with the processing of applications from the 2003 FM translator window that ended up being dealt with in settlements more than a decade after they were filed). In the case of existing NCE stations, the FCC has taken the position that gradual changes in the Board of an applicant do not require a “long-form” transfer application that would otherwise apply to a major change in ownership (see our article here). The FCC is proposing to apply the same rules to the processing of applications for new stations.
  • The FCC proposes to eliminate certain tolling notification requirements and toll NCE and LPFM broadcast construction deadlines without notification from the permittee, based on certain pleadings pending before, or actions taken by, the agency. Currently, an applicant has to ask the FCC for tolling to stop the clock on the expiration of a CP from running. Inexperienced applicants acting without counsel often don’t realize that they need to request tolling, as do applicants who wrongly think that a tolling event may be able to be resolved quickly. By forgetting to ask for tolling, these permittees can lose out on potential time in which to construct their new stations.
  • The FCC proposes to extend LPFM construction permits from 18-months to a full three years, the same period that applies to other construction permits (a construction period which LPFM permittees can currently receive – but they have to timely request such extensions at the end of the initial 18 month construction period).
  • The FCC proposes to eliminate the current rules prohibiting the sale of unbuilt LPFM construction permits and requiring a 3-year holding period for newly licensed LPFM stations. The FCC proposes instead to allow the assignment/transfer of LPFM permits and stations after an 18-month holding period as long certain safeguards are met – including that there is no profit in the sale and as long as the new owner satisfies all FCC eligibility criteria (including offering the same comparative attributes as the original applicant if the CP was granted after a point-system analysis).

Interested parties will have the opportunity to comment on these proposals once the FCC adopts the final NPRM and the NPRM is published in the Federal Register. Theoretically, interested parties can now ask the FCC to make changes in the NPRM before it is adopted – perhaps suggesting other NCE rule changes that should be considered. However, with the FCC shutdown, opportunities to reach the appropriate people to implement such changes may be limited. Stay tuned to see when and whether this tentative proposal matures into a final NPRM.

This playlist is full of wonderful ARP music – some might surprise you

Delivered... Peter Kirn | Scene | Wed 9 Jan 2019 5:46 pm

As we remember Alan R. Pearlman and the impact his instruments had on music, here’s a survey of the many places ARP sounds appeared in music culture. It’s a reminder of just how profound electronic music tools can be in their influence – and of the unique age in which we live.

Perhaps now is the perfect time for an ARP revival. With modular synthesis reaching ever-wider audiences, the ARP creations – the 2500, 2600, and Odyssey featured here – represent something special. Listen across these tracks, and you’re struck by the unique colors of those ARP creations across a range of genres. It’s also significant that each of these designs in their own way struck a balance between modularity and accessibility, sound design and playability. That includes making instruments that had modular patching capability but also produced useful sounds at each patch point by default – that is, you don’t have to wire things up just to make something happen. That in turn also reduces cable spaghetti, because the patch connections you make represent the particular decisions you made deviating from the defaults. On the 2500, this involves a matrix (think Battleship games, kids), which is also a compelling design in the age of digital instruments and software.

And lest we get lost in sound design, it’s also worth noting how much these things get played. In the era of Eurorack, it’s easy to think music is just about tweaking … but sometimes it’s just as useful to have a simple, fresh sound and then just wail on it. (Hello, Herbie Hancock.)

It’s easy to forget just how fast musical sound has moved in a couple of generations. An instrument like the piano or violin evolved over centuries. Alan R. Pearlman literally worked on some of the first amplifiers to head into space – the Mercury and Gemini programs that first sent Americans into space and orbit, prior to Apollo’s journey to the moon. And then he joined the unique club of engineers who have remade music – a group that now includes a lot of you. (All of you, in fact, once you pick up these instruments.)

So I say go for it. Play a preset in a software emulation. Try KORG’s remake of the Odyssey. Turn a knob or re-patch something. Make your own sound design – and don’t worry about whether it’s ingenious or ground-breaking, but see what happens when you play it. (Many of my, uh, friends and colleagues are in the business of creating paid presets, but I have the luxury of making some for my own nefarious music production purposes that no one else has to use, so I’m with you!)

David Abravanel puts together this playlist for CDM:

Some notes on this music:

You know, we keep talking about Close Encounters, but the actual sound of the ARP 2500 is very limited. The clip I embedded Monday left out the ARP sound, as did the soundtrack release of John Williams’ score. The appearance is maybe more notable for the appearance of ARP co-founder David Friend at the instrument – about as much Hollywood screen time as any synth manufacturer has ever gotten. Oh, and … don’t we all want that console in our studio? But yes, following this bit, Williams takes over with some instrumental orchestration – gorgeous, but sans-ARP.

So maybe a better example of a major Hollywood composer is Jerry Goldsmith. The irony here is, I think you could probably get away with releasing this now. Freaky. Family Guy reused it (at the end). We’ll never defeat The Corporation; it’s true.

It’s also about time to acknowledge that Stevie Wonder combined Moog and ARP instruments, not just Moog. As our industry looks at greater accessibility, it’s also worth noting that Wonder was able to do so without sight.

What about U2? Well, that’s The Edge’s guitar routed through the ARP 2600 for filter distortion and spring reverb. That’s a trick you can steal, of course – especially easily now that Arturia has an emulation of the 2600.

Expect our collective reader knowledge exceeds anything we can contribute so – let us know what other artists using ARP inspired you, and if you have any notes on these selections.

The post This playlist is full of wonderful ARP music – some might surprise you appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

Explore House Music’s Queer Roots With These 15 Fierce Tracks

Delivered... Derek Opperman | Scene | Wed 9 Jan 2019 2:17 pm

The post Explore House Music’s Queer Roots With These 15 Fierce Tracks appeared first on Telekom Electronic Beats.

In Reggaeton, Design Matters

Delivered... Beatriz Hernández Caraveo | Scene | Wed 9 Jan 2019 7:00 am

In her music, the reggaeton dj and musician Clara! combines styles from the past and the present. Her use of visual aesthetics from the 80's and 90's also reminds us that old school reggaeton has always had feminist roots. Clara! will perform on January 12, 2019, at the Global Warning II Concert and Club Night in Bern along with Bamz and Kries, and on January 11, 2019 at Le Bourg in Lausanne. Both events are part of the 9th Norient Musikfilm Festival in Switzerland.

Reggaeton Queen DJ Clara! (Photo: Sasha Vernaeve)

Reggaeton is more popular than ever, and it is a vast source for contemporary, female artists. As both a dj and musician Clara! is an outstanding example. Her productions are influenced by female reggaeton from the 90’s. Her compilation «Reggaetoneras» from 2015 is a tribute to such female Latin American voices, and is not just reminiscent of the music itself.

Her compilation pays tribute to its traditional visual representation. The album’s cover artwork is also reminiscent of female reggaeton artists from that era. It consists of a collage of small photos that show different faces with a smooth gradient around each photo. The 80’s aesthetic can be understood as a direct link to the Latin-American heydays of the music style.

Cover of Clara’s mixtape «Reggaetoneras» (Promo, 2015)

In 2016, Clara! released a second compilation of old school reggaeton in collaboration with DJ Coquelin. The cover consists of the word «Reggaeton» in red over a white background; the font, similar to Brush Script, is typical for most of the 90’s reggaeton productions. The pre-internet style represents a period in which access to technology was limited to only a few.

Music From The Streets

On the following mix albums «Reggaetoneras 2» and «Reggaetoneras 3» from 2016 and 2018, Clara! follows a similarly nostalgic approach. They were released on tape, evoking the way reggaeton was shared and distributed in the 90s. The cover’s design uses simple letters that looks as if they were written on a peeling wall in a ghetto. This reminds us of a delicate street aesthetic. Through this, the Brussels based musician exalts the original intention of reggaeton, which was music from the street for the streets.

The raw aesthetic of the 80s and 90s is a reminder that graphic design and music identity are closely connected. As Clara! builds a bridge between the visual aesthetic of old school reggaeton from the past with a sonic aesthetic of the present, she reminds us that this music can still be a source of female empowerment for today’s younger generations.


9th Norient Musikfilm Festival 2019

TunePlus Wordpress Theme