Skip to main content

Month: March 2011

The Pain of Auto-tune

X-Factor contestant Gamu Nhengu was involved in an auto-tune dispute in last year’s competition.

The Pain of Auto-tune

2010 was the year of the auto-tune. With the increasingly popular Glee, the controversial use of the plug-in on X Factor and a Billboard number one album from Ke$ha- it’s everywhere. Yet, we forget that 15 years ago, international superstar Cher brought it to the forefront of musical technology, creating almost a revolutionary new sound with her hit ‘Believe’.  Today it has created problems of “over produced” sounds, with untalented stars being given an easier pathway to success.

Criticisms for the plug-in have come from many workers in the industry such as Jay-Z, Death Cab for Cutie and Christina Aguilera, the latter claiming it “was for pussies” but it can be used “in a creative way.”  The fact is that the use of auto-tune is bringing the industry into disrepute. 

Auto-tune has almost become accepted by some in the industry as it has become commonly used. Yet, if a band decided to use triggers to give an album sounding performance whilst playing live, they would be criticised for not being able to play their respective instrument, so what is the difference between using triggers or using pitch-altering software?

Well, in my opinion, there is none.

James Birtles

Column: What are the odds?

Meeting Daron Malakian from System of a Down

It’s a wild life for us music journalists, constantly rubbing elbows with the stars. Nearly every week, we’re barraged with requests to meet the pinnacles of musical excellence. Imagine such treats as interviewing the occasional fill in keyboardist of a local rising band, or chatting on the phone with somebody you’ve been assured is next year’s big thing; we’re just too lucky. Occasionally however, outside of busy journalistic hours, your glowing aura of musical obsession helps you stumble upon an amazing chance meeting and it’s at these times you remind yourself why you bloody love music.

Staggering home from a prior engagement (never you mind what) early into the hours of a Saturday morning, it’s safe to say you’re ready to call the night to an end and just flop straight into bed; the very last thing you want to have to deal with is a drunken old man collapsed in the street. Despite the yearning to collapse myself, I decided to cash in my good deed of the month and phone the poor old sod an ambulance. Perching myself on a wall, waiting out the inevitably much-delayed arrival of paramedics, I watched scores of people walk by without a second glance, obviously too busy being dickheads to help out their fellow man. Eventually, one man was decent enough to step up and ask if all was well, in a Canadian accent no less (although, admittedly, mistaken for an American one.) After the faux pas of falling back into Fresher’s Week syndrome and asking what he studied, I received an answer that broke me out of my tired stupor. “Nah, I’m not a student, I’ve just played the Academy. I’m looking for a bar.” I’d have been mad to not offer to find him one.

Establishing that he was a fellow rocker, or to be precise, Tim Millar, guitarist from Protest The Hero, the obvious choice was always going to be The Salisbury, yet at 3:30AM it was looking unlikely that or anything else would be open at all. Not knowing much about the band, for the first ten minutes I slipped into interview mode; asking all the banal questions about influences, the tour and future plans. Whilst some of the things said here were interesting, most notably that the band and their three tour-mates were three days into a full fortnight of non-stop gigs – “We’re young, we don’t need to rest every other night” – topics soon moved beyond music and as we realised that the bars were all closed, there seemed only one logical option left open. Hit a casino.

This is where the memory starts becoming a gambling induced blur. Vague snippets of the night are still available to me, but clear as day I remember Tim recounting how he once quadrupled his $400 advance on tour pay by putting it on black twice. “You don’t get anywhere without balls”, he says, perhaps in hindsight hinting as much towards his band with such a unique sound as he was to his finances. Both making a decent profit, we ended the night on the tour bus, with members of four metalcore bands singing the cheesiest of Mr. Big songs (how’s that for juxtaposition?) and trying to outdo each other with card tricks. Leaving to a fully risen sun, I couldn’t help but think something Tim said. What’re the odds that the two people who stopped to help a guy out in the whole of Manchester would be a musician and a music journalist?

Tom Geddes

‘I’ll have a teaspoon of liberalism and a taste of global economics’ – The after dinner discussion and its place in grass roots political analysis

Jessica Brown
Politics Editor

As you begin to stack the dirty dessert dishes, the pungent flames of the smoldering Christmas pudding still lingering in your nostrils, the onslaught begins. Quite regularly, in fact most definitely annually, the eclectic cheese, grape and coffee array is collected from the kitchen and hence it begins. A few collected generalisations demarcate the arrival of conversation, a ‘have you seen the news?’ or ‘isn’t it awful about…?’ emerge, as ripe and provocative as the after effects of yet another episode of green cannon-ball warfare. Perhaps, like the phantom sherry trifle, the post blowout discussion follows a distinct pattern. The conversation begins, the sweet texture is absorbed, the mood is of joy, of reciprocal yuletide affection. Somewhere during the opening exchange of generally accepted statements is the gloop, the custardy quagmire of conversational no-man’s-land guaranteed to leave more than a few members of the party lost in the translation of their own ideals and concepts.
A question to Uncle Geoffrey about his strong capitalist avocations when considering the rather questionable moral position of the banks, an interjection from younger siblings, their lingo smitten with the idealisms of socialist reform or just any withering glance towards that centre of patriarchal dominance, Dad, in a state of near alcoholic heart failure. Lastly, the bitterness of the discussion ensues; the drenched boudoir biscuits are engulfed. The sherry has been left, opened from the previous year. The taste is tart, sour and unpleasant and must, in the light of your good social graces be undertaken with caution. It seems you have forgotten the reason you did not usually partake in the consumption of trifle on a daily basis. The trifle tries to seduce you with its sugary toppings, its pleasantries and relative joy, the reality is that any foodstuff containing the reminder of last year’s bitter pudding should not be undertaken lightly.
Perhaps the analogy of the trifle is too abstract, but the point is somewhat more straightforward. The after dinner discussion frames the course of grass roots political analysis on a personal level. It dislocates the distant, aloof nature of the national media, the national political spin-doctors and the propaganda machines and enables families to interpret, to discuss and to relate to contemporary situations. Most importantly, it allows a vital interaction between modern political understanding, the historical example represented by the elder family members’ experiences and a youthful, perhaps naïve idealism to combine within the same context. This is a fairly unique situation in the motions of our modern body politic, usually based on the fragmentation of political ideals and ideologies. With the growing tendency of contemporary culture being to move away from the dinner table, the pressures of our fast paced modern lifestyle affecting our eating habits, the occasion of the meal re-focuses conversational etiquette and debate.
The after dinner discussion, however sour and distinctly lacking in joviality it may eventually become, quite prominently represents on a smaller scale the first hand interaction of these different demographics and ideals. More than just another bloody trifle, it is the primary foundation of discourse and interaction in a world where first hand discussion are regrettably in decline.

The end of the world is Nigh! Don’t believe me? Pick up a paper

Tom Hoctor

The result of the Oldham East and Saddleworth (OES) by-election was not quite, but almost, a foregone conclusion. For reasons best known to themselves a large portion of the electorate voted for the Liberal Democrats at the general election last May. Many of these were what are technically known as protest voters (although I prefer the term whingers), who would vote against a government no matter what colour of sheep’s clothing it wore. As the Liberal Democrats are now part of a government pushing through spending cuts, raising VAT, and generally being smug gits on television, these ‘whinge’ voters are continuously finding more obscure parties to vote for to show their displeasure (like Labour). One of the other near inevitabilities of the OES by-election was that the media would pounce on the result, whatever it happened to be, spin it like mad until it was dizzy and vomiting, and then use it as a club to beat us with. This essentially sums up the media’s general attitude towards political news in the last year. Rather than calmly reporting the news as it breaks, with some measured analysis thrown in for good measure, the media has become a cross between the many-headed Lernean Hydra and Norris from Coronation Street. Essentially a beast with a thousand ears that is constantly listening out for gossip and telling as many people as possible in the shortest feasible time.

We are all familiar with the term ‘media circus’ but the recent advent of coalition has led to a situation more like an all-singing, all-dancing, Andrew Lloyd-Webber production of Walpurgisnacht where the media demons howl 24 hours a day to anyone who will listen. Confusingly, this howling is also peculiarly direction-less. The upshot is that British media has become like a schizophrenic Cerberus spitting fire willy-nilly at government ministers, members of the shadow cabinet, student protesters and confused tourists. The effect on the newspapers of the recent coalition has been particularly amusing, as the various different publications try to reconfigure their fury at targets, which won’t alienate their readership. The Murdoch papers are overjoyed to finally have a Conservative prime minister, but are obviously unhappy that they are joined by Liberal Democrats as well. As a result a middle ground has been found whereby the Murdoch papers will never criticise a Conservative minister, but will happily denigrate any Liberal Democrat (other than their Emperor, Caleggula).

The wealth of poorly researched, misrepresented, pointless stories that seem to dominate popular tabloids really capture the public imagination. On the whole these stories are totally hysterical, and anyone who had spent half an hour with one of their newspapers could be forgiven for thinking that Britain was on the verge of total collapse into perpetual looting, cannibalism, and race war. The government’s spending cuts agenda has turned the Guardian, already a very smug, pretentious rag, into a sort of infuriating ‘I-told-you-so’ machine. Everyone from editor-in-chief to lowliest intern has apparently forgotten that the Guardian cheerfully backed the Liberal Democrats at the May election; in spite of the fact that even then it was obvious that Caleggula was an utter tosser. The Telegraph has decided to take a foray into the world of the Sunday tabloids by entrapping idiotic government ministers. These stories are of dubious public merit, but never mind, eh. This leaves sensible reporting to the Express and Mirror, as only five people and a dachshund read the Independent, which is a bit like asking a lame hamster called Lucy to hold up the sky.

Fortunately, circulation is declining so swiftly that soon nobody will even read these harpies of hysteria, and the only people left reading them will be people like me who still misguidedly care. It’s hard to know who to feel sorriest for: the politicians who are being pilloried or the general public who have to read about it. The entire situation is so fantastically tedious that I’m considering chucking in all this news business as a bad lot. The way I see it, there are two possible options instead: I could employ someone to follow me around all day intermittently shouting things about social breakdown and corrupt politicians. This would probably have an approximate impact on my mental health. Or I suppose I could just read something else.

‘The world is a better place without Saddam – we turned a blind eye to his atrocities for too long’

He may no longer occupy a position at the heart of government, but Alastair Campbell’s interest in the fraught machinations of British political life seems to burn as brightly today as it did at the very peak of his power and influence.

And what power. Having initially served as Tony Blair’s spokesman and then his chief press secretary, Campbell assumed the strategic role of Director of Communications in 2000 – cementing his position as Tony Blair’s de facto number two and one of the most dominant political figures in the land. Along with the formidable triumvirate of Blair, Gordon Brown and Peter Mandelson, the 53-year-old is regarded as one of the architects of New Labour.

His uncompromising attitude towards disagreeable journalists and politicians who failed to toe the party line is legendary, as is his supposed penchant for profanities in the workplace. That Campbell’s passion for politics pours out of him is no surprise; nor is his defence of former boss Tony Blair, which remains decidedly robust. His reputation as a real life Malcolm Tucker notwithstanding, I found Alastair Campbell to be the antithesis of his alleged alter ego – affable, obliging, calm and considered.

In light of the ongoing crises in the Arab world, we begin (somewhat inevitably) by discussing the issue which has come to define the Blair government – Iraq. Having been heavily involved in the preparation of the ‘Iraq Dossier’, a document which highlighted significant cause for concern over Iraq’s supposedly extensive programme of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Campbell played a pivotal role in arguing the case for military action against Saddam Hussein’s regime. Whilst he clearly regrets the resultant loss of life, he stands by the decision to go to war.

“Taking part in the action to remove Saddam was the most controversial decision the Blair government took,” Campbell states unequivocally. He accepts that, “millions of people opposed it at the time and many continue to feel we did the wrong thing. I continue to believe we did the right thing, whilst recognising that the aftermath of Saddam’s fall was not well handled. But I still believe that region and the world are better places without Saddam and his sons in power. I also believe those who opposed what we did have at least to confront the fact that the world turned a blind eye to Saddam’s atrocities for too long.”

Yet many activists, academics, journalists and politicians – not to mention a majority of the general public – continue to believe that the decision to invade Iraq was at best wrong, and at worst illegal. The ongoing Chilcot Inquiry has served to re-ignite the debate over the veracity of evidence presented to Parliament in the months leading up to the invasion, whilst a recent edition of Question Time illuminated the huge gulf in opinion that remains between those for and against the war.

As the tension mounted between Campbell and former Labour MP George Galloway (one of the leading opponents of the war), Galloway proclaimed, “Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell are war criminals with blood on their hands,” suggesting that they along with George W. Bush should be tried for war crimes at The Hague.

Having described Galloway as “repulsive” in his memoirs, it seems that Campbell is thoroughly unconcerned by such aggressive accusations. “George Galloway can speak for himself”, he says dismissively. “He will always be remembered as the man who stood in front of Saddam and praised his courage, strength and indefatigability.”

In the end, Campbell admits, history will be the judge of whether or not invading Iraq was the right thing to do. “It will always be controversial, but it is certainly possible that people will look back on it as an important moment in the democratisation of the region. Given what is happening in Libya right now it is also worth reflecting that the reason Gaddafi gave up WMD – or one of them – was because he saw the seriousness of intent with regard to Saddam.”

We could talk endlessly about Iraq, but I am keen to hear what Campbell has to say about the politics of today. He continues to advise the Labour leadership unofficially and briefly returned to the political fold during last year’s general election in a bid to salvage victory from the jaws of the defeat. When it became clear in the aftermath that Labour might be able to stay in government by way of a ‘Lib-Lab’ coalition, Campbell was ever-present throughout the many strategy meetings and conference calls that ultimately sounded the death knell for Gordon Brown’s premiership.

“Gordon really believed we might win and inevitably was disappointed,” Campbell says of Labour’s widely-predicted demise at the polls last May. “It takes time for something as big as an election defeat to sink in but I am sure he will continue to make a contribution in different ways.”

Just as Brown is adjusting to the markedly slower pace of life on the backbenches, there is a new kid on the Labour Party block. Ed Miliband has been Labour leader for six months now and has been giving a rough ride by an unsympathetic press, who accuse him of being a lightweight figure without clear direction.

But, as you might expect, Campbell seems relatively impressed so far. “I like the fact he seems pretty unfazed by attack and criticism and I think he is really beginning to get under Cameron’s skin at PMQs. He has plenty of time to put together the policy agenda for the next election.” How could Miliband improve? “For the time being I would like to see more and deeper engagement in the economic argument”, Campbell suggests.

This is sound advice which Miliband would do well to take heed of – after all, Alastair Campbell is a man who truly understands the meaning of ‘engaging in the argument’. A much-publicised bust-up with Sky News anchor Adam Boulton just days after the general election became a YouTube hit as people clamoured to see the ignominious spectacle.

“He was just over-excited and totally lost the plot,” Campbell says of his adversary, who was the subject of much negative press as a result of the incident. “I may have needled him a bit but he was behaving like a total prat. One of the things I can’t stand about a lot of journalists is that they are good at giving it out but not to so good at taking it. I have seen him since and got on fine but I wouldn’t claim him to be a friend.”

If there is one thing Campbell relishes more than picking a fight with a fellow journalist, it’s taking the fight to the Tories – or, more specifically, the Tory-led coalition government. The role of the Liberal Democrats in supporting the near-trebling of the cap on tuition fees to £9,000 seems to have angered Campbell as much as any decision taken in recent times.

“Life was easy for the Lib Dems when they could go out and say whatever they liked to any audience they saw. Now they are propping up the Tory government their decisions have profound political consequences. Many people voted for them to stop a Tory government and they have ended up delivering just that.”

Will dismay amongst students who voted Liberal Democrat be reflected in a haemorrhaging of Lib Dem support amongst students next time around, in 2015? “Almost certainly – and so it should be”, he says defiantly.

“The fact is that raising the cap will deter people from going to university. I don’t think that bothers the Tories. They always scoffed at our goal of getting 50% of young people into higher and further education. I accept that we first brought in tuition fees and that was a difficult decision. It was all about trying to get more, bigger and better universities and more young people going to them. I fear that is now at risk.”

Campbell’s assessment of the coalition’s performance in other policy areas thus far is equally scathing. He suggests that, “they lack clarity of strategy. We know they want to reduce the deficit and we know they say they have to make cuts. We know next to nothing else. Big Society? Nobody has a clue what it means. Foreign policy? Ditto. Cameron is finally waking up to the organisational side you need but he still lacks clarity of strategy.”

“The Tories got away with murder during the Labour leadership election in blaming the previous government for all the difficult decisions they are taking. These are political choices they are making and they really need to be made to pay for them politically. David Cameron has the bonus of a tame media but once the cuts and sackings really start in earnest, he will find the temperature rising.”

A former tabloid hack himself, Campbell is taking a keen interest in the unfolding News of the World phone hacking scandal. He is almost certain that he was targeted.

“I was suspicious when Tessa Jowell and I fixed up a meeting using our mobiles only and a photographer was outside when it started,” he recalls. “Phone hacking is the least of what some papers get up to. I also think there is a danger in keeping all the focus on the News of the World… I would hope that eventually the net gets extended. It is interesting to see how few of the papers have really bothered with this story”, he notes wryly.

The former spin doctor remains a busy man with a hectic schedule. He is currently working on the third unexpurgated volume of his diaries, having seen the insightful second volume fly off the shelves in recent months. Power and the People chronicles the struggles, successes and frustrations of the early years of the Blair government – so, what could David Cameron learn from the diaries?

“That you need hard work, clear strategy and good organisation – and that even then a lot can go wrong.”

Volume 2 of Alastair Campbell’s diaries, Power and the People, is out now in hardback, published by Hutchinson, RRP £25.00. Volume 1, Prelude to Power, is out in paperback, published by Arrow, RRP £9.99.