An economic theory of hipsters

These days people hate hipsters.  I hate hipsters.  But what is a hipster, and more importantly why is a hipster, is a question I have recently unraveled.  Allow me to explain.  There is an economic reason why hipsters exist, and there is a good reason why you hate these jerks.

The main cause of hipsters is unemployment and underemployment.  Hipsters are by and large a group that went to college.  Their job prospects post college have been slim, and they are largely unemployed or underemployed.



This is a group that also faced large borrowing costs to get that college degree.

"To swing this without hitting the lottery, you're going to need a job that pays far more than the minimum wage. One estimate, according to a calculator at www.Finaid.org, is an annual salary of $42,000, assuming you use 10% of your monthly gross for loan payments."

The tastes of hipsters is directly attributed to these grim economic realities.  What is vintage thrifting but a pretentious way of shopping like a poor person?  Isn't the hipster beard but an arrogant cost saving device?  Saving money on razors and making fun of truck drivers at the same time.

So then to answer the question what is a hipster I would argue a hipster is a person part of the great college wave from the last 10-15 years that is economically marginalized and maintains absurd pretensions regarding their poverty.  They moved into the inner city looking for cheap rents but dressed it up as a search for "authenticity".  They started taking public transportation as an economic necessity but dressed it up as green living.  They indulge in Pabst Blue Ribbon because it is cheap beer but say that they like it "ironically".  And this is why no one admits to being a hipster.  And this is why, despite their plight, you won't feel sorry for hipsters.

If hipsters had money they'd live in a McMansion in the suburbs, drive a hummer, and buy expensive new clothing.  But they don't so they shop at Goodwill, live in "gentrifying" inner city neighborhoods, and take public transportation.  And they are pretentious about it.

Music is dead

Hahahahah!

I would call this graph "A colossal failure of imagination on the part of the music industry".  Isn't it funny that youtube is basically the best promotional tool for the music industry since Cable Television?  And how they worked so hard, and still do, to remove content that promotes their own interest?  These guys are so stupid...

The old curmudgeon is disappointed with kids these days

It has recently been brought to my attention that kids these days are really into pants.  No really.  Pants.  The height of their teenage aspirations is apparently owning stylish jeans.



Now maybe you think Chesty LaRue is off base here and the kids aren't really into owning pants.



Nope. Kids are really into owning pants.  There are two things to note here.  First is that kids these days are a sorry bunch of losers.  Back in my day teenagers dreamed of sex, smoking weed, drinking a gin and orange juice cocktail, and skipping school.  These days their fantasies are owning stylish pants?  Back in my day people wore raver pants but you never heard us making songs about it.

Second, I guess the kids these day must have it real rough if this is the height of their aspirations.  These aren't teenage dreams, these are third world dreams.  We just want some pants.



Skinny jeans dreams LOLZ

Back in my day not only could even poor white trash afford stylish pants, but our stylish pants were made of generous material proportions, to display our excessive wealth. 



You see?  We could not only afford all this superfluous material for our pants but also glow in the dark decals.  The kids these days?



These losers can't even afford jeans with extra denim.  And pointless pockets, zippers, and chains?  Forget it.

Truls Mork: Worth the money

Classical music is a dead genre filled with dead composers who wrote for a dead audience.  Apparently you can chart in billboard classical by selling only a few hundred discs.

"The dirty secret of the Billboard classical charts is that album sales figures are so low, the charts are almost meaningless. Sales of 200 or 300 units are enough to land an album in the top 10. Hahn's No. 1 recording, after the sales spike resulting from her appearance on Conan, bolstered by blogs and press, sold 1,000 copies."

These days everyone who wants to break big in classical tries to look like the NSYNC of classical.






And really why should anyone buy a new "classical" album.  Bach has been dead for over 200 years.  Why should anyone profit from his music?  There are so many recordings of Beethoven, Mozart, etc that I can't see how one more piano sonata is worth 15 bucks.

But then I found an album with an NSYNC cover of songs by a guy who has been dead for over 100 years that is worth a few bucks.  Truls Mork's Nocturne.



Looks like someone went to glamor shots.

So why is this worth buying?  Because it is sort of new.  I mean the Chopin pieces themselves are old.  But many of them are arranged for cello for the first time.  Or at least the first time I've found.  It's new to me.  Prelude in B minor for cello and piano is a great idea.

Ok so I guess you can google other people doing it.  But Truls does it better.  And the sound quality is good as well.



No offense kids, this is fine and dandy.  But I like Truls performance better and the sound quality is better too.  And it is on sale for ten bucks.  If you like Chopin and you like cello then you should like this album.

Are we suckers?

Yesterday I was going to have my bass setup professionally.  I play tuned to B-E-A-D, and so I of course get a lot of fret buzzing.  Even with the action jacked up it tends to buzz.  My strings are old so it looks like a good time to reboot.  I was thinking about putting on some DR Black Beauties.



My black beauties don't have a g string.  LOL.

So I called a guitar shop in town.  The guy was going to do the setup including strings for 35 bucks.  I asked about the strings, because these DRs cost about 30 bucks.  So he goes on a long tirade about string manufacturers.  There are only 2 companies in the US that makes strings, he says.  No one can import strings, he says.  They are all the same, the labels are only an illusion of choice, he says.

Consider that I currently have Rotosound strings on my bass, which are made in England.  Obviously this guy is full of shit.  And he definitely lost a potential customer over the phone yesterday.  But it is an interesting philosophical question.  How much do strings matter?  How can you really tell?  I mean when you change strings you are basically comparing new strings to old strings, so the new strings will have that bright new string sound.  Who has two identical instruments strung with different brands to give you a side by side comparison?



Well I guess there is that. Thanks funky white dude.

So how much difference is there between strings?  It is an interesting question, despite the ignorance of the person who originally asked the question.  Obviously there is a big difference between roundwound and flatwound strings, owing to the different design.

Related question:  has any heavy metal bassist played with flatwound strings?  How would that sound trying to play Motorhead?



Maybe I'll go flatwound just to play this song?

Youtube poop from ages past

That's right kids, get yourself an 8 ball of blow and go back in time to when the price was right



This is definitely going in my summer playlist.  Love that Moog!

The Cruise industry is weird

I'm sure many of you are aware of the heavy metal cruise.  7000 tons of metal or something like that.  Well apparently there is the analogous goth cruise.  Not really any bands, just a bunch of goths.  And they have a movie.  Prepare to be dazzled.


Goth Cruise - trailer from Jeanie Finlay on Vimeo.

Now I've been to the Caribbean, and it is hot.  And the sun is intense.  Not really the sort of place you want to wear black leather and lots of makeup.  It is more the sort of place you want to wear bright rayon shirts and Cuban pants.  But hey, to each his own.