89627

'Mainstream' - a principal current of a river, 1667, from main (adj.) + stream, hence, "prevailing direction in opinion, popular taste, etc.," a fig. use first attested in Carlyle (1831).

I propose that the concept of 'the mainstream', be it music, art, ideas, politics, entertainment and all other social constructs, is and has always been a social myth.

The key to this argument lies in the cyclical nature of the market economy, political thought, and technological advancement. For sake of simplicity, I shall concentrate solely on the development and eventual disintegration of the concept of the 'mainstream'.

What came before the MP3? The CD.

And before that? vinyl.

And before that? Shellac and wax drums for musical boxes.

And before that? sheet Music. Musical Scores.

As funny as it sounds now, at the very dawn of 'Popular Music' or pop, a 'Hit' technically accounted for the total sales of a sheet of music, a musical score. The expectation and reality of the market was solely reliant on availability of current technologies at the time (namely music boxes and pianos) and the musical ability of the consumer.

For the main part it was more economic to purchase an upright piano rather than a the musical box, purchasing songs for a music box was a privilege of the rich. Imagine paying $500 for an mp3 track? No one in their right mind would, yet the physical nature of such devices meant that supplying a range of music for any device would be beyond the reach of the masses. The 'Player Piano' moved things along somewhat, creating rolls of punch paper reduced the costs considerably. For many this was new technology was still out of reach of the average, or even middle income family.

For most, instead of an Ipod, there would stand, pride of place in the Sitting Room or Parlour, a basic upright piano, of which at least one member would be able to read and play music, and the others would at the very least need to hold a whole gamut of decent notes to make the performance painlessly entertaining. The more savvy music publishers (yes they were printers and nothing more), realized early on that if they wanted to increase their sales they'd need to expand their market.

A few seemingly harmless pointers to publishing a popular 'hit' led to a series of hard and fast rules that held back the creative growth of the music industry for over a century.

Family friendly. Their market was the Middle-Class Family, they had money, Sunday Evenings with little to do, a strong moral and religious upbringing and a very definite idea of what music should do.

It shouldn't offend, anyone, anywhere, anyhow. It cannot include any mention of any controversy. The melody must be light, instantly engaging and simple to follow. The whole family must be able to join in and not feel awkward or embarrassed in anyway. Basically hymns.

The market began to fracture eventually, songs for the kids, religious, risque ditties for young lovers and dirty old men, then came style... jazz, blues, big band. Finally wax rolls for musical boxes gave way to shellac and eventually vinyl discs and as the sound quality improved, and the availability increased and prices reduced, finally those that played the piano instead of a Gramophone, were the rare exception.

The world has changed a lot since then, but as with all things fashion has a funny habit of repeating itself. More and more iPod fans and mp3 addicts are beginning to manipulate their own collections, with the development of a whole series of cheap and cheerful music mixing software releases on the way, it doesn't seem so far-fetched to imagine a time in the not so distant future where rather than the 'Mainstream' we will be talking in terms of Single Streams, or even the 'Onestream'.

In the past the more forward thinking printers and publishers of the day decided to buy music from songwriters for a pittance, sometimes even steal them outright and make all the profit for themselves. Now things are changing beyond belief.

Anyone can make music to a point with the aid of software and electronic instruments that a child could learn and play within minutes. With the increased interactivity involved in many of the new technologies, the PC being the original focal point, most consumers are no longer purely consuming, they are now producing. Be it their own Tivo TV schedule, the play list on their iPod, the answer phone message they recorded themselves. Consumption was never a creative act, but finally it seems technology is enabling individuals to come to that conclusion by themselves.

Eventually few people will purchase entertainment in any form, simply the means to produce it. As part of my Fine Arts Degree many years ago, I specialized in Photo Montage, appropriating and aggregating a variety of disparate images, and manipulating and combining them to form a new and original work. Nowadays few would ever consider going through the rigmarole of cutting and pasting printed matter when a graphics program and the internet can provide vast more choice in subject matter and imagery.

Technology has led our actions, or rather inaction for most of the 20th Century, in the 21st we are witnessing the slow decay of Consumerism itself, and at the beginning the first change we are all both witnessing and providing, is technological manipulation of consumer goods.

As the manufacturers of multimedia devices finally catch up with demand we will witness more and more graphic and sound interactivity to the point that most products will simply enable us to create our own entertainment, as we have in histories past. The only difference is that your Bedroom DJ Mix is now heard by the world rather than an unwilling friend or family member. Local heroes and heroines will be born, down the road from my place are the band Keane, a very successful UK pop band from Battle, Sussex. without the proliferation of social networking technologies I doubt that their meteoric rise to fame would have been as startling.

Other more stark examples are Gnarls Berkley and the Arctic Monkeys, who via the Myspace.com service have become major players in the world music scene. This isn't simply a technological change. The 'Futurism' Arts Movement at the turn of the last century was obsessed with painting fast cars and trains and planes, as much as a young boy might do these days. No one wants to draw an MP3 player, no one wants to write a poem about their xbox. People want to 'use' them, and they do, all of them.

The idea that materialism can enable anything other than a show of wealth has changed, we no longer have toys, we have tools. Consumption is now lured by the idea of Production, the snake is eating itself.

Within your lifetime, your or someone you know will produce something remarkable, the miraculous is about to become commonplace and the 'Mainstream, obsolete.

The mainstream is diverging into a billion tributaries, the concept of popularity, and eventually mass advertising will dry up, along with monolithic centralized institutions and corporations. We as individuals are finally learning to disagree with each other, we are taking informed and personal choices in our consumption, and eventually the production of our own 'streams'. We fish for ideas, we take those ideas and create our own unique range of arts, entertainment and individual understanding of the world. And when we're bored with our own minds, we trade our goods with others, some like-minded, some not so.

Music, Art, Entertainment, conceived, designed and produced by the individual for the individual. Very much the way we began. Travelling Minstrels, visiting one village and the next, trading music, trading styles, ideas, even new technologies, but for the main part from home.

There never was a mainstream, the concept of the mainstream was conceived for the convenience of unwieldy organizations with little ability or even impetus to change. Like a vast dam, blocking and filtering the river, it is now beginning to crumble, and creative sources and flowing in from all directions, a veritable waterfall of new ideas, sounds and images are about to be born.

Paul Baines, Singer Songwriter for http://www.OneManBrand.co.uk. A UK Based Electronic Musician, Designer and Writer. Visit http://www.onemanbrand.co.uk to find out more...

posted by 83212  # 3:09 PM 0 comments

Could yoga have all the answers to anxiety? Why is it that anxiety, stress, and unhappiness take over so many peoples lives? If you listen to a doubting Thomas, nothing works, but if you read below, you will see some solutions.

In fact, all forms of yoga are good for our mental health. This does not mean that anxiety will disappear, but Yoga gives us the tools to put anxiety in the back seat, while we determine a positive direction in life. The struggle for direction is within our minds. We must be aware of the struggle from within.

Pessimistic thought is not productive, yet there are many pessimists ruled by the dark side. For them, nothing will work because they already have the Why me attitude. Everything is against them, or so they think, and that is where the problem lies.

Unless you can master your thinking, you will not suppress negative thoughts. How does yoga do this? The principle is simple. Lets use 21st century jargon to give you a clear picture. Yoga is an ancient, but constantly evolving, science of life. The yoga practitioner reprograms his or her thoughts.

Your mind is your best friend, and your worst enemy, at the same time. When you attend yoga classes regularly, under the guidance of a competent yoga teacher, your mind and body become charged with positive energy.

If you look at the facial expressions of yoga students after a class, you will notice they are in a state of bliss. If this is not the case, they have not found the right place yet. There is no need to be discouraged. We find what we seek in life.

Copyright 2007 Paul Jerard / Aura Publications

Paul Jerard, E-RYT 500, has written many books on the subject of yoga. He is a co-owner and the Director of yoga teacher training at: Aura Wellness Center, in Attleboro, MA. http://www.riyoga.com He has been a certified Master Yoga teacher since 1995. To receive a Free yoga e-book: "Yoga in practice," and a Free Yoga Newsletter, please visit: http://www.yoga-teacher-training.org/index.html

posted by 83212  # 11:59 AM 0 comments

As a result of problems related to the mass production of a key component of its Blu-ray DVD player, Sony (SNE) will delay the European launch of its next generation video game console, the PlayStation 3 (PS3). Sony will also reduce the number of PS3 units immediately available in both the U.S. and Japan.

In the U.S., the PS3 will launch on November 17th, with approximately 400,000 consoles available for sale. The U.S. launch will come almost a week after the Japanese launch which will consist of merely 100,000 units.

Sony's PlayStation 3 is the successor to the PlayStation 2, the world's most popular (and as recently as July, the world's best selling) video game console.

The Number That Really Matters

The fact that there will only be 400,000 PS3 units available for sale in the United States on November 17th is totally unimportant. The launch date itself is unimportant. What matters is how many units will be available for sale in mid to late December.

Sony claims it will have 1 million to 1.2 million consoles available for sale by December 31st. I think it's safe to assume they don't plan to have many arrive between December 26th and December 31st. So, let's assume there will be at least a million PS3 consoles available for sale in the U.S. by Christmas.

Will that be enough to put a PlayStation in the living room of every household that wants one?

No. There will almost certainly be many people who have to go without a PS3 for Christmas, despite being willing to pay the very high price Sony is asking. But, that's nothing new. Other consoles (including the xbox 360) have been launched without an adequate number of units immediately available for sale.

This isn't like failing to get enough Glad trash bags on store shelves. Once the console has launched, limited availability shouldn't cause many people to switch their planned purchase. If they want it and it's out, they'll wait for it.

A delay is much worse than a mere shortage. There's a promise (and a tangible product) behind a console that has already launched. So, very few people in the U.S. or Japan who planned to buy a PS3 are likely to change their minds because of a Christmas shortage no matter how severe.

The Things That Really Matter

The success of any gaming platform is largely based on five factors:

Available Titles

Relative Launch Date

Price

Predecessor's Installed Base

Technology

Of these five, technology is by far the least important factor. The four most important factors (available titles, relative launch date, price, and predecessor's installed base) are difficult to separate. Clearly, having a predecessor with a large installed base (such as the PS2) can be tremendously beneficial, if you get satisfactory marks in the other three areas (titles, launch date, and price).

Predecessor's Installed Base

The PlayStation 3 dominates when it comes to having a predecessor with a large installed base. So, how does it score in the other three areas?

In terms of available titles, the PS3 scores as well as any of its competitors, if not better. However, none of the three consoles (Xbox 360, PS3, or Wii) does very well in this regard. Unfortunately, the titles are likely to be somewhat segregated by console. There will be quality games on each system; but, almost no one will buy all three. Simply put, there will be some games exclusive to each console that a lot of people would really love to play but can't.

Also, there's the danger that both the PS3 and the xbox 360 will be seen as the more adult and less casual consoles. Microsoft (MSFT) and Sony have Nintendo to blame for this but, let's put that issue aside for now.

Relative Launch Date

Returning to the list of factors that determine a console's success, let's consider the launch date issue. Sony clearly has a bit of a problem in Europe, because it will have one less Christmas season than both the xbox 360 and the Wii. Some analysts think Sony will lose no more than a few hundred thousand console sales to substitutions. If that's true, lost revenue might be in the hundreds of millions rather than the billions.

Strong sales of the xbox in Europe during the Christmas season would be a very bad indication for Sony. The combined price of an xbox and a PS3 is prohibitively expensive. Furthermore, the two consoles are far more similar to each other than they are to the Wii. As a result, while some European Wii sales might be recoverable by Sony at a later date, because individuals will choose to buy the Wii first and the PS3 later, very few xbox 360 sales would be recoverable. Essentially, every xbox sold in Europe this Christmas is a PS3 that will never be born.

Three Separate Markets

The U.S., Japan, and Europe are really three very different markets. It's quite possible you could have a console that is very successful in one market and yet unable to get any real momentum in another.

Before this delay, I felt strongly that Europe was the market where the PS3 could come closest to duplicating the performance of the ps2 in terms of market share. There's a long-term danger that Microsoft will gain market share in the U.S. and Nintendo will gain market share in both the U.S. and Japan.

Obviously, Europe isn't as well defined a market as either the U.S. or Japan. So, it's much harder to predict how a certain type of console or a certain type of game will go over there. The U.S. and Japan are very clearly defined game markets, largely because they have very clearly defined consumer cultures in general and entertainment cultures in particular.

So, what does the PS3 delay mean for Sony's future in Europe? It's hard to say. I'm more interested in seeing what the installed base of each next generation console will look like in the American and Japanese markets after Christmas 2007, when we'll have the first real chance to predict how this round of the console wars will play out.

Of course, there are some predictions that seem pretty safe even now. For instance, it seems safe to say Sony will lose worldwide market share. Simply put, the PS3 won't be able to duplicate the market share dominance of the ps2.

So, most likely we're talking about Sony's PS3 falling somewhere north of catastrophic failure and south of market share gains. Although I think both of these scenarios are extremely unlikely, catastrophic failure is more likely, simply because improving upon the PS2's market share seems a near impossibility given the much tougher competition this time around.

Is there a real risk that the PS3 might end up being a catastrophic failure? I don't think so, simply because of the number of ps2 systems still out there. Price combined with solid competition on both of Sony's flanks is the only thing that could cause such a failure. If the price prevents widespread acceptance of the system, third party publisher support would be a problem down the line. Nintendo doesn't need a lot of third party support. Sony does.

Although I do think Sony is doing serious harm to its PlayStation line by insisting upon including Blu-ray and charging a ridiculous price, I don't think any amount of managerial ineptitude is likely to cause the catastrophic failure of a successor to such a dominant console as the ps2.

Price

If price isn't the elephant in the room, it should be. Most of the articles I read about the recently announced PS3 delay / production scale-down didn't say much about the pricing of the PS3. That's a mistake especially, because several articles mentioned the laptop battery recall, which has nothing to do with the PS3 and very little to do with Sony (it has everything to do with lithium-ion batteries irrespective of their manufacturer).

The PS3's price is a big problem. One that might have manifested itself in poor Christmas sales, if the number of units available for sale had approached the expected demand. For now, Sony is planning on having so few units available in the U.S. by Christmas that the launch will go well even if the PS3 is ultimately a failure. Sony claims it will have 6 million units by the end of its fiscal year. A few analysts are skeptical, but Sony is sticking to that line.

In the weeks ahead, expect Sony to make a big deal about the fact that it will actually make more PS3 units available by the end of December than the number of xbox 360s Microsoft had made available by the same time the year before. It's a valid point. But, it omits two key facts. The PS3 is launching after the xbox 360 and there are more PS2 owners out there who will want to trade up for the new system.

Since the PS3 is launching after the xbox 360, no one is waiting around to see what the alternative will look like. They already know what the xbox 360 is, what it can do, and what (some of) the games available for it are. As soon as the PS3 launches, the comparisons can begin. That wasn't possible when the xbox 360 launched and everybody knew the PS3 was on its way.

The second reason why no parallel exists between the demand for xbox 360s at launch and the demand for PS3s at launch is simply that there are more PS2s out there. As a result, Sony having as many units available by Christmas as Microsoft had the year before would be a lot like Gillette having as many new razors available as Schick had produced the year before. The difference in market share obliterates any possible comparison.

So, even though I think the PS3 is far too expensive going into the Christmas season, I'm quite sure that fact won't be evident in the sales numbers, because there will be a severe PS3 shortage throughout 2006. Even if the PlayStation 3 is too expensive, it will look like it's selling well, because there simply won't be enough of them produced in 2006.

Why am I so convinced the PS3 is priced too high?

The PS3 is too expensive to be a Christmas gift. Around Christmas, a lot of these consoles are bought by parents as gifts for their kids. Parents are willing to pay a lot for them, because they're a huge one-time item for the kid (and the parents have been hearing about it since well before the launch). But, the prices likely to be charged in 2006 for the PS3 are simply beyond what parents are willing to spend.

It's not an issue of how much consumers have to spend versus the value they're getting. It's an issue of being psychologically unprepared for paying this kind of price for any gift.

It may be a price older gamers are willing to pay to get a PS3 for themselves. But, it's not a price parents will be willing to spend on their kids.

Geoff Gannon writes a daily value investing blog and produces a twice weekly (half hour) value investing podcast at: http://www.gannononinvesting.com

posted by 83212  # 9:14 AM 0 comments