Recently in CB Category

At the start of this month, dozens of bars prepared themselves for London Cocktail Week, each one serving their unique signature cocktail for the exceptionally reasonable price of £4. I found out about this from my girlfriend who thought it’d be a fun thing to do - as indeed it was.

We kicked it off at Shaker & Co. Shown here is their Teenage Blues cocktail with a portion going to support the Teenage Cancer Trust. My personal favourite was their Benedictine and grapefruit cocktail ‘Le Pamplemousse’. Amazingly, these guys opened their bar for the first time on the very first night of the week - if they call that a ‘soft launch’, I can only wonder what numbers the guys behind them are used to.

We spent a lot of our time there having too much fun with their Canadian bartender (your name escapes me now, sorry!) and the flamboyant drinks he made for us afterwards. Nevertheless we finally headed out to Centre Point, ascending to the 34th floor of one of the oldest skyscrapers in London to visit the Paramount bar.

The tour continued on Tuesday around Camden. Coco Bamboo offered spicy mint mojitos (i.e. your regular mojito but with Bacardi’s new Oakheart spirit). The Hawley Arms offered a rather non-descript Jack Daniels-based drink - I doubt Amy Winehouse loved the place for its alcohol.

One of the star bars was a gin and real ale bar, The Colonel Fawcett, who gave us this fine Tom Collins with added Chambourd. I’m not normally a gin fan but I do love raspberry, and this turned out to be a great cocktail that’s a little too easy to drink! If you go, check out the menu - the chocolate and chestnut cake with hazelnut ice cream is fantastic and everything you could possibly ask of a dessert.

Our final bar was Cottons, who have supremely knowledgeable staff who love rum and making interesting cocktails. One favourite was a malty cocktail made with condensed milk, Jamaican Dragon Stout (it is a rhum shack after all) and a few other additions blended together into a deliciously creamy drink. It’s like a mudslide made with Bournvita.

At the end of the night I asked our bartender to make a cocktail that met a particular taste profile I wanted. The good news is it was one of the most delicious alcoholic beverages I have consumed. The bad news is, I was too drunk to remember it or think about writing it down. It’s too bad; I guess I’ll just have to go there again…

The London Cocktail Week lasted until the 16th of October. While we only managed two days, maybe next year I’ll be able to last the whole week. After all, if you don’t come out never wanting to touch a drop again, you probably haven’t gone far enough.

The election results are in and the UK has a hung parliament. Nobody wins.

Especially not the people.

The Conservatives have 36% of the popular vote and 47% of parliament.
29% of people voted Labour, awarding them 40% of seats.
Finally, the Liberal Democrats get 23% of votes, but just 9% of seats.
(source)

In what world is this disparity between the electorate’s wishes and the actual result fair?

It’s not even the first time our voting system has given skewed results. In 2005, Labour got 3% more votes than the Conservatives across the entire country, yet this translated to 24% more seats in parliament.

As a result of our political system’s inherent need to form a majority government, we are going to see a possible Con-Lib or Lab-Lib coalition. This is unlikely to please voters of any of the three major parties due to conflicting policy interests. Britain simply isn’t used to compromise, and as a result we have a real problem dealing with it in times, like now, when it is required.

Storm clouds of discontent have been brewing ever since it became possible for less than two-fifths of the population to set the government for the entire country. Now we have no majority party we are forced to deal with it. Perhaps, at long last, we will.

We don’t need superficial change, as presented by the Tories. We need genuine reform.

We need to take back parliament.

More info on the hard facts, with charts visualising where your votes go - or don’t.

Has anyone played those games where you have to drag a ragdoll body with the mouse?

That’s what immediately sprang to mind when I saw the picture of Jarvis Cocker on iPlayer. Someone’s clicked on his head and is dragging him across the side of the screen, hoping they might rub some static electricity into his hair.

It’s not just me, is it? Probably is. Oh well. Jarvis’s show is really good, though. Support him, and with it, 6music, by listening in. 6music needs all your help - nay, INDEPENDENT MUSIC NEEDS YOUR HELP. There are few outlets for new artists or anyone who strays from the mainstream; if the BBC follows through with its plan to axe 6music it will be a serious blow to musicians and music lovers. Do all you can to convince them otherwise.

In just under 40 minutes, Ellie Goulding answers the question “What would Imogen Heap sound like if she did pop?”

You’d think the producers had decided that nothing on each track may sound harsher than Ellie’s voice. I mean that in a good way - it’s comparable to (but softer than) Cerys Matthews, interesting enough to act as an instrument in its own right, and often the driving force in each song. Although considering her acoustic folk roots, it’s no surprise.

In some ways it’s a shame she has transitioned only halfway between folk and Frankmusik. For example, I don’t know whether to be impressed or disappointed that the synthesisers didn’t break out of their soft, inoffensive bubble during Pink-soundalike ‘Every Time You Go’. Having access to a vast range of electronics affords you an intensity a lone singer-songwriter could only dream of achieving, but that capability isn’t used here. Goulding has stuck to what she knows best, in a move that has undoubtedly disappointed many critics expecting her to go one further than ‘Under The Sheets’.

That said, effects are put to very good use, keeping it fresh and interesting, even while you’re saying to yourself “this is a bit like Linkin Park here” or “ooh, they nicked that from ‘Last Christmas’”.

All in all, ‘Lights’ is a decent bit of pop with good melodies, an interesting backing track, a bit of emotional response and a nice voice to listen to. Really, everything pop music is meant to be, rather than Simon Cowell-produced noise pollution. If I wanted the full wrath of synthesisers and samplers I’d put on some Animal Collective, thankyouverymuch.

During my daily dose of reddit I saw an article on the artifically-intelligent software composer, Emily Howell, and the story of David Cope and his first creation Emmy (or EMI, for Experiments in Musical Intelligence).

Algorithmic music has always interested me, but not for the sheer pleasure of music appreciation; it’s the way you can create atmosphere on-demand, and given my love of computer games - the most interactive art form yet - the ability to make music defined by your actions raises the experience to a whole new level.

Just imagine. You become one with the violins. Horns wait for their cue while the bassoon annotates your every move. While you were busy playing the conductor with your existence, the timpani has tirelessly amplified your heartbeat a million times. Every little bit so seamless and unobtrusive, so perfect, that the music feels like a natural extension of you. It literally is the soundtrack of your life, and just thinking of the potential gives me goosebumps.

Anyway.

That’s all well and good, but Emily isn’t that kind of composer.

She writes music for the sake of music. And in contrast to her forebears, it’s all original. (Naturally, with the necessary qualifications that any jazz man will give you - numerous quotes about everybody stealing from everybody else spring to mind, unattributed in my disorganised mind yet universally acknowledged.)

I honestly have no problem with this, since anyone can write a song. Writing a good song, well, that’s something else.

What I’ve heard so far (excerpt 1, excerpt 2) is certainly pleasing, but it’s far from Chopin. That’s not a performance issue, either - Chopin sounds great even in the hands of an amateur - but something more fundamental. I’m definitely impressed that a computer wrote it, but as a piece generally? Meh.

I’m not here to write a review, though. What I found especially interesting was the reaction of critics against Emily’s precursor, Emmy. David Cope created Emmy in an attempt to solve a severe case of writer’s block; her task was to create chorales in the style of Bach. She passed with flying colours, and musical scholars hated him for it.

(Cope also created more scores in the style of other composers, with varying success.)

The funny thing is, being able to compose music to sound like a long-lost Bach piece shouldn’t be as amazing, disturbing, or even as revolting as the critics have made out. Our definition of a Bach piece is based solely on his repertoire as a reference point; the computer doesn’t have to capture the essence of Bach at all, merely convince us that it is Bach. Something entirely different.

Conversely, suppose you find a long-lost Bach piece that sounds unlike his other work. You have two choices: destroy the evidence, or move the goalposts to retain consistency, calling it a blue period, or hampered by external creative interests. (I particularly like that one - it’s like saying he’s on drugs without the stigma of an outright accusation.)

Either way, perception and reality are not necessarily aligned, which is why I consider mimicking specific things a bit of a red herring when asking whether music has ‘soul’. The illusion of soul, perhaps; a snapshot of it. But that doesn’t make it the real deal.

“The question,” Cope says, “isn’t whether computers have a soul, but whether humans have a soul.”

Emily Howell doesn’t tickle my soul - at least, not with what I’ve heard so far. However, even this is not the most important part of the question. So far, Emily relies on Cope for control, and to assess whether the results are any good. We have no idea what the success rate is, or how much intervention and selection is required. Even now, the output isn’t spectacular.

Liken it to the infinite monkey theorem; a tool like Emily can speed up the process, but we decide whether the output is correct or has artistic excellence, not the ignorant monkeys. The milestone lies beyond this, in generating works of art every time, and I’m just not convinced we’re even near that yet.

A threat to contemporary composers? Only when the results are consistently good without the need for manual selection. But even if Emily accelerates the creative process as David Cope indicates, this should be seen as a step forward for everybody. After all, nobody’s complaining that the Industrial Revolution happened.

I first saw the Quails in their home town (and Muse’s, who they were supporting at the time) in Devon. They offer a slice of indie akin to the likes of the Strokes and the Killers, plus a bit of Bloc Party without the intensity. The vocals may be a little insipid, but the lead guitar work is sound and the band as a whole manages to stay cohesive.

This time they visited Bristol, and it was all perfectly agreeable and fun to dance to. Exactly what you want from a live act - in contrast to, say, The Invisible, who got into the realms of bad jazz at times; overly repetitive and lacking direction. It starts well but you’re definitely glad when the song is over.

They won’t win awards but they definitely have talent, so it’ll be interesting to see if they go anywhere. More here!

The redesign I’d threatened for months has finally arrived! I hope you like it, ‘cause if not, tough.

You also have easy access to the cooking and coding posts through clicking the photos at the very top. Delicious!