Welcome to Muse Songwriters Message Board

Register now to gain access to all of our features. 


This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Alistair S

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Alistair S last won the day on June 24

Alistair S had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

40 Excellent

About Alistair S

  • Rank
  • Birthday 20/08/57

Contact Methods

  • Music Page

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK

Previous Fields

  • Lyricist, Composer or Both?
  • Musical Influences?
    Neil Young, James Taylor, Leonard Cohen, Tracy Chapman, Tom Waits, John Martyn, Harvey Andrews, Ralph McTell

Recent Profile Visitors

61,119 profile views
  1. This forum is for feedback on songs you have written yourself. I am moving this post from Songs Feedback to Self Promotion and Advertisements. Please don't post promotional content elsewhere on the site.
  2. Soundcloud has laid off a lot of staff and looks as if it is in financial difficulties. They are looking for investors. If you have your music on Soundcloud, it may be sensible to make sure you have kept copies (just in case). It would be a shame to lose anything.
  3. I took a look, Anna, but it seems to be devoid of content so far (just a welcome page). Maybe post again when there is something there? By the way, I did take a look at your profile and, well, are you sure Dan Brown's work qualifies as literature?
  4. It's an interesting idea, Barneyboy, but do you have any evidence to support it? At the start of the war in Europe, the USA was really not geared up for war or for arms production - despite the second amendment. Congress had been cutting military expenditure for years, the army had no tanks and there was no appetite to get involved in what was happening in Europe. What the USA did have was a strong industrial base, especially around vehicles and agriculture. Roosevelt called in Willian Knudsen, who helped transform US industry to focus on supplying the things needed by those fighting - aircraft, trucks, radios, etc. Unlike WW1, when US soldiers mostly used British and French weapons, they used their own in WW2. Yes, guns were also produced in the USA, but we didn't really use them. The UK did look at the M1 but rejected it, sticking with the Lee Enfield. Some Thompson sub-machine guns were issued, but these were replaced with sten guns. The main machine gun used by the Brits was the Bren. It may puzzle you to know that the UK is the second largest arms dealer in the world (behind the USA). Of course, you may think this is because, until very shortly before the war, we had no real legislative controls over carrying weapons. As an aside, I don't know where the idea of the "invading German army" comes from - unless you meant invading Yugoslavia or somewhere. The Battle of Britain had been won before the USA joined the war and we were defeating the Germans in North Africa. Mind you, Europe might have ended up a huge Russia - who knows? There is plenty to say about the second amendment but I don't see any evidence to support the view that it won WW2 because it enabled weapons production. There could be an argument that it provided a better soldier- because there is evidence that prior experience with firearms makes for a more effective soldier who is more likely to survive. Anyway, maybe this is taking the thread too far off track?
  5. Me neither. Happy to agree on that
  6. Yes, I agree! Thank you for coming back
  7. I think you will find that what you sent was mostly food, vehicles and other equipment - which was very welcome (and which we have now paid for in full). I don't think you can claim that the US arms industry is a result of the second amendment as much as the result of the second world war.
  8. And that's fine! I wasn't arguing against the second amendment. I was arguing about what happened during the revolutionary war and WWII (and whether the second amendment has much to do with protecting freedom).
  9. The first is guidance - not law! It's mainly to teach children some road safety Your second link is about local attempts to control Welsh people. They're a law unto themselves!
  10. I just noticed this. Sadly, Kuya, I think everything here is based on a myth. The reason you won the war of independence was ... the French. Even though we Brits were at war elsewhere and our sub-standard soldiers were vastly outnumbered, the Americans were being defeated until the French stepped in. http://www.cracked.com/article_20306_5-myths-about-revolutionary-war-everyone-believes.html Japan never had any serious plans to invade the USA in WW2. Their ambitions were in the Asia-Pacific region and they didn't think they could take Hawaii, let alone the entire USA. It would require a navy far greater than they ever had. They certainly didn't give a damn about some armed civilians. So, who are you protecting your freedom from? The rest of the free world? And how free are you... really? You have laws about how to cross a road and you can't even enjoy a beer on the beach. I don't feel very free whenever I go there, for sure.
  11. Well, there was always Ted Nugent and Joe Walsh. I'm not clear that what any of these celebrities said actually amount to "threats" though ... There were, however, a series of real threats (and attempts) ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_threats_against_Barack_Obama As far as the state of the dialogue is concerned, I believe we all (including the current President) share some responsibility for the current atmosphere.
  12. Before the thread goes over to another discussion about guns in America, I'd just like to say that there is a problem with political discourse, in my opinion. It's become almost tribal and much of it appears to me to revolve around the use of selective facts at best and deliberate lies at worst. The truth gets lost in the spin and the misinformation. With the rise of social media and the proliferation of the media in general there isn't enough factual news to fill the time available and sell the advertising, so the news is polluted with opinion pieces and we get to listen to the "news" that we choose to listen to. The result appears to be that we each end up living in a bubble of our own making. Maybe it was always this way, at least to an extent - we would buy the newspaper that reflects our own worldview - but it seems to me that we had better balance when I was younger, with more sources that would challenge the version of the news that we received from any one source. I'm now becoming aware that many people rely on Facebook and Twitter for their news - and both sources are unreliable, to say the least. I have a Facebook account. I barely post on it (I set it up to see what my kids were up to when they were younger, if I'm honest!) but I do look at it to keep up with what people are doing and to see any messages I have been sent. In the latest election, it struck me that I saw very few dissenting voices in my "news feed". It was dominated by one political point of view which likely reflected the type of people I "friended". I suspect this is true of most people, and it isn't good if we want a balanced view of the world and don't look elsewhere for that balance. We can also find ourselves thinking in a certain way about the world because we see things repeated and because memes can be powerful. But are they true? Let's take the "political hate" and violence thing, as that is what this thread is about. I believe that there are people at each end of the political spectrum who are violent. There are also people who are violent and/or disturbed, irrespective of their political leanings. They have always been with us and they could be stimulated into violence by the hyperbole and nonsense around the political discourse. However, the vast majority of people are NOT violent, even when they attend political protests. A protest can attract the violent and any violence will attract the media's attention, but I believe that most protesters are peaceful, from all sides. Is the rhetoric from the left violent and hateful? Well, yes, some of it is - and this isn't new. It comes from all sides of the spectrum, left and right. Yes, there was a version of Caesar put on in Central Park that had Caesar played by a Trump lookalike and that has caused some outrage. It is perhaps interesting to note that this isn't the first time the play has been staged using modern political figures - there was a version while Obama was President with an Obama lookalike and there has even been a version with a female lead, based on Hillary Clinton. It's a way of bringing the play into modern times and make us think about the story in a fresh way. However, as Cicero says in Act 1 Scene 3 "Indeed it is a strange-disposed time; but men may construe things after their fashion, clean from the purpose of the things themselves". What about Kathy Griffin and the severed head? It was poorly judged and wrong, of course. Is this type of stuff new? Well, let's see ... here are just a couple of examples ... It's not OK when either "side" does it. Has it always been this way and we are only now seeing it on a daily basis because it can be posted up so easily? Maybe. Does that encourage it to escalate so we see more of this kind of stuff? Maybe. Either way, it isn't OK. But we live in bubbles. Barneyboy says he didn't see anyone on the left condemning the shooting. All I saw was condemnations. Was Scalise the first person to be shot? Well, it brought to mind Gabrielle Giffords back in 2011 who was also shot by a deluded individual. There was some talk at the time that a Sarah Palinl ad could have inspired it - which was nonsense. Linking things that happen around the same time is something people do, but that doesn't mean there is any causal link. So, what's my point? I go back to the start - that there is a problem with political discourse (and with the increasing polarisation of society as we sink into our bubbles). I don't think it is about one side or the other and the vast majority of people are peaceful - but we all need to pay more attention to how we discuss our disagreements and we need to take far greater responsibility to question the memes and spin that surrounds us on a daily basis - to question what we are told and to make ourselves better informed.
  13. While there are a bunch of videos on YouTube that use each of these mics, I'm not sure they will tell you much. All of these mics are accurate and clear and will do a very similar job. The main differences you will likely hear will be because of mic placement, the room and the amount of gain - and any effects/EQ used. That said, here's some examples: AT2020 MXL 770 Shure Beta 87A Rode NT1A
  14. There's another one to consider! And HoboSage gets great results I have to say I also love my Shure SM7B, which is a dynamic mic but also outside the price range ... and not sure it's ideal on an acoustic - but it may depend on how often you record an acoustic guitar (which can be a bugger to record - finger-picking especially - let's be honest!)
  15. Those Shure mics are fine and the SM57 is a real workhorse - but maybe not what I would recommend for what RepeatingZero is going for right now, and at the budget he has set himself. Neither of the other two suggested are bad mics. They are both solid and well-built and both have great feedback. Both would handle the requirements set out quite well, I think. The AT2020 has no pad but does handle a higher SPL (max sound level than the 770). Yes, there are better mics out there but you would likely have to pay considerably more. The Rode NT1A is also good. I have one and it's quiet (doesn't create much self-noise), which is nice. I don't use it much these days because I have mics I prefer - and it could hype the highs a little for my taste - but it has a lot of fans. The truth is that there are lots of mics that will do the job and will do it perfectly adequately. You can spend a fortune if you want but, if I was to spend at this stage it would likely be on the interface and decent monitors (and pay attention to room treatment). There will be lots of calls on money and I would recommend taking time, spending once and focusing on the weakest link in the signal chain. That will probably not be the mic if you go for one of the suggested mics. When upgrading (which will happen) both would still have a place in the arsenal and the focus is likely to be on being able to select different patterns (figure-8, for example) to enable stereo recording and mid-side. That can all come later. For a good while, the AT2020 or the MXL770 (or the Rode NT1a) will absolutely do the job. Just be prepared that they are sensitive and you will be amazed at what you hear through them - like every sound in your house!