How to Wreck a Nice Beach

How to Wreck a Nice Beach
By:Dave Tompkins
Published on 2011-11-08 by Melville House

The history of the vocoder: how popular music hijacked the Pentagon's speech scrambling weapon The vocoder, invented by Bell Labs in 1928, once guarded phones from eavesdroppers during World War II; by the Vietnam War, it was repurposed as a voice-altering tool for musicians, and is now the ubiquitous voice of popular music. In How to Wreck a Nice Beach—from a mis-hearing of the vocoder-rendered phrase “how to recognize speech”—music journalist Dave Tompkins traces the history of electronic voices from Nazi research labs to Stalin’s gulags, from the 1939 World’s Fair to Hiroshima, from artificial larynges to Auto-Tune. We see the vocoder brush up against FDR, JFK, Stanley Kubrick, Stevie Wonder, Neil Young, Kraftwerk, the Cylons, Henry Kissinger, and Winston Churchill, who boomed, when vocoderized on V-E Day, “We must go off!” And now vocoder technology is a cell phone standard, allowing a digital replica of your voice to sound human. From T-Mobile to T-Pain, How to Wreck a Nice Beach is a riveting saga of technology and culture, illuminating the work of some of music’s most provocative innovators. From the Hardcover edition.

This Book was ranked at 29 by Google Books for keyword Beach.

Book ID of How to Wreck a Nice Beach's Books is U964yxC-risC, Book which was written byDave Tompkinshave ETAG "XQfExmyicA0"

Book which was published by Melville House since 2011-11-08 have ISBNs, ISBN 13 Code is 9781612190938 and ISBN 10 Code is 1612190936

Reading Mode in Text Status is true and Reading Mode in Image Status is false

Book which have "352 Pages" is Printed at BOOK under CategoryMusic

This Book was rated by 3 Raters and have average rate at "3.0"

This eBook Maturity (Adult Book) status is NOT_MATURE

Book was written in en

eBook Version Availability Status at PDF is falseand in ePub is true

Book Preview

Do not you type of hate how we've joined the decadent period of Goodreads where probably fifty % (or more) of the evaluations written by non-teenagers and non-romancers are actually naked and unabashed in their variously effective attempts at being arc, wry, meta, parodic, confessional, and/or snarky? Don't you sort of wood (secretly, in the marrow of one's gut's happy druthers) for the good ol'days of Goodreads (known then as GodFearingGoodlyReading.com) when all opinions were consistently plainspoke Don't you kind of hate how we've entered the decadent phase of Goodreads whereby possibly fifty % (or more) of the opinions written by non-teenagers and non-romancers are now actually nude and unabashed within their variously powerful efforts at being posture, wry, meta, parodic, confessional, and/or snarky? Do not you sort of maple (secretly, in the marrow of one's gut's happy druthers) for the great ol'times of Goodreads (known then as GodFearingGoodlyReading.com) when all reviews were consistently plainspoken, just utilitarian, unpretentious, and -- especially else -- dull, boring, dull? Do not you sort of loathe when people claim'do not you think in this way or feel this way'in an attempt to goad you equally psychologically and grammatically in to agreeing together? In the words of ABBA: I do, I really do, I do(, I do, I do). Effectively, since the interwebs is really a earth where days gone by stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the present (and with fetish porn), we could review the past in its inviolable presentness any time we wish. Or at the very least till this website ultimately tanks. Consider (won't you?) Matt Nieberle's report on Macbeth in its entirety. I've destined it with huge rope and pulled it here for your perusal. (Please realize that several a sic are recommended in these reviews.) their actually complicated and silly! why cant we be examining like Romeo and Juliet?!?! at the very least that book is great! There you've it. Refreshingly, not a evaluation prepared in one of many witch's voices or alluding to Hillary and Statement Clinton or discussing the reviewer's first period. Just a primal yell unleashed in to the dark wilderness of the cosmos.Yes, Mr. Nieberle is (probably) an adolescent, but I admire his power to strongarm the temptation to be clever or ironic. (Don't you?) He speaks the native language of the idk generation having an economy and an understanding that renders his convictions much more emphatic. Here's MICHAEL's review of the exact same play. You may'know'MICHAEL; he is the'Problems Architect'at Goodreads. (A problematic title itself in so it implies that he designs problems... which can be the case, for several I know.) This book shouldn't be required reading... reading plays that you do not want to read is awful. Reading a play kinda sucks to start with, if it was meant to be read, then it would be a novel, not really a play. Along with that the teach had us students read the play aloud (on person for every character for a few pages). None of us had read the play before. None people wanted to read it (I made the mistake of taking the'easy'english class for 6 years). The teacher picked students that appeared as if they weren't paying attention. All of this compounded to create me pretty much hate reading classics for something similar to 10 years (granted macbeth alone wasn't the problem). I also hate iambic pentameter. Pure activism there. STOP the mandatory reading of plays. It's wrong, morally and academically. And yes it can definitely fuck up your GPA. There's no wasteful extravagance in this editorial... no fanfare, no fireworks, no linked photos of half-naked, oiled-up, big-bosomed starlets, no invented dialogues between mcdougal and the review-writer. It's simple and memorable. Being required to read plays is wrong, and in the event that you require anyone, under duress, to learn a play then you have sinned and will hell, if you rely on hell. Or even, you're going to the DMV. I'm also fed up with all you could smug spelling snobs. You damnable fascists with your new-fangled dictionaries and your fancy-schmancy spell check. Sometimes the passionate immediacy of an email overcomes its spelling limitations. Also, in this age when we are taught to respect each other's differences, this indicates offensively egocentric and mean-spirited to expect others tokowtow in your petty linguistic rules. Inspired manifestation may free alone no matter how you attempt to help shackle it. That is certainly ones cue, Aubrey. With my personal thoughts and opinions, the actual participate in Macbeth has been the worste peice possibly provided by Shakespeare, this says considerably thinking of also i read the Romeo plus Juliet. Ontop of it's presently fabulous plot of land, unrealistic characters along with absolutly discusting pair of morals, Shakespeare freely molds Lady Macbeth for the reason that true vilian in the play. Taking into consideration she is mearly the particular voice throughout the trunk rounded and also Macbeth themself is usually truely choosing a gruesome offenses, which includes killing along with fraudulence, I wouldn't discover why it's so easy to visualize in which Macbeth would probably be willing to do very good in lieu of nasty only if her girl were being extra possitive. In my opinion that this perform is definitely uterally unrealistic. But the subsequent is undoubtedly this ne furthermore super involving typical e book reviewing. While succinct as well as without the distracting interest to be able to coyness or cuteness, Jo's critique alludes to your anger thus profound it is inexpressible. Just one imagines some Signet Vintage Editions broken into so that you can portions together with pruning shears in Jo's vicinity. I detest this particular play. It's that I cannot perhaps supply you with any analogies or perhaps similes regarding the amount of I detest it. A strong incrementally snarkier kind could have claimed something like...'I detest this participate in like a simile I can't appear with.' Not Jo. She echoes your natural, undecorated truth of the matter unhealthy with regard to figurative language. As well as there's certainly no problem with that. When with a fantastic when, when you're getting neck-deep in dandified pomo hijinks, it is an excellent wallow while in the pig pencil you're itchin'for. Thank you, Jo. Everyone loves you and the futile grasping at similes which can't method your bilious hatred within your heart. You will be my own, and also I am yours. Figuratively chatting, with course. And already and here is my personal examine: Macbeth by simply William Shakespeare is the greatest fictional operate inside the English vocabulary, in addition to anybody who disagrees can be an asshole and a dumbhead.