“The Economics Of Fast Food”

chit-chat from the Chainsaw--
an irregular feature
by a. cerda

As a Dollar Menuaire, the McDouble pisses me off. And not just because it robs me of an extra piece of cheese. It’s because… well, okay, it’s because it robs me of an extra piece of cheese. But I refuse to be hoodwinked by the clown. Why does getting that extra piece of cheese cost me 19 cents when a regular cheeseburger only costs 10 cents more than a regular hamburger?

The math doesn’t add up, especially the more you break it down. Okay, let’s assume each slice of cheese really costs 19 cents. Now a McDouble is only a penny more than a regular cheeseburger. That means each patty only costs a penny. So that leaves 79 cents covering the bun, pickle, ketchup, mustard, and whatever other condiments they throw on there.

Now, we know condiments really can’t cost much otherwise restaurants and sporting venues across the nation wouldn’t offer them so freely. Let’s give an estimate of about 10 cents for condiments. Now, we’re down to 69 cents for bun and pickle.


An 8-pack of hamburger buns generally goes for about $1.50, meaning each bun is about 19 cents. If my math is correct (which it is, unlike my logic), that means the pickle is costing me about 50 cents. That’s outrageous! Especially since I order mine without a pickle. I want my 50 cents back, clown.

By the way, why is it that two 4-piece pack of chicken nuggets is not only cheaper than one 6-piece pack, but you also end up getting two sauces instead of one? Maybe if McDonalds wasn’t losing money hand over fist in the McNugget department, they could put the double cheeseburger back on the dollar menu.


from the McDonald's official Web site FAQ:
"What if I order a McDouble with an extra slice of cheese. Then it would only be $1, right?
No. If you order the McDouble with an extra slice of cheese, you will be charged for the extra slice of cheese. Nice try, though!"

(Ed. Why the dickish tone?)

How Pitchfork is killing "alternative"

Through top-notch writing and reviews, pitchfork.com has become the premier internet resource for all things music, especially for acts that don't show up on the mainstream pop culture radar. That being said they have effectively crippled underground, alternative or whatever you want to call it.

They have done this not by HOW they review, but by WHAT. For example:

1) They review mostly stuff that is very polished or heavily buzzed. This shuts out a lot of acts with unproven yet redeeming qualities, especially when compared to the ink/ love something like Maximum Rock n Roll gives a lot of unknowns.

2) Because of what they review, they create the mentality that image and polish are more important than the music itself.

3) Some accuse the web site of promoting style or personality over substance-- giving props to acts based solely on charisma.

So-called indie, underground or whatever has become very poppy and very trendy in this post-Pitchfork age. I hate to sound like an ol' timer but "alternative" used to be about being different or weird. Now-- its about having a different brand or image.

Like the financial sector, the advent of Pitchfork becoming the premier taste-maker for the music industry has lead to another "boom and bust" industry. Acts and genres are sequentially built up and torn down. Music doesn't seem to evolve organically anymore with Pitchfork-reading hipsters across the lands glomming on to the latest trend (or in Buffalo, last year's trend (oh BTW, it's been over for a few years now-- GIVE IT UP STONER ROCKERS!!!)) only to see it blow up in their face.

The last serious rock movement was the garage revival earlier this decade, which, by the way, was based entirely on the rebooting of old ideas. Meanwhile, micro/minimal techno seems to have turned the page on electronic music, trendiness be damned. These two examples show ground swells in "pop" music still exist, however substantive, yet it remains to be seen if the snowballing of underground trends via Pitchfork hype will have an effect on music in the long run.

On hiatus til May-ish

this being my last semester and a busy one, silo3 will be on hiatus until late spring. sorry to those looking for their stories to appear. they will in due time.

-BS

Podcast: Stay Lows in Studio

Silo3 was lucky enough to recently get invited into the studio with the Buffalo indie-veterans the Stay Lows. Jeff, Jim, Rick and Brandon answered a few questions between reviewing rough mixes for their upcoming album, tentatively titled The Signature Bridge. This is the first in a series of Silo3 podcasts.


Always well-documented, the band can be seen in action here.

RRIICCEE RREEVVIIEEWW @ Soundlab 9/25

photo from rriiccee.com

Vincent Gallo, who put Buffalo on the hipster map with his movie Buffalo '66, bought his musical project in RRIICCEE back to Soundlab last Thursday. While Gallo's past musical collaborators in other projects include Sean Lennon, Jim O'Rourke, Eric Erlandson and legendary New York artist, Jean-Michel Basquiat, the current RRIICCEE line-up includes less recognizable names in brothers Nikolas and Simon Haas. Gallo describes RRIICCEE as, "a gesture of composing and performing at the same time, always hoping to avoid musical cliché or jamming... when we play live, the music is often created during the performance."

Upon descending the Soundlab steps Thursday night, it looked like Gallo had planned everything except the music. Seven rows of black folding chairs had been arranged in rows facing the stage, with a narrow, de facto walkway cutting the rows through to the back of the room. A drum set, synthesizers, amplifiers and guitars were set up in front of a white screen. The stage was completely lit by fluorescent light-- an island in the dark, subterranean Soundlab performance space.

RRIICCEE took the stage without opening act, the first song built up from guitar noise loop into abstract trip-hop. Throughout the set, the band also touched on elements of jazz, tropicalia, electronica and rock. Some of the songs had vocal melodies, a hint that some of the music is written beforehand. The music felt, at times, like the score to a film playing just behind the stage. Returning to trip-hop before the end of the set, Canadian emcee Buck 65 dropped a few freestyle verses over RRIICCEE's bed of minimal-ambient sounds.

photo from buck65.com

After playing about only 40 minutes, with no opening act, some people were grumbling about the ticket price after the show. Some were probably hipster-suckers, looking for a celebrity experience or Gallo photo-op. At $20 a pop, without hearing a single song they recognized, no doubt a lot of people were asking themselves-- who the fuck is Vincent Gallo anyway?

"Wait, I’m Not Even A Registered Voter… Am I?"

chit-chat from the Chainsaw--
an irregular feature

picks up on the theme of my recent mySpace blog...

Now, normally I don’t do many political rants ‘cause I’m not the type of guy to offer an opinion on something he doesn’t know a lot about. Oh, no, wait, that’s exactly the type of guy I am. And as long as I think I’m right, I probably am. Hey, if that philosophy works for George Dubya, it’ll work for me.

I just have to get it off my chest. Sarah Palin bugs me. Really, really bugs me. More so than any other candidate. Why? you might ask. Is it because she’s a woman? Well, pretty much, yeah. I’m not afraid to admit that my voting preferences are based on genitalia. That’s why I supported Hillary. She had the biggest balls of all the candidates.

Honestly, I have nothing against Palin personally. I just disagree with her on every issue. She’s anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, pro-drilling, pro-war, pro-moose hunting, anti-polar bear, and I’m pretty sure she voted for David Archuleta. And I’m sick of hearing guys referring to her as a MILF. I mean, yeah, she is, but so is Denise Richards, and I wouldn’t want her leading the country.

And let’s not overlook the lack of experience factor. Her only major political experience is two years as governor of a state whose entire population consists of ten Eskimos and several caribous. I guess it’s all a moot point, anyhow. Our votes won’t matter come November. With the way the Electoral College is set up, no matter which candidate gets the most votes, George Dubya will win again.

--A.L. Cerda

Roger Bryan on 'Recovery'

As he eases back into the beige-ing faux-fur couch in his second-floor practice space above Main Street, Roger Bryan takes a drag from a freshly lit cigarette. "It just reached a point where it really wasn't going to work the way it was," he explains.

In 2004, Roger would help start a band that would consume his creative energies for the next four years of his life, the Old Sweethearts. The band would go on to produce two proper releases. "When the Sweethearts first came together," he says, "it was a pretty inspiring period of time."

Grabbing a Miller High Life from a small dorm refrigerator a few feet away, Roger heads back to the couch as he describes how the band would fall apart as lost momentum gave way to dwindling creative drive and weakening relationships. The situation was further strained by guitarist Andy Vaeth’s commitment to his other band, the power trio Johnny Nobody. As the weeks, months and years passed Roger became increasingly frustrated.

"By the time we'd started the third record, it had been two years," he says. "Also, the 'new' songs we were recording, we had been playing all along (this period of time)."

Perhaps for a shot at redemption or maybe for closure-- Roger was inspired by this time in his life: the long, slow deaths of an important relationship between himself and the band as a whole; between himself and his band mates. This inspiration found its way into the songs on his second full-length as a solo artist, Recovery.

Although his backing band, the Orphans, includes some familiar faces, ex-Sweethearts Jeff Pietrzak and Erik Roesser, he wanted an otherwise fresh approach to Recovery. The new songs were shorter and faster. The band was recorded mostly live and in a few takes. Recording in guitarist Matt Smith's Hi/Lo Studio, the band entered the sessions without any preconceived notions on how the record would sound. The only predetermined goal, says Roger, was to finish the record with a sense of urgency and within a year from when the first songs were written. The results were better than he had expected.

"Everyone brings a very high level of play... we're lucky to all be on the same page," he says. "It was extremely refreshing, especially after years of sitting around."

Roger Bryan and the Orphans cite both Crazy Horse and the Replacements as strong influences, which can be heard throughout much of the album. The folky-garage of "This Song" punctuates distant, sing-a-long verses with searing guitar lines that flicker up like campfire. The 90’s alt-pop meditation of “If we fall” finds the band I an up-tempo gear, swapping melancholy for bitter-sweet.

And on an album filled with rebukes and flat-out regrets, Roger feels out for redemption on the record-closer “Full Reverse”, as Crazy Horse guitars wash over his scratchy vocal lines. Where he and the Orphans go from here is anyone’s guess.