that most people are good people, that trust is more often repaid than abused, and that the Oxford comma is a good thing.

What do you believe?

And what do you know?

Not an original sentiment and not even one that everyone would agree with but here's my justification:

Browsing the Quietus site I came across an interview with Tim Burgess talking about Felt (the band/eccentric chap from Birmingham). Didn't really know their stuff so I headed over to Spotify where I discovered the really quite marvellous "Primitive Painters" featuring Liz Fraser.

Shuffle then took me to "Felt" by Felt, which at first sounded a bit odd - not the shimmering proto-indie majesty I was expecting. Further research revealed this Felt to be an early-70s blues-rock outfit from America and by God, what a corker of an album - a bit Beatles-y (Beatles-ish?) in places, with slight prog nods.

Anyway, judge for yourselves: http://open.spotify.com/album/2CIw4USIt4seYX2G8o2O50

I know there are a few photography buffs on here so I was hoping someone could help with some basic advice. I've had a digital camera for a few years now and I've been happily snapping away with the resolution set to maximum (8mp). I've never bothered printing any of my photos, though I may want to in the future, but have recently started using Flickr. What I've found is that my free Flickr account is rapidly being used up because most of my photos are around 1.2 - 1.6 MB in size. What I'm trying to find out is what is the optimum size for photos to be for viewing on screen and/or printing? I assume there is some formula for the amount of pixels needed for a 6x4 print, for example? Or should I be changing the size of the picture that I take rather than the resolution? And what is the relationship between the two?

Sorry to be so "asky". I promise to be more "answery" in any thread I can.

lead me to this:

"She also played Dina in La Passione, a feature film based on the life of Chris Rea."

I'm not asking you to identify the "she" in question. I'm not asking if you've seen the film. I am asking: have you ever come across a sentence that completely blew your mind like this did to me? A film based on the life of Chris Rea? I know nothing about him or his life, or even if this sentence is actually true but still, a film based on the life of Chris Rea? WTF?

Repeated from 2008, I missed this first time around, but am enjoying the repeat. Available on iplayer if anyone missed it/fancies watching it again.

Brought to mind a question: could Elvis really play the guitar? Obviously he could strum a bit and throw it around a lot, but was it the guy behind him who did most of the work?

Alan Yentob stated that in his hands (Elvis', that is) the guitar was more than just an instrumnt, but did he mean it was transported to another level of musical possibilities or that it became a prop as well as a way of conveying a tune?

but it's amazing what slowing a song down by 800% can do.
J. BIEBZ - U SMILE 800% SLOWER by Shamantis

Any other tracks that might benefit from this approach?

As a Welshman I reserve the right to not care about football much. I do care about quality reportage though, so I visit the Big Picture website quite often. Their latest collection centres on the World Cup - http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/06/opening_weekend_-_2010_world_c.... - and is packed full of great photographs. I couldn't help but notice though, the one photo that, to quote Sesame Street, wasn't like the other ones. It's number 27. I won't embed the picture as the site is well worth a visit.

Now, why would they pick this photo rather than any of the many others that would show an entirely different take on English fans?

Is this the absolute best shot that summarises the reality of English football fandom?

Or is this a journalistic cheap shot that was designed to confirm the prejudices of football fans around the world?

Nine steps from Squarepusher to Gene Pitney. Thought it would be more.

Do better, or worse, here - http://labs.echonest.com/SixDegrees/index

A recent sort-out chez ceepee unearthed a couple of books by Mark Blackaby, "Look what they've done the the blues" and "You'll never be here again". I remember enjoying them greatly when they came out (mid 90s) and have put them aside for a re-read just as soon as I clear the backlog (which, if you're interested, includes "Gig" by Simon Armitage, "The secret vanguard" by Michael Innes, the new Nick Cave and the first of that series by the scandi writer who died, something about dragon tattoos and hornets, I think.

Anyway, my curiosity was aroused so I Googled "Mark Blackaby" to see if he had written anything else and was surprised to find virtually no internet record of him at all, other than bibliographic listings of those two books. No biography, no website, no wikipedia entry. I admit to getting slightly obsessed at this point and spent a couple of hours going many pages deep in Google but to no avail. Unless he is now a roofing contractor or lawyer in the US, or wrote to Silentnight asking for mattress advice, he seems to have disappeared.

So, two questions - does anyone know of him or his work, and has anyone developed a similarly fruitless minor obsession?

I've just bought my chum a gift subscription for the mag. He's very keen on the Tindersticks and is hoping that you will review their latest album. So as not to disappoint him on his maiden voyage, could this be arranged?

Ta.

PS: Doesn't have to be a positive review - anything will do.

Having once dared to opine that the mag, that month at least, wasn't as good as it sometimes was, may I be the first* to congratulate the team on the excellence of the new issue, the CD and the new website design.

Hat doffed.

*Probably not actually.

Not a specific question, this (unless someone happens to know what tracks were used in the recent episode of Jonathan Meades' new show?), rather a general wondering if any "insiders" from the music industry/TV production fields have any idea why it is so difficult to find out what music is used in the background of TV programmes?

The aforementioned programme included two or three tracks that sounded very much like the sort of thing I like. Keen to hear more I headed to the BBC site to investigate, but no joy. Further delving revealed an FAQ that said that the BBC couldn't help with enquiries about music used on their programmes!

Why the hell not? It can't be that difficult or time-consuming to knock up a list of tracks and stick it on a web page, can it? Surely the programme makers know what music they've used?

Or is there some other reason? Would the BBC be "advertising" if they listed the tracks? Any ideas?

This is taken from an article here - http://thequietus.com/articles/02313-dirty-projectors-the-curse-of-brook.... I have no idea about the "scene" that is being referred to but this line made me think - is this true or even close to the truth?

What do you think - have the working class (or upper class for that matter) really made no appreciable contribution to the world of rock?

I work in marketing (but it's for good things I promise) and in an idle moment I had a couple of ideas that I think would work on this already excellent site (OBN).

Firstly, how about an alternative listing of blog posts that just shows the titles without the post itself? This could be customisable so that you could see as many or as few as you like per page. I often remember interesting posts from days or weeks ago that I'd like to revisit but can't face scrolling through pages and pages to find them. I know I can search or track posts but sometimes I forget.

Secondly, how about a rolling survey on the monthly CD? Sadly, I actually mocked something up using Survey Monkey - http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=qlbhL0SnOdJEYEem2qEFMw_3d_3d - feel free to take part.

This could be updated as and when we buy tracks or albums and could be used to make the case to those in the industry who don't see the worth of providing tracks for promotional purposes. It would also show which tracks were the most or least popular and which artist got the most benefit of being included on the Word CD.

I for one would be more than happy to fill out a survey each month if it would help guarantee the continued existence of this fantastic bonus item.

Any thoughts?

that there is no such thing as "rubbish" music. Sure, there is lots that may be uninspired, derivative or not to ones taste, but I can't think of anything I've heard that I would describe as rubbish. By that I mean something that falls below an acceptable standard, either in the playing of instruments or vocal ability. Live performance would probably be a different matter, and lyrics also, but in terms of recorded music is there anything that is truly rubbish?

Compare, for example, music with TV programmes or films which can have rubbish scripts and rubbish acting, or books which can have rubbish plots, characterisation or writing. I come across these all the time and switch off or put down, but as music, at it's very simplest, can be one chord lightly strummed, I find I can listen to it no matter how basic or lacking in skill. Even the stuff I don't like I can listen to, and I can't say the same for rubbish in other artforms.

So, is there any rubbish music?