(no subject)
Nov. 21st, 2003 11:17 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wispfox[Boston-centric post]
The fact that the MBTA is intending to prevent subway musicians from using equipment which can drown out the Public Address system doesn't bother me nearly as much as the fact that they are also planning to charge $25 for an annual performance permit.
Now, I don't personally know anyone playing the subways, but I can't imagine that having to pay $25/year to perform is going to do anything but make there be fewer musicians who will be playing in the subways - based soley on available funds, and not on actual ability. Personally, I enjoy the fact that there are musicians playing in there. It's a pleasant distraction from waiting around for the next train, even if I have brought a book with me.
I admit that I am not very aware of what an effect this will actually have, and realize that it's entirely possible that $25 is not really that bad. But it's still concerning, I think.
The fact that the MBTA is intending to prevent subway musicians from using equipment which can drown out the Public Address system doesn't bother me nearly as much as the fact that they are also planning to charge $25 for an annual performance permit.
Now, I don't personally know anyone playing the subways, but I can't imagine that having to pay $25/year to perform is going to do anything but make there be fewer musicians who will be playing in the subways - based soley on available funds, and not on actual ability. Personally, I enjoy the fact that there are musicians playing in there. It's a pleasant distraction from waiting around for the next train, even if I have brought a book with me.
I admit that I am not very aware of what an effect this will actually have, and realize that it's entirely possible that $25 is not really that bad. But it's still concerning, I think.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-11-21 10:29 am (UTC)When I first heard about the MBTA plans, I thought, well, OK, sounds sensible, and some of those amp'd performers can be awfully loud. But my suspicion is that the MBTA is using "security" and "need to hear the Public Address" as a smokescreen.
First, as noted, most of the announcements are indecipherable anyway. Second, look at the actual restrictions on musicians... In addition to license fees and complete prohibition of any amps or horns (two acoustic-guitar-playing friends tell me it generally isn't possible to be heard in the subway without amplification), musicians can play only in "designated locations" (which doesn't sound bad in principle, but turns out to mean "shunted away from the main groups of people").
So if it's not about security, what is it? Apparently (and I don't how much of this is rumor and how much fact) the MBTA is planning on putting in closed-circuit TVs, since they can make money off the ad revenue. Is that is in fact the case, then the MBTA is scum. I prefer even bad subway musicians to force-fed TV.
(I wonder if the TV volume will automatically be muted when there are Public Address announcements? Any bets?)
no subject
Date: 2003-11-21 11:50 am (UTC)TV in public places = EVIL!
(just in case you were wondering about my feeling on the matter)
It's much more difficult to read or hold a conversation or think if there is a TV playing near me. I hope that's not *really* what they plan to do...