This could be the most boring blog post I’ve ever written. I thought I’d get that out of the way first thing. I’m not going to shy away from the boredom: I’m going to enjoy it. Nay, I’m going to revel in it. Bask in the banality, magnify the mundane. Strap yourselves in, dear readers, it’s going to be one hell of a dull ride.

There’s a reason for all this (thank Christ for that, I hear you sigh). You know that thing, when you’re using a certain program or website, and something odd happens? Something goes wrong. You hit a brick wall, and suddenly don’t know how to proceed. What do you do? Google search, of course. 99% of the time, you find a multitude of posts from other users, detailing the exact same problem, hopefully also illustrating a handy solution. Sometimes the solution comes from the program or site developer themselves, sometimes from a handy boffin. You rarely care. You just want your problem fixed. Nine times out of ten, it’s a bingo. One time out of ten: it’s a fail. But at the very least, you realise there are others out there who feel your pain and share your new belief that the program or site has a glaring error or limitation that – with any luck – the developer might fix, one day.

HOWEVER. A few weeks ago I discovered a problem that has seemingly gone unnoticed. Or maybe, as was suggested by my friend (let’s call him Mike – that is, after all, his name), it has been noticed, but I’m the only person who gives a fuck. Either way, there exists no helpful post on my subject anywhere on the interweb, much less a helpful solution. So I’m writing, I’m pretty certain, on virgin territory here. Not that I’m going to offer much of a fix. Pointless, you might think, and you’d have a point. If you want to stop reading now, I totally get it. You’ll certainly have much better things to do. But if you haven’t, read on.

You see, a month or so ago I transferred one of the podcasts I edit onto the American host Buzzsprout. Mike had recommended Buzzsprout to me, and to be completely fair, all the good things he’d told me about turned out to be (and continue to be) true: it’s user friendly, it makes it easy to plop your podcast on all the various listening platforms, it’s reliable, it’s got a decent social media player, the customer service is quick and friendly and there’s certainly no shortage of helpful FAQs and support posts on their site, not to mention newsletters and much informed, jolly communication. Indeed, helped by my general busy-ness and the fact that I’d just started using a new and unfamiliar model of headphones, I didn’t notice anything was amiss for around three weeks, instead basking in a general Buzzsprout honeymoon, oblivious to the strange thing that had been happening to all my precious, hard-worked-on audio.

At first I just thought my mixes were a bit whack. For various lockdown-related reasons I’m putting this show together largely from a bunch of iPhone recordings, so I’ve had to dive into the EQ pretty hard, and I’m quite used to episodes sounding a little different on the web to how they do playing straight from Logic. But this was something else. It sounded narrow, dull, flat. Not a crapness you’d necessarily notice playing out of laptop speakers or a little Bluetooth job, but on headphones it sounded boxy and, quite literally, monotonous. When I reached a section of the programme where I’d panned the two interlocutors quite nicely to left and right so the conversation would sound like, y’know, a real conversation, it finally hit me: is this sucker in mono?

A few quick tests proved that this was definitely the case. Swiftly I searched the Buzzsprout backend looking for a little box I’d forgotten to tick (“Is this 1965? No? Click here for stereo”), but to no avail. At this point, I performed the Google search I alluded to way back in paragraph two. (“Why is my Buzzsprout podcast in mono”, “Buzzsprout not in stereo”, “Buzzsprout, Mono, WTF” etc.) I did not find what I was expecting. What was I expecting? Forums, baby, forums. Some irate tech-head in Nottingham or Portland saying “Why the hell does Buzzsprout convert your files to mono?” along with either a quick fix (“Go to options/audio/mono and make sure the ‘convert my files to mono and make my episode sound like shit’ box is unchecked”) or a volley of sympathetic replies (“I know, right? It’s totally stupid”). All I found was a few links to the Buzzsprout techie pages, of which more below, and a few calm reviews, in which the file conversion was discussed only in the most general terms. Nowhere did I find anyone getting to the very crux of what I thought (and still think) is the most insane of actions: that the Buzzsprout processor is taking a stereo audio file and changing it to mono without telling anyone?

Because yes, Buzzsprout are not telling anyone. Which brings me to their techie pages. The top hit on my Google search was this page, which concerns an additional feature that I’d bumped into on the Buzzsprout backend but had happily dismissed as of no use to me: “Magic Mastering”, with which, for an admittedly not bank-breaking sum of $6 per month, a podcaster may have one’s episodes put through what Buzzsprout describe as an “Instagram filter for your audio”. Fair enough, I’d thought, but I don’t really need that. Anyway, now it popped up on my “Mono WTF?” search, I dutifully read the piece.

Let’s cut to the chase. Nowhere on this page is there a nice, clear statement like “All podcasts will be uploaded in mono. For stereo, use Magic Mastering.” The closest we get is: “Your episode will sound crisp, clear, well balanced” (italics mine) and some other rather oblique discussions of the benefits of mono or stereo encoding with Magic Mastering enabled, but nothing that clearly states your podcast will definitely be in mono if Magic Mastering is not enabled.

Consequently, I was still confused. I figured must be missing something. Surely? Why on earth would a podcast host in 2020 choose mono as a default? What is this, AM radio? So I returned to the Buzzsprout page with all the pricing plans. Much discussion of storage, permitted numbers of team members, uploading additional content and so forth, with each plan sporting the option of adding Magic Mastering. Needless to say, no little red flag saying, “p.s. everything is in mono”. So I messaged customer support.


Quickly (their customer support really is very responsive), I received this reply:


But, I replied. But But But. That effectively means I’d be uploading a stereo file, and paying $6 per month for it to remain in stereo. Nothing more. That doesn’t make any sense. Does it?

My correspondent admitted that this was indeed so, adding that:

Really? We don’t need stereo? Sorry, but I listen to podcasts all the time. I have about four regular shows that I follow religiously, along with plenty of occasionals. All are in stereo. You can tell. Podcast editors love to pan sounds around, piss about, have some fun. Often it’s the time we get to be creative. Only very rarely do I hear a (usually current affairs) programme during which it strikes me that, oh yeah, this one’s kinda lo-fi. Nor am I aware of any other podcast host that offers mono as a default. My previous host – indeed, it’s still my current host for a different podcast that I run – certainly uploads in stereo. It’s never been an issue. Whether it’s in stereo or not simply hasn’t occurred to me in years. That’s partly why I was so flabbergasted.

Don’t get me wrong. There’s nothing wrong with offering mono as an entry-level default – nothing much, anyway. I guess it’s a space-saving thing. Maybe the world is finally running out of servers. But what I object to is Buzzsprout being so underhand about it. If they said on their information page “all pricing plans offer mono uploading; for stereo, use Magic Mastering” – I would still have gone for Buzzsprout, as everything else about them is very good. I would have shrugged and thought, “Hey, $6 per month is a little silly, but whatever.” What I wouldn’t have done is wasted an entire evening wondering firstly what the fuck was wrong with my mix, then pissing around trying to find forums, decipher the Buzzsprout FAQs, emailing the customer support and so forth, then finally calling my producer and asking if we could spare another seventy bucks per year as, duh, I hadn’t yet noticed everything was in bloody mono.

I said all this, very politely, to the nice chatty customer service person. I asked them to forward my message to whoever wrote their blurb, urging them to come clean. At the very least, I said, it would waste a little less of people’s time. “Hey Tim!” came the endlessly sunny reply. “No problem! I will definitely pass that information along to the team!”

Call me a weary old cynic, but my very next thought was “yeah. RIGHT.”


In this Instagram-fuelled, selfie-driven world in which we live, the publication of a book can be somewhat lacking in funky assets. There are no action-packed photos of gigs or festival appearances, no phone snaps of ker-rayzee tour bus antics, no fascinating, intimate behind-the-scenes footage of recording studio creation.

All you get in bookland, if you’re lucky, is the occasional rubbish picture of a computer, with Word open at some unfinished page of text (usually accompanied by the hashtag #amwriting).

So it gives me great pleasure to finally have something to take a photo of. Through the door this morning came a box of THIS, and frankly I’m gonna enjoy myself.

Those who supported the campaign – THANK YOU – and you should be receiving/have received your books right about now…

The book can be bought HERE.




Tim pix by C.M.F. Thornton

Forgive me if this sounds a bit pathetic, but it takes a lot for a book to hold my attention these days. Like everyone, I’m frantic from seven ‘til eleven, and even if I do manage to catch a few minutes of downtime, sitting in a chair to read instantly makes me feel like a home counties housewife with a Mills & Boon novel. Even my traditional “guilt free” times for reading – in bed, on public transport, on the loo – are constantly threatened by that constantly threatening scourge of modern concentration: the smartphone. In order to compete with the latest cat video, Daily Mash article or even a rubbishy Buzzfeed list – not to mention my scintillating Twitter feed – that book in question has to be seriously good.

In fact, to struggle through a tome of any magnitude, I need the same feeling when I look at the book as the one I get from spying the last beer in the fridge, or the last piece of chocolate or slice of cheescake… “ooh, come on, I could have just a littlemore of that, couldn’t I?” I usually leave books I’m reading in my hallway, and if I don’t get tempted for a moment as I pass, to steal a cheeky half-minute to read a couple of paragraphs when I’m really supposed to be doing something else, there’s probably no point in bothering. Conversely, if I look at a book, sigh, and say to myself, “uh, well… I suppose I’d better crack on with that, hadn’t I…” – sorry, but off to the charity shop that book goes.

So it’s with particular pleasure that I can tell you about three absolute slam-dunk top-hole bangers of books that I’ve been lucky enough to consecutively read over the last few months. Each of them had me stopping every few pages – not to check Facebook or see if anyone had replied to my latest Guardian comment – but to gaze at the cover and marvel at how marvellous the book was, which is something I’ve been doing with all great books since I was about six years old. All three of them are labours of love, and are, in their own way, works of art, lovingly crafted and imaginatively published. And only two of them are about music. And here they are:

1. Sick On You – Andrew Matheson

You’ve read a hundred “bands trying to make it” books, but none of them is like this one. Two reasons. One is that it focuses on a rarely visited corner of British music: pre-punk, and I’m not talking about pub rock, I’m referring to the immediately post-sixties crop of anti-prog, glam-sceptic, anger-ridden, attitude-laden, year-zero noiseniks. The British New York Dolls, then. The Hollywood Brats, the group in question for whom our spiky narrator was the lead vocalist, were the classic also-rans, navigating their way past a bewildering list of stars both current (Cliff Richard, Keith Moon) and eventual (Queen) with Forrest Gump-like prescience, but zero success of their own. But it’s the second element that really lifts the book above all the other failed-careerographies you might encounter, and it is, simply, Matheson’s hilarious turn of phrase. Any examples I present will probably look a bit pants out of context but here’s a few: so boring is a house party thrown by the aforementioned Queen, we’re told that “for the first couple of minutes we think we’ve got the wrong house and instead have stumbled into a retirement party for a particularly dull Ecclesiastical Studies professor.” Describing an angry mafia-connected manager, Matheson doesn’t write “he looks a bit cross” but “the scientific instrument has yet to be invented that could measure the lack of mirth in his arrangement of stretched lips and gritted teeth.” My kind of writer. The book is stuffed with hysterical anecdotes – like all good music books, almost none of them are about the music itself – and I could be here all day trying to single the best out, but the tale of Matheson and bandmate breaking into a neighbouring disused shop to stop a perpetually ringing telephone is among the funniest I’ve heard all decade.


Sick On You. Crazy clothes, crazy book.


2. Good Night And Good Riddance – David Cavanagh

If I told you this book was an exhaustive description of 250 episodes of John Peel’s radio show spanning 35 years, you could be forgiven for thinking it sounded a bit speccy and earnest and solely of interest to hardcore Peel enthusiasts, but I can sure you it is nothing of the kind. Canavagh’s peculiar genius is that he’s woven Peel’s life events, the headline news stories of the day, the ups and downs of BBC Radio 1 and the music played on Peel’s show so deftly together that the whole thing reads like a riveting social drama. Will Peel eventually triumph over the fickle radio programmers? Will the various pop stars he’s helped make household names forget all about him? When will he be conquered by punk? Midway through the 90s when he’s asked to sit in for Jakki Brambles on her incredibly mainstream lunchtime slot, he’s lambasted by the listeners via fax (thank God Twitter didn’t exist) and snubbed by the regular daytime DJs (a particularly awkward encounter with Gary Davies). More so than any of the biographies about the man, we get to know Peel… really, really know him… his modesties, his wit, his weaknesses, his tastes, what it takes to (finally) make him angry. It’s nail-biting stuff, and a must for anyone wondering how we ended up with something as great as BBC Radio 6 Music, which often feels like one long John Peel show.


Good Night and Good Riddance. How rude.


3. The Good Immigrant – edited by Nikesh Shukla

Awesome though the above two books are, they didn’t quite provide the rollercoaster of highs and lows I’ve felt while reading this quintessentially 2016 document. Nikesh Shukla has been rightly hammering the promo for this book so it’s possible you’ve heard about it already, but let me add my own loud applause to the project: a collection of 21 essays, stories, articles and reflections by 21 Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic writers, exploring themselves, their families, their experiences, and how they perceive the attitudes towards them in the UK, both in the earlier parts of their lives and right now. Again, there might be people reading this who think that sounds, y’know, a bit worthy and unexciting, but largely due to the sheer sky-high quality of the writing, it most certainly is not. It’s a compelling and fascinating ride, often highly amusing, often heartbreaking, causing me to do no small amount of self-examination about my own views and social reflexes. Although I am probably the epitome of what my Dad used to refer to as a “bog-standard Brit”, I consider myself to be as open-minded, equal-opportunties-conscious and culturally respectful as people get (I live in Hackney, for God’s sake), but even I encountered descriptions of several bits of thinking or behaviour within the book that made me think: “Shit! I do that.” Wei Ming Kam’s article about challenging stereotypes, for example, made me ashamed of my passive assumptions that “model minority” East Asians are all “quiet and hardworking”. It had never occurred to me that, although the “third largest ethnic grouping in the UK”, it could be An Event when an East Asian is seen on British television, as Vera Chok’s essay suggests. The book is heaving with great stories and episodes that make you leap up and down with with rage or laughter, often both: Riz Ahmed’s brilliant tale of his acting auditions influencing the hassle he receives at airports, and vice versa; Varaidzo’s savagely witty “A Guide To Being Black”; Coco Khan’s charming, sad account of seduction and of local, casual racism; Daniel York Loh’s hilarious recollections of watching the mysterious masked wrestler Kendo Nagasaki on telly as a kid; and Nikesh Shukla’s own story of language misuse and abuse. J. K. Rowling has called the book “important and timely” and as usual I agree with everything she says; especially in this hatred-laden year, I wish I could upload the book straight into each British human’s brain and then give everyone a day off to think about it. In the absence of this magical ability, I urge you to buy it. Today.


The Good Immigrant. Way cool book, way cool cover.


One of the first things I thought I should do is read some books. Problem is, the most recent ones are published last year, and for good reason, I suppose, as the closer to the general election they were published, the sooner the books would be rendered obsolete. I guess the two books I picked are already kind of redundant, but I’m reading them anyway just to get thinking. I finished the first one last night.

Hugo Dixon is clearly quite a learned chap – a prominent financial journalist who was at the FT for a decade – and he probably knocked off this small reader over a wet weekend. Despite being called The In/Out Question it is essentially one long “in” argument, although Dixon does list extensive improvements he would make to the current system, none of which I expect would be as easily achievable as he suggests. He likes the single market, he likes the idea of the EU ratcheting up its competitive edge, he likes free movement between countries, he thinks it’s crucial for the EU (with the UK firmly included) to be a single, strong front in the face of huge growing markets like China; he acknowledges that Brussels can meddle too much and that red tape could be “cut” (a slightly awkward clash of idioms) and he hates the Common Agricultural Policy. His points are well-organised with plenty of statistics to back them up, but the writing is slightly flat and unpersuasive; I wonder whether this book would manage to turn any eurosceptic’s opinion around.

The other problem with the book is that it’s almost wholly economically focused. There are hardly any cultural points for good or ill, and the few which squeeze in are a bit perfunctory: when discussing how we as a country are culturally getting closer to the EU, the best proof he can muster is that “we are enjoying more and more continental food – tapas, wine, pasta, Greek yoghurt, you name it.” It could be a line out of a 1970s school textbook.

He also fails to convince us that free movement of people isn’t causing a serious problem in some parts of the UK, with the rather whimsical notion that “the more people experience cross-fertilisation [of cultures], the more people like it”, then going on to discuss how popular foreigners are in London. No shit, Hugo… but what about in Kings Lynn or Lowestoft?

The difficult thing for me is that I agree with most of what he says, and of course I want it all to be true and for everyone else to believe it too. But very little is spoken about “what if we don’t” vote to stay in the EU. One sole paragraph is dedicated to what would happen to UK citizens residing and working in the EU, and EU citizens residing and working in the UK, if we left; although Dixon does give oxygen to a dark concept that the country’s pro-Europe press would do well to bandy around a little more: namely, that we have no way of knowing how the rest of the EU will react to the UK leaving. They would be perfectly within their rights to tighten border controls, turf out Brits, make trading agreements tricky, the works. We have no reason to presume that our erstwhile union partners will simply say, “okay, fair enough, you’ve left, now let’s try and make it as easy as possible for you.” Quite the contrary – it may get decidedly spiky, especially if the UK start to play tough with euro migrants. That eurosceptic Tory MP with his holiday home in the Dordogne may well have to get a visa to visit it, in a worst case scenario – or even pay a hefty tax on it.

In short, The In/Out Question is a quick, worthwhile read if all you want to do is confirm your already pro-EU feelings. But as for convincing eurosceptics, or even swaying those on the fence, the pro-EU brigade are going to have to do a hell of a lot better than this.

Next: Europe: In or Out? by David Charter

Conversations can continue @timwthornton on Twitter.