Santa Monica Civic Auditorium

A few friends and I just caught the Silversun Pickups at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. Since I see a good deal of shows in the LA area, I figured I should start sorting them out.

Venue:

1855 Main Street Santa Monica, CA 90401-3209

Just off the 10 and easy to get to, the SMCA is in the heart of the city close to the beach. There’s ample parking in a next door pay garage and there’s no hassle getting inside. The interior structure looks like a 50s era bomb shelter- it is laid out like a theater but has little imagination or noticeable decoration. The plain cement walls and cement seating/steps are so bland that it would even be embarrassing for a high school pep rally. As with most shows, the AC didn’t do a very good job keeping the crowd cool on the General Admission floor but it was nice to be able to go outside in the front grounds for some fresh air. All in all the venue is pretty convenient.

Show:

The light show was top notch. I’m not sure how much of this had to do with Silversun’s set up but there were great visuals with modern lights. It was a simple layout too so I’m sure the limits could be pushed on this end. That said, it’s hard to judge the speaker system because the whole place is encased in cement and echoes like crazy. I have to say, especially considering the fairly large open space the crowd was standing in, the music was completely destroyed by the horrible acoustics. I love the band and am familiar with all their songs and it was sometimes hard to discern what was going on. I don’t know if everything could be blamed on just the echoes, either. At times the back up singer would chime in or a guitar solo would start and it took several seconds of silence before the volume was adjusted to the proper mix. Just awful for a great album that I wanted to enjoy live.

Drinking:

Now to the important part. Drinks were served outside and they had good bottles like Sailor Jerry’s available. Prices weren’t too bad and lines were plentiful and decently sized. We did generally wait about 5-7 minutes to order but it was pleasant standing and socializing in the front yard anyway. Pours were pretty good too. There was a food counter inside but it didn’t look appealing and no one was bothering.

Mixology

The modern cocktail is a funny thing. Just over 10 years ago a mixed drink was either a highball or one of a select few classics. Nothing additional was provisioned for by bars or requested by drinkers. This state of drinking had remained relatively unchanged over the previous 50 years when vodka was popularized and beer was lightened. And things had gotten pretty bleak. It was time for a change.

The mixology movement didn’t happen all at once and, despite its predisposition towards pretentiousness, was the natural momentum of passion for the drink. Along with the craft beer industry, mixology ushered the 21st century into an alcohol renaissance. Society agrees that everybody wins when you can equate drinking with enlightenment (as long as it’s not the kind of enlightenment that happens when you drink three bottles of wine, pass out, and hit your head on the coffee table). So how have things changed?

The old bar

It’s easy to pick on dives but that’s not where I’m going here. You tried the new Irish pub with the fancy woodwork and all you got were the same old beers. You went to the fancy steakhouse with the ‘sophisticated’ lounge and the same overdone cocktails were on the menu. Of course more rare and complex drinks existed but, as far as the vast majority of these bars were concerned, if you weren’t getting a martini or Bloody Mary then your vodka was either coming with soda or tonic. There’s nothing wrong with these options individually but as a whole they were limiting.

 

The modern bar

Nowadays, it’s hard to find a nice place without at least a few ‘house drinks’. Sexy cocktails in cool glasses with nice presentation appeal to women, and women appeal to men. It’s a simple recipe to broaden the appeal of the bar. But if it’s so obvious, why has it taken so long? Well, cocktails are a business and stocking and training is the expense. Limes, lemons, olives, and corn syrup cherries are not going to cut it anymore. Actually keeping fresh ingredients and making sure your employees know what to do with them isn’t automatic. It’s something that needs to be planned, managed, and presented properly. But it’s worth it, as the payout is a higher profit margin.

The old new

Before when I said drinking hadn’t changed a whole lot in 50 years, I kind of lied. You see, there has been an interesting twist to drinking all along that we’ve always known about- doing shots. In a way, modern cocktails are a natural progression of the more complicated shooters of yesterday. And they existed for the same reasons: making drinking more interesting and varied, blunting the bite of the alcohol, fun and creativity. But what was generally lacking was sophistication. The modern mixology movement is about these mixed shots growing up and looking elegant in a stately glass. Add a stalk of lemongrass and it’s just downright fancy!

The movement

So that brings us to mixology. Bartenders coming up with creative ways to mix new ingredients. I think this all started with rediscovering the roots of the cocktail. The speakeasy movement that started in New York brought back the old timey charm of fresh ingredients and classic liquors. I like the speakeasy scene, I really do. The style and focus on vintage and quality is great but there is an over reliance on bitters, disrespect of vodka, and not enough interest in the modern. The danger here is that drinks are made more for novelty purposes than for enjoyable consumption. While I’m trying not to make a negative blanket statement about ALL speakeasy bars, it is easy to see why newer cocktails outgrew this style.

Now many mixologists are not just looking at old ingredients but trying to find new ones. New liqueurs are increasingly added to the mix (a move some old-school bartenders refer to as "cheating"). High tech mixes are interesting as are the fresh ingredients but the 12 ingredient cocktails are simply too complex for most drinks besides shared punchbowls. Not that all bars are guilty of this and there are definitely some exceptions but, in general, simpler is better. We are already starting to see cocktails pop up that are the bartending equivalent of molecular gastronomy. It’s kind of cool to make something that no one thought was possible but again, the real priority should be on the drinkability and long term sustainability of the cocktail.

As a side note, do you ever wonder where these terms like mixology come from? I mean, why not mixtronomy? Yes, I kind of like the sound of that. And instead of mixologist, can’t we call a bartender a mixican? Hmm, maybe that one doesn’t work so well.

Tech Sites

Obviously I don’t hate important or material analysis but anyone who barely casually kinda glances at any one of a number of popular tech sites on the web knows that they are going to be inundated with trivial coverage of Apple minutia. Speculation on the next iPhone with or without concrete facts? Check. Name-dropping Steve Jobs months after his death for desperate attempts at page views? Check. Can someone explain why the stock went up, down, or stayed exactly the same? Check.

You can identify a bad quality tech site when half of their articles are Apple focused. You can still somehow read a new piece about Steve Jobs every day if you subscribe to only a handful of feeds. Is the iPhone a big deal? Of course, and the fact that so many people own one make its mention excellent link bait, but there’s not really any interesting news to get out of most of these tidbits. While many of them are stock price analysis and new technology speculation, many others are inane bullshit.

If a new Apple commercial comes out you can be sure that a brave and responsible journalist will rise to the task of telling us about it. New actors pushing Siri? An old commercial getting taken down from the YouTube channel? There are some high profile respectable sites getting caught up in places they would be better to avoid.

I get the fact that Apple is moving a lot of merchandise and money these days and they will naturally be the topic of conversations, but that doesn’t mean that a dialog is always warranted. Instead of reporting legitimate news, websites are generating their own stories to cash in on Apple’s popularity. I had to straight up stop following some tech sites because they were spamming my Pulse reader harder than Twitter. This article, not counting the joke at the end, is a 3 sentence drive-by-gossiping about a possible new iPhone charger.

Bang up job there, bro.

What about rumor articles like this?

‘Maybe’ isn’t generally a word that screams journalistic integrity. The article goes on to say that there are other rumors pointing at 2 other companies, which is essentially just admitting that it’s a slow news day.

This is why I’ve really started respecting Ars Technica as a site with good info. They really seem to be above the pandering and go out and analyze interest topics. Of course, I’ve recently realized they’re not quite so perfect either. It’s not so much that there’s an article talking about hating a new line of Apple commercials– after all, hating is what I almost exclusively do here- but the signature of the article made me cringe.

Senior Apple Editor? Ugh. With narrow positions like that, who could really blame her for inventing stories to stay relevant?