SUPPORT MUSIC IS NOT A GENRE ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

FEATURED MUSIC:

The Drop – “Hey Bulldog” (Beatles cover)

There is very little anyone can say about the Beatles that hasn’t been said before. They’ve been talked about, written about, critiqued, analyzed & dissected, loved & hated, memorialized & revitalized, covered & copied, and have influenced more musicians than even the musicians themselves realize. But do they deserve it?

If you think that question even needs to be asked, you should probably stop reading and return to whatever sick cave of self-hatred you live in. Yes, it’s possible to not be into the Beatles, to even dislike them. But no one with a working brain – and more importantly, working heart – can possibly suggest that they don’t deserve every bit of attention & praise they’ve gotten. It’d be like saying Bach was a trite & repetitive hack, or all Mozart really did was coopt other people’s ideas.

Personal opinions aside, the Beatles are objectively one of the greatest creators of music in the thousands of years of recorded history. They’ve infiltrated most cultures in ways few other creators of any art have. At this point, it’s more surprising when someone hasn’t heard of them or at least one of their songs. They just are.

This is not my definitive episode on the Beatles. In fact, I won’t be discussing much of their actual music at all. This week, my focus will be on three things:

1. The books in my collection, and the plethora of Beatles books (and movies, TV shows & other media) in general: what they contribute to the greater discussion, and what else possibly could be brought to light by new books – cuz we all know they’re coming;

2. The idea that the Beatles are more than just a band; they’re a near-universal Rorschach test, a way to suss out what kind of a person someone is based on their relationship to the Beatles. Specifically, which Beatles period resonates with you, which one defines what the Beatles are to you, can determine not just the rest of your musical taste. It can also shed light on how you see and relate to the world at large.

3. That the most valuable new thing anyone can say about the Beatles is what they think & feel. Their opinion, assessment, focus, emotion is a unique mix, no matter how much is shared with others. In fact, it’s that combination of uniqueness and commonality that does exactly what the Beatles intended: spread love & connection through music.

As a music creator, and a member of PreFab 4 – one of the better Beatles cover bands (NOT a tribute band), I count the Beatles as my favorite band, and love that I can discover more about them almost every day. That’s a hint to WHY so many books, movies, shows, covers are inspired by the Beatles. We want to feel what we felt – or what fans alive enough to experience it firsthand felt. We want to recapture & reanimate the life & magic that once was. But we can’t. Not really. Nothing we do now will ever fully satisfy that want. Which is why we always want more.

FOR THE FULL TEXT AND MORE, GO HERE

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT ME ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

This is the first of a two-part interview with Bridget Hogan - classical singer, actor & teaching artist, and recently named Artistic Director for Reaching for the Arts.

Her credits include roles at: New York City Opera, San Diego Opera, New York City Ballet, Opera NJ, & Resonanz Opera; and oratorio/concert performances at: Carnegie Hall, Toronto Sinfonia, Windsor Symphony Orchestra, Summit Music Festival, & Ocean Grove Music Festival. She also founded Silver Thread Productions, a company that produces small scale, integrated arts works.

To see and hear more of Bridget, go here:

La Voix Perdue – a one-woman show loosely based on the life of Teresa Stratas

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT ME ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

FEATURED SONG: REC – “Gold” (from Parts and Labour)

What I’m about to discuss is highly illegal. Some of it. Maybe. Among other things, it’s a primer on what music piracy is & isn’t, and who the real pirates are. But before that, let me tell you why I’m getting into this.

As I’ve said a dozen or more times, I’ve been a DJ since I was a teen. I started making mixes by bouncing songs from one cassette player to another. Then I used a mixing board & two turntables to record my mixes with crossfades & other fun punch-ins – again on cassette. I took it live in high school & college. After that, I’d create a mix for our annual Halloween party, and a mega mix every two years. Plus a BUNCH of specialty mixes for friends, lovers & other occasions.

There were several technological developments that converged to change everything.

· The internet. Sure, it’s actually been around for like 50 years, but most of us know it really took hold in the early-mid 1990s – the days of the AOL disc.

· The CD-R (or CD-RW). Introduced in the late 1980s, the tech became affordable about a decade later. That allowed me to record a higher quality live mix than on cassette, using the best songs from two years of my purchases.

· The mp3 (and wav). Again, look to the late 1980s for this innovation, and the 1990s for its wider dissemination. What you might recall is that computers & the internet were too slow & weak to handle lots of higher quality files (like wavs), which is why the mp3 was so important. Especially when it came to…

· File sharing. Documents & other very small files have been shared over the internet since the 1970s, but again it was the 1990s when this took hold. And it was the early-mid 2000s when it blew sky high – in more ways than one. Remember Napster? MP3.com? LimeWire & FrostWire? Kazaa? The BitTorrent protocol?

Once all those came together, I was like a diabetic in a candy store, gobbling up everything I could get my hands on even if it was ultimately a bad idea. Yep, like most of us, I was a music pirate and happy to be one. I created several collections of music that I’d never have been able to afford otherwise, and loved every minute. Fun as hell and incredibly educational, but again, a bad thing to do.

But was it? Yes and no – and that “no” is qualified by what came after. Music piracy didn’t die because it was outlawed. (In fact, it’s alive and well with things like free online software that lets you rip songs from YouTube.) It died because music & tech companies got wise. They saw an opportunity to cash in in a big way. They made it hella easier to acquire nearly unlimited music legally – first with Rhapsody/Listen, then iTunes, then everything else we know and lo- … tolerate.

Now things are better for everyone, right? Wrong. These companies have made music consumption super convenient, improving the experience for both the listener & the companies themselves. But make no mistake: the music creators themselves are still being pirated.

For the FULL TEXT AND MORE visit the NEW MUSIC is not a GENRE home at: https://www.nickdematteo.com/podcast

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT ME ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

FEATURED SONG:

NICK – “Come A Little Closer” (from The Metrogrande Sessions)

What is jazz? At this point there are so many subdivisions that it’s not easy to define. That word – “JAZZ” – 100% evokes different sounds & ideas in every person’s head. For me, jazz has to have some form of improvisation – freedom within form – and it has to be funky, at least a little. If I were doing a podcast on jazz in general, I’d throw down some more descriptions, and even get into what I think jazz ISN’T. But that’s not what this week is about.

I ask the question because this week’s spotlight albums are likely NOT the first things that come to mind when most people think of jazz. Take Heavy Flute – a compilation of jazz cuts from the 1960s & 1970s featuring flute solos. Released in 2000 (and now out of print and nowhere to be found on streaming services), it was an instant classic for me. Say “flute” to someone, and the first words that come to their mind are unlikely to be “funky” or “cool”. Yet this album proves without a doubt that the flute can be both. Ian Anderson knows this. So does Lizzo. And Walt Parazaider of Chicago.

The songs on this album range from lyrical to percussive & everything in between. When you listen to it – and I do suggest looking up every song, you’re gonna get a big 1960s/70s vibe. And you’re gonna be surprised at how diverse & freakin’ cool & funky it is. My favorite is no question Rahsaan Roland Kirk. He treats the flute like everything from what it’s meant to be to a percussion instrument to a microphone. What he did was practically punk. The dude weirded out in all the best ways, and clearly influenced Walt Parazaider’s solos. Herbie Mann is a close second fave on this album, but you could start with any track and be blown away. Pun intended.

Crime Jazz was released in two parts (Music in the First Degree& Music in the Second Degree). Both albums came out in 1997, and are also out of print & impossible to find on streaming. They feature ensemble jazz made especially for crime movies & TV. Think of the themes to Mission: Impossible (the old TV show, not the movie series) or Peter Gunn. Though the first one isn’t featured in this compilation, you will find other compositions by the great Lalo Schifrin. The second was by Henry Mancini and performed by Quincy Jones and his Orchestra. Check out Elmer Bernstein’s tracks too. He's always been a fave of mine.

For the FULL TEXT & LINKS, go to: https://www.nickdematteo.com/podcast

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT MUSIC IS NOT A GENRE ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

I spend an hour with Jacqueline B. Arnold. Jackie is a performer, currently on Broadway in the multiple Tony Award winning musical, Moulin Rouge! The Musical. We talk about her history on Broadway, on tour, and everywhere else in musical theater and beyond. 

For more on Jackie, go here:

And for more info on The Kitchen Chemists, Handmade Full Spectrum Cannabis Infused Topicals, go here:

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT ME ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

FEATURED MUSIC:

REC – “Break You” (from Parts and Labour)

REC – “Suddenly” (from Synergy for the Weird)

NICK – “Your Sweetness” (from Your EP)

See that link right above this line? It makes me feel … whatever. Basically, I get all “emo” whenever someone tries to define what “emo” is and which bands do or don’t qualify. Not unexpected, I’m sure, since you know well I’ve got issues with “genres”.

As with any genre, one band you’re sure belongs is associated with another band that’s a little different. That band is close to another band etc. etc. until five bands down the line you’ve made it from emo to pop punk to Olivia Rodrigo, or emo to goth punk to The Cure. That said, I’m going to dive headfirst into this swirl of emo shite & hopefully resurface with some actual conclusions.

So what’s up with all the labels in this week’s title? First, it’s a perfect illustration of the mess we get in with this subject. It’s also an abridged history of where emo came from, when it popped (pun intended), and where it’s going.

As to that first thing, your definition of emo depends largely on when you discovered it, possibly more than almost any other type of music. If, like me, you learned about emo in the 1990s, you think of anything before Sunny Day Real Estate as proto-emo, and anything after, say, Jimmy Eat World as NOT emo. If you came to emo in the early 2000s, you’re more likely to call Fall Out Boy & Blink-182 emo acts. Here’s a quick breakdown of what I see as the main emo divisions:

For the FULL BREAKDOWN, including PRE-MO, DREAMO, EMO, SCREAMO, GLEAMO, FE-MO, and EMO RAP, go to: https://www.nickdematteo.com/podcast

So what is “real emo”? If you know MUSIC is not a GENRE, you already know the answer: There IS NO ANSWER. Qualities of emo can be found quite prominently in some 1980s bands, some grunge bands, and quite a bit of pop music. Some pop punk has emo leanings & some doesn’t. Some metal & prog bands are emo-adjacent. Others aren’t. What makes all this fun is finding the threads & following them until you hit on the “emo” that fits you.

You can argue that I was doing emo as early as Sunny Day, such as the song “Your Sweetness” (several years before Jimmy Eat World’s “Sweetness”, btw), but really the influence doesn’t pop up prominently until REC’s Parts and Labour, with the first song being the hands down best example of how emo REC can be. The second song is more in the line of “GLEAMO” than “EMO”. And the third one is the aforementioned “Your Sweetness”, from all the way back in 1996.

Do you know any of the music of the bands I profiled? What do you consider “real emo”? Do you think emo can be clearly defined, and if so which bands would qualify? Discuss dammit!

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT MUSIC IS NOT A GENRE ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

FEATURED MUSIC

I’m a peaceful man. Or at least I present as one. I’ve actually got a little too much fire in me, which is a little too easy to set off. Fortunately, with age comes … slowness. I take more time before responding. I sit with my trigger feeling and explore what else might be there. I look for a way to bridge gaps. I … drum roll please … LISTEN before I talk. All of which makes for much better communication, understanding & connection.

This is especially useful when my passion for a subject goes beyond all reason, and I’m confronted by someone with an equal passion who doesn’t necessarily see things how I do. What could end up in complete disengagement & animosity turns into an opportunity to learn, respect & bond. It’s a journey. It’s a pain in the ass. And it’s one of the most rewarding experiences anyone can have.

This week’s book, Kelefa Sanneh’s Major Labels: A History of Popular Music in Seven Genres, is one of the most passionate music books I’ve ever read. And because the author is passionate, experienced, informed AND has opinions, the book was both thought- AND emotion-provoking. I was predisposed to skepticism about Major Labels because a friend of mine – himself an excellent writer & critic – mentioned to me that Sanneh defends “genre boundaries”, something you can imagine the MUSIC is not a GENRE creator is not a fan of 😊

But I was too intrigued by the overall subject to pass on the book. So I jumped in with an open mind, equally ready to appreciate & be frustrated by it. And while appreciation won out, it was a close call. And his often deeply personal touch – informed in part by his sense of being an “outsider” both because of his race & lack of musical ability – did a lot to mitigate times when he overreached with subjective judgments or flat out interpreted genres in ways that seem tone deaf to an actual musician.

What saved the book for me most were three things: First, he knows his stuff. I want to say “inside and out”, but other than the punk & hip hop sections he mostly came across as an outsider, one more inclined to give “criticism” rather than a “critique”. Second, he was honest throughout about his vantage point & biases, and especially about how wrong his opinions, assessments & predictions have been in the past. Third, he’s close enough to my generation to have similar touchstones & perspectives, even if our takes on certain genres jibe only about half the time.

As for the entire pretense of the book, that popular music can be neatly divided into seven genres – eh. I wanted to be more upset about it, but the author understands that fluidity is part of music (and every other identity), and his joy in defining the genre boundaries and reveling in the particularities is very relatable. The truth is, I love genres too. And sub- and sub-sub-genres and all the fun classifications we can create that disprove their own rules. They do what they’re supposed to do – give us an in to what we MIGHT encounter. Unfortunately they also do a lot more – like segregate & shut out people in droves, and all the other issues I’ve discussed. Genres are a guilty pleasure, one I’m happy are falling apart. In a sense, I see this book as a summation of the “Hyper Genre Divided” period of music history – a period that we can ALMOST look back on, and the sooner the better.

FOR THE FULL TEXT AND MORE, GO HERE

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT ME ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

FEATURED SONG: REC – “I’m Gone” (from Parts and Labour) 

First off, we need to agree on what makes a supergroup. There are lists based on the conventional definition that it’s a group made up of members from other groups. I’m gonna take that two steps further. STEP ONE (yes, I’ve now planted the NKOTB song in your head): The groups these people came from needed to have been famous on their own – i.e. successful & known, i.e. “super”. This can include solo careers. STEP TWO: The new group they form has to have had some measure of success & renown as well. In short, a supergroup is “a famous new group formed by members of famous old groups.”

This stricter definition rules out a ton of groups otherwise called “super”. Some categories that no longer apply:

· Groups whose members were in groups no one has heard of. Example: Can anyone name one other group members of Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons came from?

· New groups almost no one has heard of or remembers. Example: We probably all know Filter, Nine Inch Nails & Stone Temple Pilots, but does anyone remember Army of Anyone?

· Glorified side projects, – people mostly from one band, with some side dudes from other lesser known bands. Examples: GTR, A Perfect Circle, Zwan.

· Established bands that had another famous person join in for a while. Examples: RHCP with Dave Navarro; Mars Volta with John Frusciante, Queen with Paul Rodgers.

· Glorified solo projects – one famous musician forming a band with a bunch of non-famous people. Example: Wings.

· Personal favorites – a new group of famous musicians you wish everyone else knew but never quite got there. Example: Tinted Windows.

I’m not saying any of these deserve less praise or respect. They’re just not really supergroups. Now that we’ve established the criteria, let’s look at a much shorter list of actual supergroups:

TO SEE FULL LIST AND FULL ESSAY, GO HERE: NEW HOME of MUSIC is not a GENRE

One thing everyone assesses right out of the gate is whether the new group is better than the old ones. In a few cases – CSNY, Bad Company, Foo Fighters, Madvillain & Run the Jewels – the new groups ARE better. Their music can stand alone with or without their origin groups – one thing I think truly makes a supergroup super. But in almost every case above and any I’ve missed, the answer is no. Them Crooked Vultures is not better than any of the bands those people came from. Neither Broken Bells nor Hollywood Vampires.

And certainly not Audioslave or Velvet Revolver. Were they good bands? Yes. Did they bring something new to the conversation? To some degree, yes. Did they eclipse their old bands? Hell no. It was awesome to hear Cornell & Weiland sing again, and with such esteemed company. And there were several songs from each I really liked (“Cochise”, “Show Me How to Live” & “The Last Fight”, “Fall to Pieces”, to name just a few). But I don’t think there’s a doubt in anyone’s mind that the new bands never came close to the artistic achievements of Soundgarden & STP.

It's awesome they existed – both for the artists & for us. But they will always be footnotes. Exceptions like CSNY or Bad Company prove the rule: that supergroups on the whole are usually not so super.

I was in several bands before REC, including my own solo career. Members of REC have been in other bands as well. That said, none of us are famous – either before or now. So we would not make this list. Which is totally okay.

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT ME ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

FEATURED SONG: NICK – “Water Baby” (from Your EP) 

I’ve been putting this off since the very first volume of Death is DUMB. For several reasons. It’s confusing & painful. It feels too much like 1994 and yet totally not. It’s laden with commentary & assumptions & prejudices. It’s like what I said about Eminem’s “controversy” – what possible new spin or bit of insight could I provide that would justify a whole episode? But I can’t do a sub-series on major deaths in music and not include this band. That’s just plain cowardice, and abdication of responsibility that should strip me of any claim to being a good music podcaster.

So fuck it. Time to reopen the old wound and spill my guts.

Let’s get one thing out of the way first. This is not about grunge. Death in music is everywhere, and while several grunge-related deaths have been high profile, they’re no more numerous than in other kinds of music. This is about amazing music, nostalgia in its truest form (“the pain of returning”), and what it all means to me. It doesn’t have to be for or about anyone or anything else. No lengthy history or patchwork biography – you can find those anywhere. No rehashing old arguments or trying to come up with whys and what-ifs.

In fact, this isn’t even going to be negative. Yes, death is fucking dumb whether it’s self-inflicted or not, and it became a big part of Nirvana’s story. But before that, the music was the story. And the more time passes, the more the story is overtaken by the music. As it should be.

The Monkees. REM. The Beatles. The Smithereens. The Pixies. Punk. Heavy metal. Pop. Harsh dynamics that often obscure the subtle intricacies and songwriting genius. The contrast of expressing the softest vulnerabilities with the loudest shouts. Nirvana did for a generation of musicians & music lovers what those other bands did for Kurt Cobain. They reminded us that in music – and in all art – there’s no such thing as “allowed”. We might seek permission by example, like Cobain did with the Pixies, but that’s us battling within ourselves. The world can fuck off. As soon as you embrace that, what comes out of you is ALL YOU, ALL REAL, and ALL NEW, regardless of what came before.

Were Nirvana grunge? Sure, okay. But at heart (and heart-shaped heartbreak), and as I believe they will be seen historically, they were power pop. Beautifully conceived & written pop songs, executed with primal & unopposable force. Freedom within form. Deeply conscientious creation infused with fuck-all abandon. Far too few artists – far too few people in general life – figure this out. We lean into structure & stricture, or we throw ourselves into self-centered self-destruction. We miss that sweet spot – that perfect state of giving ourselves over fully to our inner truth while still respecting forms, functions & relationships. We miss that nirvana.

No album of mine captures what Nirvana meant to me better than Your EP. Every song except one was a love letter to them. Soft & bitter. Hard & open. Especially “Your Sweetness” and this week’s featured song:

NICK – “Water Baby” (from Your EP) 

What’s your relationship with Nirvana? What are your thoughts/feelings/memories on Cobain & his untimely death? Can you enjoy the music despite this? Do you hear the unabashed (or I guess severely bashed) pop music in their songs? What other bands do you feel expressed the beautiful heartbreak of existence? Discuss dammit!

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

SUPPORT MUSIC IS NOT A GENRE ON PATREON

WATCH MUSIC is not a GENRE VIDEOS and MORE

There’s a sort-of old saying: “You can’t put lipstick on a pig.” Meaning dressing something up doesn’t change its inherent nature. Let’s sort this out for real.

First, I’m betting you actually can put lipstick on a pig. It might take sedation or some form of restraint, but it can be done. Second, has anyone ever asked the pig if it even wants lipstick? I have a feeling it’s totally fine being what it is. Third and pretty crucial, does the lipstick’s ineffectiveness mean the pig itself is not worthy? Finally and most relevant to this podcast, is this even true? If you put enough “lipstick” in enough areas, can you change the impression the pig makes enough to render its inherent nature virtually irrelevant?

Okay and fifth, what does this have to do with music? When you listen to a song, all that really matters is how it makes you feel. Do you like it? Does it evoke the emotion you want it to? Will you want to listen to it again? When it comes to gut level reactions, all the steps the song went through to get to its finished state are immaterial. If you think a song is good, it’s good. If you don’t care for it, it’s not. This is why it’s not just hard but futile to try to judge the quality of any kind of art.

But we do. The curious – those of us who take music seriously – do. We’re not satisfied with first impressions. We know instinctively – and often from direct experience – that we’ll find as many people who agree as disagree with our opinion of a song. If consensus says a song is trash, there are likely millions of people who think it’s great. If the accepted wisdom is that a song is genius, there are millions of people who are indifferent to or flat out hate it.

This is what makes the process of creating music magical, even illusory. That general impression – trash or genius – is shaped by more factors than most of us are aware of. When we absorb a song, we tend to gravitate towards the big three: lyrics, music, performance. But it doesn’t stop there. There’s the arrangement & instrumentation (does it have guitar, drums, keys, backing vocals, etc.). The recording quality & aesthetic (lo-fi or hi-f, crisp or warm). The riffs & hooks (melodic lines or power chords or anything else not fundamental to the original written song). And the style itself (strictly one genre, a mix of sounds, consistent & comfortingly predictable, all over the place & excitingly experimental).

All of those are part of the music production process. I’ve stated often that if a song is good, then it can be played & recorded in just about any way and still be good. It’s why I like to do song covers that are different from the originals. But what if a song isn’t good? What if, when you get down to the basics of the song – music & lyrics – there’s not much there, or what is there is kinda not great? Can all that production work save that song? Can good production turn a clunky, threadbare, or otherwise poorly conceived song into a gem?

Yes. Yes it can. It has done so thousands of times. I don’t often point blank answer the questions I pose. Most of the time they’re red herrings put up as entrees into a wider discussion. And sure, that discussion is happening here too. But this time around I can say unequivocally that good production – innovative & intuitive use of all those elements above – can create the near universal impression that a bad song is a great song. It can even cause you to question what the nature of a well written song really is.

REC - "Love in Stockholm" (from Distance To Empty)

For FULL SCRIPT, visit https://patreon.com/MUSICisnotaGENRE

This episode is sponsored by

Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/musicisnotagenre/support

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.