From Hrvatski Sent Thu, Mar 26th 1998, 00:57
From Hrvatski Sent Thu, Mar 26th 1998, 00:57
Sorry for yet another word-for-word analysis. I'm not doing this in defense as much as I'm questioning certain concepts in siliconvortex's argument >>Programming the Akai >>to do a single track used to take 12 solid hours of button pushing. It's >>more like two now. It's all about control. If you want your machines to >>write your music for you, than stick with a simple setup with fewer >>variables. Some of us seek more complexity... > >i know what you're saying, but really it's just made your job easier, not >improved the potential of your music has it? It has directly improved the potential of my own music. It gives a much clearer gateway between my original concept and the finished 'product'. No more of the mid-session manual-checking is necessary. Just a direct path between thought and sound. >:-) ...if tom jenkinson can do what he has done on a boss drum machine for >sequencing and a 12 bit akai sampler, then for anyone who has the drive and >determination to really do something, a setup such as yours (not that it's >particularly expensive) isn't crucially important. What I'm referring to directly (and I hope this opens up an altogether different can of worms) is sound design. Jenks probably recorded the Amen break off of a scratchy old LP or 7" way back when, came up with a few variations, made a program in his sampler, and called it a day. Now every time he goes to make a new track, he doesn't think 'What drum sounds/parts/breaks would fit this tune specifically?", no he just says "I've got that Amen program all ready, Amen it is!". He remembers how long it took to set those sounds up in the first place, and he'll be damned if he needs to do it for EVERY TRACK he does. I don't blame him. I am in no way attacking anyone's engineering (in Jenks' case, his down to earth production values are very endearing), but the physical aspect of programming consumer machines without a graphic editor is highly daunting. It often halts producers dead in their tracks, when they should be thinking about the tune. >don't be surprised if little johnny and his 4 track take the world by storm. Mu-Ziq's success does not surprise me. His music seems very sincere, and his lo-fi aesthetic was certainly unique at its inception. Several albums later (some of which on VERY big labels), his sound is relatively unchanged. I applaud him for making that work, time and time again. Same with 'pushy. Big records, small studios. But think how much wasted time these guys are spending programming those bastard machines one last time before they go kaput for good! think how much of that time they could have spent on making new music. Technology makes things easier. The way it sounds is another fucking story. >with more expensive, and more complex equipment, you can obviously achieve a >wider variety of sonic delights and other such things. but is this all that >is important about music? No, not all. But in my eyes, it's very important. What made you buy that Autechre record vs. that Robert Miles record? I know why I did. Autechre SOUNDS better. Not more high fidelity than Miles (not by a long shot), but better sounding; more complex sounds, rhythms, structures. All of these things were facilitated by their modern setup, and I assure you, they've scrapped th four-track long ago... >can we not listen to music in a deeper sense? is >it a good thing if the whole scene becomes one big technological race? >where does it end? there's only so much information a human brain can >process before information is lost.. And we're nowhere near that point. >> it's COMPLETELY INVALID by the standard definition. > >right, everyone stay indoors while we shut down the music industry, in that >case. I don't follow... >it's quite simple - i hear a record, i like it, THAT IS MUSIC THAT I WANT TO >HEAR. Bravo (sound of clapping hands) >there is no such thing as idm, apart from the rotten core of unoriginal >producers >with no imagination. You're referring to those who have co-opted the IDM tag as a marketing ploy? Good Luck. When those Warner Brothers sponsored (and paid in full by) IDM-indies start sprouting up, I'll be the first to buy one of the 20,000 copies of the Freeform single... >it is the outer fringe, those not afraid to use >whatever ideas they want Hah! >who are willing to work with any kind of >influences Right! >who make the interesting music and, in turn, influence others. >with those people, we are simply talking about MUSIC and nothing so shallow >as a set of stylistic rules. Man, I couldn't have put it better myself. Break those rules wide open. Don't think you have to stick to the 4-track/sampler/Mackie bit to 'make it' in the "wide world" of IDM. Purely digital (that's the point, right? Analog vs. Digital? Come on, what year is it?) music's just as good (and believe you me, leaves far more room for interesting variants). >>something post-dancefloor. > >there are a LOT of dancefloors on this planet, and they are NOT all the >same. Okay, you're right. But no-one outside this ring cares 'bout that... >the whole world is a club, your living room is a club, the street outside a >'club' is a club in exactly the same way, so there is no such thing as 'club >music' in the way you put it. I don't understand what this is in defense of. Do you like clubs? No? Yes?... >all music that is put on a disc and sold in a shop has to have a crowd >pleasing element. By a crowd, I mean the general public, i.e. 'The Masses'. >this 'non-commercial' ethos concerning idm is just the biggest load of hot >air - idm music is commercial in exactly the same way as any other section >of the music industry is - please stop deluding yourselves cult-freaks and >fashion-slaves! You can't possibly believe this. >experimental music is no different - >experimental music is a market where the listeners WANT to hear something >different - >>>>>>> the experiment is a success if people LIKE it <<<<<<<<< That's it. That's your summation of experimental music. Really fucking informed. >labels who say "[we] will Never press more than 500 copies of our 12"s, we >will also support underground retailers by selling in direct to them and >Refusing to let the capitilist Pigs who run chain stores [both independant >and mainstream] get their hands on our records" /are/ the biggest >capitalists Amen. You are so right. That whole MASK thing is complete & utter garbage. But there are certain labels who don't have the confidence and/or capital to press any more than a few hundred. >>But technology making someone less-dimensional! That also is absurd. >if you can't 'do it' on a simple setup, what is there to say >that by simply piling up the gear, piling up the options, piling up the >sounds, is going to make your music worthwhile? Why the negative always? What if you 'can' do it on a small setup. Most of us who make music, succesful or not, feel that we can. And we're only getting better at it, not worse. >>True, but not true. You can also tweak thousands (but not millions) of >>sound varieties out of a Casiotone with built in sequencer. It would beat >>out the records that strain to achieve that level of innocence. > >is anyone innocent in this day and age? everyone seems to think that they >know everything ;-) Okay, your little winky man makes me laugh so much that I'll let that ad hominum attack slide... >i don't respect any musicians. i just love pieces of music and try to >forget that mere musicians actually made them. cos musicians are really >pathetic people on the whole! Right to that! Wankers! Anyways, I really enjoy this thread. Silicon-let's take it private from here. __________________________________________________ Reckankreuzungsklankewerkzeuge.________________________ _________________________________PO Box 382864-2864 Cambridge, MA 02238-2864____________________________ _______________________________________________USA _______________Main URL: http://www.tiac.net/users/sheket __________________________________________________