R3dshift wrote:
>for the music he makes, Jeff Mills sure makes himself sound like he does
>something intellectual or complex.
>
>there is a lot of much much better music out there, why does everyone
>worship the guy who tries to make 4/4 techno sound like physics?
Perhaps because a large part of it *is* physics?
Not to get too much into the Jeff Mills debate itself, but I think Mills
(perhaps more than a lot of other artists) realizes how intertwined music
and physics are: after all, sound is a wave that obeys the laws of physics
and similarly, the process of cutting a vinyl release and playing it back
is heavily influenced by the physics governing it. Knowing a little bit of
the physics behind music and vinyl can only improve how well you're able to
translate what's in your head into a real track and a piece of vinyl.
Some examples of how the physics affect the music: the closer you get to
the centre of a record, the more high end you will lose in the sound; the
shorter a track, the more space you have on the record to accommodate the
sidewards movement of the groove and the louder it can be cut;
sawtooth(-like) waves or spikes in the sound cannot be cut properly on
vinyl, they only work well on CD; etc. etc.
More detailed info:
http://www.acousticsounds.com/acoustic/acoustech/records.html
http://www.aardvarkmastering.com/cutspec.htm
and I'm sure there's plenty of sound experts on the list who can chime in
on this.
Otto, who had a crash course in sound/vinyl-physics during a three
hour-dicussion with a cutting engineer last week :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
