RE: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread)
"Soul" comes from the way in which you arrange the samples. Done well, you can impart on it feeling and emotion, done poorly, it's just "boom-tsck-boom-tsck-boom-tsck-boom-tsck". Hip hop artists have been doing it for the last couple of decades; a little snippet here, a little snippet there and you have a Pete Rock, 9th Wonder, Jay Dee/Dilla, or Beatminerz track full of soul. Arrangement might be the problem you're having with Hawtin. If its just loop after loop layered with another loop, that's a surefire way to bore someone to sleep. Arrange the pieces of the puzzle in such a way that you come off with something great to listen to on the dance floor as well as your headphones. -Original Message- From: Arturo Lopez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 12:30 PM To: 313 Mailing List Subject: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread) What do you people think about Hawtin's approach to music? I'm calling it hypersampling. So we're on the same page, I'm talking about taking snippets and loops from a wide library of pre-existing music, and then inserting those little snippets into a dj set via the current software of choice. I think it brings up a number of supposed pros and cons. On the one hand, it seems to give the artist a incredibly wide range of possibilities, taking just those parts of tracks that you like and putting them together in any way/shape/form that you like, hopefully coming up with something interesting as a result. On the other hand though, I feel like there's no "soul" left, for lack of a better term, with what you end up with. If you gut a track to just take the little part that you like, you are still gutting a track, something that was part of a cohesive sound that the producer of said track was going for. You end up with a hundred little pieces that might sound like very interesting little loops, but string them together for an hour and I frankly get a little bored with the results. Hawtin's mixes sound like flipping the channel on your TV every 3 seconds. There's no hook, it's just loop after loop after loop, even if put together in interesting combinations. This is very different from mixing records or even using regular samplers for the occasional insert or loop. You still come up with interesting new sounds when you've got two records playing at the same time, but I feel like it's more of an additive process, with both parts still intact and forming that nice third record, you know? The listener can follow what is going on, and take part/enjoy the new sounds being added, with a clear reference to what is changing and what is being dropped in. With this hypersampling stuff, everything is so completely stripped of its original source that it becomes irrelevant where it came from. I get a great feeling from hearing two or three distinct tracks put together in interesting ways to form new sounds, not two or three drum loops and five high-hats and some random sound effect from 20 different tracks. "...perhaps that one of the last remaining walls (or most of it) between the Studio and the Club has come down." That's Hawtin's quote from that RA link the other day. I personally think that wall can be very important, and shouldn't be knocked down. Beethoven didn't write a great symphony on the fly during a show, he wrote them in the studio. This isn't to discredit the awesome amount of talent and exciting things that live P.A. work brings about, some stuff is certainly better on the fly, but Hawtin's approach seems to discount and not really care about the sources of what he is extracting. One of the earlier posts described this mix as sonic wallpaper and I would agree, although I think the 2nd half does pick up a bit. There's no "there" there. As for Hawtin, I think he's a far better producer than performer. He's written some very, very good tracks, especially most of the plastikman stuff, I just don't care for the new approach to performing. -Arturo -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1413 - Release Date: 5/3/2008 11:22 AM
Re: (313) First Mayhem 2008 Wild Kingdom
Good one, J.C. That little blooper slipped through in a moment of inattention, and I wondered if anyone would call me on it. For those who care, the actual first month of Mayhem at KFJC was in 1982. As a point of interest, the first regular voice transmissions that could be deemed a radio station were done by amateur Charles Herrold right up the road in San Jose, California, starting in 1909. J.C. wrote: On 2 May 2008, Richard Hester wrote: Last week's Wild Kingdom playlist is at http://www.kfjc.org/music/playlist.php?i=30125 . It was an all-vinyl odds and sods affair. This week's set kicks off my contribution to the fabulous KFJC "Month of Mayhem". Since 1882, KFJC has set aside the month of May for music specials, Impressive, to be broadcasting before radios existed. (Although by only a handful of years.) :) That aside, Mayhem on KFJC is highly recommended.
Re: (313) Reference track
80-120 grade sandpaper MEK Simon Swain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 05/02/2008 08:06:24 PM: > Hi I know this isn't a production list, but I was wondering what > 313'ers would pick as a reference track for tuning a sound system, > studio, and comparing their own mix balance against? What do you > think the ideal techno reference track is? > > S > > Simon Swain > http://Obscure.co.nz > +61 418 30 20 20 >
(313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread)
What do you people think about Hawtin's approach to music? I'm calling it hypersampling. So we're on the same page, I'm talking about taking snippets and loops from a wide library of pre-existing music, and then inserting those little snippets into a dj set via the current software of choice. I think it brings up a number of supposed pros and cons. On the one hand, it seems to give the artist a incredibly wide range of possibilities, taking just those parts of tracks that you like and putting them together in any way/shape/form that you like, hopefully coming up with something interesting as a result. On the other hand though, I feel like there's no "soul" left, for lack of a better term, with what you end up with. If you gut a track to just take the little part that you like, you are still gutting a track, something that was part of a cohesive sound that the producer of said track was going for. You end up with a hundred little pieces that might sound like very interesting little loops, but string them together for an hour and I frankly get a little bored with the results. Hawtin's mixes sound like flipping the channel on your TV every 3 seconds. There's no hook, it's just loop after loop after loop, even if put together in interesting combinations. This is very different from mixing records or even using regular samplers for the occasional insert or loop. You still come up with interesting new sounds when you've got two records playing at the same time, but I feel like it's more of an additive process, with both parts still intact and forming that nice third record, you know? The listener can follow what is going on, and take part/enjoy the new sounds being added, with a clear reference to what is changing and what is being dropped in. With this hypersampling stuff, everything is so completely stripped of its original source that it becomes irrelevant where it came from. I get a great feeling from hearing two or three distinct tracks put together in interesting ways to form new sounds, not two or three drum loops and five high-hats and some random sound effect from 20 different tracks. "...perhaps that one of the last remaining walls (or most of it) between the Studio and the Club has come down." That's Hawtin's quote from that RA link the other day. I personally think that wall can be very important, and shouldn't be knocked down. Beethoven didn't write a great symphony on the fly during a show, he wrote them in the studio. This isn't to discredit the awesome amount of talent and exciting things that live P.A. work brings about, some stuff is certainly better on the fly, but Hawtin's approach seems to discount and not really care about the sources of what he is extracting. One of the earlier posts described this mix as sonic wallpaper and I would agree, although I think the 2nd half does pick up a bit. There's no "there" there. As for Hawtin, I think he's a far better producer than performer. He's written some very, very good tracks, especially most of the plastikman stuff, I just don't care for the new approach to performing. -Arturo
Re: (313) Most unlikely pairing of the week......
Im curious about this. I've liked a lot of pepe's stuff but I guess Namlook and I are on different wavelengths - Original Message - From: "Frank Glazer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "313 list" <313@hyperreal.org> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 11:14 AM Subject: Re: (313) Most unlikely pairing of the week.. NICE. jason you really need to do a better job of sharing where you're finding this stuff! ;) What's the detroit connection? Well Pete Namlook worked with Ritchie Hawtin and he's from Detroi...oh, wait a minute, no he's not :) Well, Jeff Mills get's a mention so hopefully that makes it relevant! i'd say pepe braddock and pete namlook are definitely ON TOPIC for this list. now paul van dyk and princess superstar, not so much. -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
Re: (313) Most unlikely pairing of the week......
It's due out at the end of next week so we (and many other fine record retailers!) should have it then cheers Jason 2008/5/3 Michael Kuszynski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > now where do i buy it. > > > > On 5/3/08, Frank Glazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > NICE. jason you really need to do a better job of sharing where > > you're finding this stuff! ;) > > > >> What's the detroit connection? Well Pete Namlook worked with Ritchie > >> Hawtin and he's from Detroi...oh, wait a minute, no he's not :) > >> > >> Well, Jeff Mills get's a mention so hopefully that makes it relevant! > > > > i'd say pepe braddock and pete namlook are definitely ON TOPIC for > > this list. now paul van dyk and princess superstar, not so much. > > > > > > -- > > peace, > > > > frank > > > > dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com > > > > > -- > --- > Michael Kuszynski > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.planerecordings.com > New York, NY >
Re: (313) Most unlikely pairing of the week......
now where do i buy it. On 5/3/08, Frank Glazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > NICE. jason you really need to do a better job of sharing where > you're finding this stuff! ;) > >> What's the detroit connection? Well Pete Namlook worked with Ritchie >> Hawtin and he's from Detroi...oh, wait a minute, no he's not :) >> >> Well, Jeff Mills get's a mention so hopefully that makes it relevant! > > i'd say pepe braddock and pete namlook are definitely ON TOPIC for > this list. now paul van dyk and princess superstar, not so much. > > > -- > peace, > > frank > > dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com > -- --- Michael Kuszynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.planerecordings.com New York, NY
Re: (313) Most unlikely pairing of the week......
NICE. jason you really need to do a better job of sharing where you're finding this stuff! ;) > What's the detroit connection? Well Pete Namlook worked with Ritchie > Hawtin and he's from Detroi...oh, wait a minute, no he's not :) > > Well, Jeff Mills get's a mention so hopefully that makes it relevant! i'd say pepe braddock and pete namlook are definitely ON TOPIC for this list. now paul van dyk and princess superstar, not so much. -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
Re: (313) Swamp Pop
He's from New Orleans. Kw On 03/05/2008, at 08:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who's Fats Domino? Is he from Berlin? Jason 2008/5/4 ralph gill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Hey, isn't techno like swamp pop...but without the liberal thought process..., you know, it's "like white people doing fats domino?" No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1412 - Release Date: 5/2/2008 4:34 PM
Re: (313) Reference track
A friend's father (a sound engineer) used to say Orbital II (Brown) is the bomb for checking a system. jeff
Re: (313) Swamp Pop
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who's Fats Domino? Is he from Berlin? Jason He's from Blueberry Hill. jeff
RE: (313) Reference track
As far as feeling out the stereo imaging of the system, I highly recommend brinkmann's remixing of mike ink's studio one or his remixing of hawtin's concept 1 thanks, Jeff Davis Mobile: 803.640.3988 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffreyjdavis See who we know in commonWant a signature like this? -Original Message- From: Simon Swain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Swain Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 10:13 PM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) Reference track Yeah I was going to try to make say an 8 track cd to use. Wanted to get some different inputs What you say is the idea though, that and to A/B my own tracks with. S Simon Swain http://Obscure.co.nz +61 418 30 20 20 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 20:55:20 To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: (313) Reference track That's a really interesting question. My answer is that it would differ from person to person, I'd say pick a few different tracks that sound different from each other and with which you are quite familiar, then make them all sound their best on the system and you should be golden. No? m At 20:06 2008.05.02, you wrote: >Hi I know this isn't a production list, but I was wondering what >313'ers >would pick as a reference track for tuning a sound system, studio, and >comparing their own mix balance against? What do you think the ideal >techno reference track is? > >S > >Simon Swain >http://Obscure.co.nz >+61 418 30 20 20
Re: (313) Swamp Pop
Who's Fats Domino? Is he from Berlin? Jason 2008/5/4 ralph gill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hey, isn't techno like swamp pop...but without the liberal thought > process..., you know, it's "like white people doing fats domino?" > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1412 - Release Date: 5/2/2008 > 4:34 PM > > >
(313) Swamp Pop
Hey, isn't techno like swamp pop...but without the liberal thought process..., you know, it's "like white people doing fats domino?" No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1412 - Release Date: 5/2/2008 4:34 PM
(313) Most unlikely pairing of the week......
Pepe Bradock and.Pete Namlook " Namlook Vs Pepe Bradock "Subharmonic Atoms, P.bradock Rmxs" An incredible EP with Namlook exploring the edges of minimal Techno and deep Ambient, while the remixes are Pepe Bradock's most dancefloor oriented works in ages! Macro delivers a stunning release by a man who has not only produced 3 collaborational albums with Richie Hawtin, but also runs the ultra influential FAX label with an artist roster ranging from Speedy J to Bill Laswell to Klaus Schulze: Namlook is a true electronic pioneer in a league of his own. The track "Subharmonic Atoms" was produced back in 1995 and is re-released by Macro as a long out of print electronic prototype on the edge of Minimal Techno and Ambient. But don't think this is a retro affair: Subharmonic Atoms sounds incredibly fresh and proves it is as groundbreaking, innovative and timeless as Jeff Mills' early Axis works or Hawtin's Concept1 series. Entirely remastered from the original source and cut in unparalleled sound quality, it is available on a single 12" side for the first time ever. The release is completed with nothing short but French remix master Pepe Bradock's triumphant return to the dancefloor. His versions of "Atoms" are rocking upfront house burners, which his fans have been waiting for since 2003's "Intrusion" EP. Definitely one of this year's hottest packages! What's the detroit connection? Well Pete Namlook worked with Ritchie Hawtin and he's from Detroi...oh, wait a minute, no he's not :) Well, Jeff Mills get's a mention so hopefully that makes it relevant! The soundclips are too short to make any meaningful comments but my gut feeling is that's it's a biggie!
