Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
COMMENTS IN BOLD BELOW
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:16 PM, David Powers wrote:
> To me, computers are good for two things:
> First of all, any track that uses FM synthesis, which means any track
> with a Yamaha DX-7 or related synths, uses a computer for some of the
> sound generation. A sampler is also a computer, and early house
> already used samples, though Detroit techno less so. So computers have
> always, in some way, been a part of house and techno.
>
> However, the sounds were indeed all mixed down in the analog realm,
> and I agree that can create a different feel to the music; it takes a
> lot of work to mix down your stuff on computers and get a similar
> feeling. However, I do believe it can be done!
>
> I think computers in music are great for 3 things:
>
> 1. Besides FM synthesis and sampling, computers are necessary for
> newer synthesis and signal processing techniques, such as granular
> synthesis, which require digital processing, and can sound really good
> when done well. "Traditional" 313 techno does not use these
> techniques, since they weren't commonly available when the sound was
> first created, but there is no reason they can't be incorporated into
> a Detroit sound. Also, FM synthesis seems to be fairly common in
> Detroit techno. Although "mnml" has resulted in a lot of stupid stuff,
> I do think it is nice that newer synthesis and DSP techniques have
> been accepted into house and techno, although they aren't often used
> in a creative, not to mention "musical", manner.
>
> 2. Making electronic music when you are poor... the cost of making
> electronic music via hardware is prohibitively expensive
> unfortunately. I would love to use gear but some
>
> 3. Creating musical forms and processes that would be too labor
> intensive to create by hand, such as generative and probability based
> structures. There is also possibility working with things like
> artificial neural networks and programs trained to respond to user
> input in unpredictable ways. This clearly isn't part of traditional
> Detroit techno, but again, I'd argue that you could apply such
> techniques to the Detroit sound and get extremely interesting results.
> In fact, I'd argue that anybody who wants to make "futuristic" sounds
> should really focus on this area, especially because you could control
> analog gear with these techniques and so still produce a very warm
> classic sound while doing some cutting edge things with the structure
> and musical content Just don't forget to keep it soulful and funky!
> ;-]
>
> Most people use computers for convenience I'd say, and I think it's
> kind of funny that people would use plugins to do traditional
> synthesis when they could afford proper analog gear. If I could afford
> gear, I'd probably record MIDI performances into a computer and use
> them to trigger both analog and digital sources, then mix down on
> analog gear.
>
> I will say, I have grown very tired of the work flows created in
> current digital software, so even though I'm using all digital, I've
> started to record my keyboard performances on MIDI a lot more, which
> makes it much easier to get that funky feel which can be a pain to
> create by hand in a digital environment. It's amazing how good even a
> digital plugin can sound when you actually use a human performance as
> the basis of the part instead of just a grid!
THANK YOU - AGREED, CAN SOMEONE JUST PERFORM LIKE A MUSICIAN FOR ONCE
OTHER THAN CARL CRAIG?
>
> I also spend a lot of time playing piano; it's extremely helpful to
> turn off the computer and spend time making music with an actual
> instrument that becomes a part of your body... There is a spiritual
> aspect to music that you simply can't experience if you don't
> participate in some type of physical music making.
>
> ~David
DAVID - THANK YOU FOR BEING YOU - I APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT INTO WHAT I
PERCEIVE AS MY MAILING LIST EXPERIENCE, AND I HOPEFULLY DO NOT SPEAK
IN VAIN FOR OTHERS AS WELL. I THINK ALL US OLD SOULS SEEK TO FIND A
VALID OUTLET FOR THE VOICE WE ALL KNOW IS INSIDE YOU
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:38 PM, kent williams
> wrote:
>> All hardware is The Detroit Way(tm), and one can't argue with results.
>> Virtually ('Virtually'?) every track that defines Detroit Techno and
>> House music was made with hardware synths and mixed down outside the
>> computer. As it happens, prior to roughly 1998, a computer was of
>> limited utility for anything other than MIDI sequencing.
>>
>> The sound of Detroit techno arose at least in part from the way
>> working with the hardware influences the aesthetic choices made. The
>> one measure drum loop is a limitation of Roland Drum Machines* so
>> Techno mostly involves one measure rhythm loops. Within that
>> limitation, producers soon used the tools available to them (volume
>> controls for individual sounds, sound parameters, write-mode real-time
>> step programming) to make something static come alive.
>>
>> I use a mix of hardwa
Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
David and all:
One little comment and everyone gets talking:)
I have always been an experimenter, if you listen to my frictional record;)
computers are also great for using as sequencers...I've sworn by them
for years for that very purpose. David makes a great point. Being an
outsider, I don't really make 'real detroit techno' all the time...so
for me doing what i do is very influenced by tha D...but I don't ask
questions like "what would Juan use to make this sound?"
Anyhow, I really love making music any way I can, and having four
computers in my studio makes me a geek (LOL). The hardware, the
samplers, etc. make me feel more alive to some extent. I have this
connection to the toys I use, and it makes me very excited to use/own
them. That feeling must be translated into the music, mainly because
I feel like that part has been lost in this music.
We make connections not with patchbays, cables, or
interfaces...the best musicians connect with our energy and our
hearts.
On 2/27/10, David Powers wrote:
> To me, computers are good for two things:
> First of all, any track that uses FM synthesis, which means any track
> with a Yamaha DX-7 or related synths, uses a computer for some of the
> sound generation. A sampler is also a computer, and early house
> already used samples, though Detroit techno less so. So computers have
> always, in some way, been a part of house and techno.
>
> However, the sounds were indeed all mixed down in the analog realm,
> and I agree that can create a different feel to the music; it takes a
> lot of work to mix down your stuff on computers and get a similar
> feeling. However, I do believe it can be done!
>
> I think computers in music are great for 3 things:
>
> 1. Besides FM synthesis and sampling, computers are necessary for
> newer synthesis and signal processing techniques, such as granular
> synthesis, which require digital processing, and can sound really good
> when done well. "Traditional" 313 techno does not use these
> techniques, since they weren't commonly available when the sound was
> first created, but there is no reason they can't be incorporated into
> a Detroit sound. Also, FM synthesis seems to be fairly common in
> Detroit techno. Although "mnml" has resulted in a lot of stupid stuff,
> I do think it is nice that newer synthesis and DSP techniques have
> been accepted into house and techno, although they aren't often used
> in a creative, not to mention "musical", manner.
>
> 2. Making electronic music when you are poor... the cost of making
> electronic music via hardware is prohibitively expensive
> unfortunately. I would love to use gear but some
>
> 3. Creating musical forms and processes that would be too labor
> intensive to create by hand, such as generative and probability based
> structures. There is also possibility working with things like
> artificial neural networks and programs trained to respond to user
> input in unpredictable ways. This clearly isn't part of traditional
> Detroit techno, but again, I'd argue that you could apply such
> techniques to the Detroit sound and get extremely interesting results.
> In fact, I'd argue that anybody who wants to make "futuristic" sounds
> should really focus on this area, especially because you could control
> analog gear with these techniques and so still produce a very warm
> classic sound while doing some cutting edge things with the structure
> and musical content Just don't forget to keep it soulful and funky!
> ;-]
>
> Most people use computers for convenience I'd say, and I think it's
> kind of funny that people would use plugins to do traditional
> synthesis when they could afford proper analog gear. If I could afford
> gear, I'd probably record MIDI performances into a computer and use
> them to trigger both analog and digital sources, then mix down on
> analog gear.
>
> I will say, I have grown very tired of the work flows created in
> current digital software, so even though I'm using all digital, I've
> started to record my keyboard performances on MIDI a lot more, which
> makes it much easier to get that funky feel which can be a pain to
> create by hand in a digital environment. It's amazing how good even a
> digital plugin can sound when you actually use a human performance as
> the basis of the part instead of just a grid!
>
> I also spend a lot of time playing piano; it's extremely helpful to
> turn off the computer and spend time making music with an actual
> instrument that becomes a part of your body... There is a spiritual
> aspect to music that you simply can't experience if you don't
> participate in some type of physical music making.
>
>
> ~David
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:38 PM, kent williams
> wrote:
> > All hardware is The Detroit Way(tm), and one can't argue with results.
> > Virtually ('Virtually'?) every track that defines Detroit Techno and
> > House music was made with hardwa
Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
To me, computers are good for two things:
First of all, any track that uses FM synthesis, which means any track
with a Yamaha DX-7 or related synths, uses a computer for some of the
sound generation. A sampler is also a computer, and early house
already used samples, though Detroit techno less so. So computers have
always, in some way, been a part of house and techno.
However, the sounds were indeed all mixed down in the analog realm,
and I agree that can create a different feel to the music; it takes a
lot of work to mix down your stuff on computers and get a similar
feeling. However, I do believe it can be done!
I think computers in music are great for 3 things:
1. Besides FM synthesis and sampling, computers are necessary for
newer synthesis and signal processing techniques, such as granular
synthesis, which require digital processing, and can sound really good
when done well. "Traditional" 313 techno does not use these
techniques, since they weren't commonly available when the sound was
first created, but there is no reason they can't be incorporated into
a Detroit sound. Also, FM synthesis seems to be fairly common in
Detroit techno. Although "mnml" has resulted in a lot of stupid stuff,
I do think it is nice that newer synthesis and DSP techniques have
been accepted into house and techno, although they aren't often used
in a creative, not to mention "musical", manner.
2. Making electronic music when you are poor... the cost of making
electronic music via hardware is prohibitively expensive
unfortunately. I would love to use gear but some
3. Creating musical forms and processes that would be too labor
intensive to create by hand, such as generative and probability based
structures. There is also possibility working with things like
artificial neural networks and programs trained to respond to user
input in unpredictable ways. This clearly isn't part of traditional
Detroit techno, but again, I'd argue that you could apply such
techniques to the Detroit sound and get extremely interesting results.
In fact, I'd argue that anybody who wants to make "futuristic" sounds
should really focus on this area, especially because you could control
analog gear with these techniques and so still produce a very warm
classic sound while doing some cutting edge things with the structure
and musical content Just don't forget to keep it soulful and funky!
;-]
Most people use computers for convenience I'd say, and I think it's
kind of funny that people would use plugins to do traditional
synthesis when they could afford proper analog gear. If I could afford
gear, I'd probably record MIDI performances into a computer and use
them to trigger both analog and digital sources, then mix down on
analog gear.
I will say, I have grown very tired of the work flows created in
current digital software, so even though I'm using all digital, I've
started to record my keyboard performances on MIDI a lot more, which
makes it much easier to get that funky feel which can be a pain to
create by hand in a digital environment. It's amazing how good even a
digital plugin can sound when you actually use a human performance as
the basis of the part instead of just a grid!
I also spend a lot of time playing piano; it's extremely helpful to
turn off the computer and spend time making music with an actual
instrument that becomes a part of your body... There is a spiritual
aspect to music that you simply can't experience if you don't
participate in some type of physical music making.
~David
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:38 PM, kent williams wrote:
> All hardware is The Detroit Way(tm), and one can't argue with results.
> Virtually ('Virtually'?) every track that defines Detroit Techno and
> House music was made with hardware synths and mixed down outside the
> computer. As it happens, prior to roughly 1998, a computer was of
> limited utility for anything other than MIDI sequencing.
>
> The sound of Detroit techno arose at least in part from the way
> working with the hardware influences the aesthetic choices made. The
> one measure drum loop is a limitation of Roland Drum Machines* so
> Techno mostly involves one measure rhythm loops. Within that
> limitation, producers soon used the tools available to them (volume
> controls for individual sounds, sound parameters, write-mode real-time
> step programming) to make something static come alive.
>
> I use a mix of hardware and software, and end up doing the mix in the
> computer. That's just what I've evolved into using over the years. I
> still have nearly every synth & drum machine I've ever bought, and got
> my latest analog synth in 2008.
>
> That being said, I think it is very possible to make good music
> without the hardware, and in fact many people who make tracks simply
> can't afford a full-on hardware studio. Software synths are free to
> cheap; a proper modern analog synth costs a minimum of $300-400, a
> TR909 -- if you can find one -- is $1000 or more. A usable laptop is
>
Fwd: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
-- Forwarded message -- From: Kevin Kennedy Date: Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 7:24 PM Subject: Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:) To: Thor Teague @thor: I totally agree. this is why I won't abandon any of this! My ears have always been my guide in experimenting. Nevertheless, my journey in sound is personal first-public second. Oh, and one more thing: I did NOT post this message to say "hey I'm doing something!" So for everyone who went to their 'me too' place-you've again missed the point of the exercise... I posted this because: I am 313 related (and so are people like Arne Weinberg), and I don't post much on here, but there are several people on this list who I either admire, or I have become friends with, and would like them to know that I'm fighting the good fight. That's all I've got for now. fbk On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Thor Teague wrote: > One more thought and I'll go back to my regularly scheduled lurking > > Choice of gear has never ever made a bad track good. > > It can however make a good track bad. > > Believe what your ears are telling you. The ears are the audio > artist's #1 tool, just like the eyes are the visual artist's #1 tool. > > On 2/25/10, kuszyn...@gmail.com wrote: >> Now that's a good response. >> >> It's all in the mix down. >> > -- fbk sleepengineering/absoloop US -- fbk sleepengineering/absoloop US
Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
One more thought and I'll go back to my regularly scheduled lurking Choice of gear has never ever made a bad track good. It can however make a good track bad. Believe what your ears are telling you. The ears are the audio artist's #1 tool, just like the eyes are the visual artist's #1 tool. On 2/25/10, kuszyn...@gmail.com wrote: > Now that's a good response. > > It's all in the mix down. >
Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
Now that's a good response.
It's all in the mix down.
On Thursday, February 25, 2010, Thor Teague wrote:
> I think this whole discussion is a)tired and b)a fat load of horseshxt.
>
> But I will say, perhaps tongue-in-cheekly, that I just can't get
> around a hardware mixdown. Other than that I'm fine with whatever, but
> putting it through a Mackie seems to make all the difference. A close
> second to that mixer would be hardware compression.
>
> I mixed one of my tracks a couple years ago then re-edited it
> digitally and bounced it. The mix just drops dead. It's really
> telling. I can play those two examples for anybody and they have only
> to listen with their own two earballs to hear the difference.
>
> On 2/25/10, kent williams wrote:
>> All hardware is The Detroit Way(tm), and one can't argue with results.
>> Virtually ('Virtually'?) every track that defines Detroit Techno and
>> House music was made with hardware synths and mixed down outside the
>> computer. As it happens, prior to roughly 1998, a computer was of
>> limited utility for anything other than MIDI sequencing.
>>
>> The sound of Detroit techno arose at least in part from the way
>> working with the hardware influences the aesthetic choices made. The
>> one measure drum loop is a limitation of Roland Drum Machines* so
>> Techno mostly involves one measure rhythm loops. Within that
>> limitation, producers soon used the tools available to them (volume
>> controls for individual sounds, sound parameters, write-mode real-time
>> step programming) to make something static come alive.
>>
>> I use a mix of hardware and software, and end up doing the mix in the
>> computer. That's just what I've evolved into using over the years. I
>> still have nearly every synth & drum machine I've ever bought, and got
>> my latest analog synth in 2008.
>>
>> That being said, I think it is very possible to make good music
>> without the hardware, and in fact many people who make tracks simply
>> can't afford a full-on hardware studio. Software synths are free to
>> cheap; a proper modern analog synth costs a minimum of $300-400, a
>> TR909 -- if you can find one -- is $1000 or more. A usable laptop is
>> $600, and sufficient software is free to cheap (or stolen).
>>
>> If you don't like how all-computer productions sound, you can spend
>> the multiple thousands of dollars to equip yourself with 'real' gear**
>> or you could learn to get the sound you want out of the computer. The
>> production techniques required for working in the computer are
>> different than working with outboard hardware.
>>
>> In the end it's always what your'e able to do with the gear more than
>> the gear itself. Whatever inspires you or feels comfortable should
>> your guide, not what anyone thinks that you 'should' be using.
>>
>> *You can use drum loops longer than one measure on Roland drum
>> machines, but it isn't the easiest or most natural way to work.
>>
>> **My rule of thumb about buying external gear -- if it's just a
>> computer on the inside, I'd rather save my money and use my computer.
>> A lot of external synths -- e.g. Nord, Elektron Machine Drum, Alesis
>> Micron -- are just computers in a fancy box. They may be useful for
>> many reasons, but they don't do anything your computer can't, at least
>> insofar as sound is concerned.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Kevin Kennedy wrote:
>>>
>>> As a side note, I have gone back to using hardware, and there will be
>>> results to post for everyone soon...
>>>
>>
>
Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
I think this whole discussion is a)tired and b)a fat load of horseshxt.
But I will say, perhaps tongue-in-cheekly, that I just can't get
around a hardware mixdown. Other than that I'm fine with whatever, but
putting it through a Mackie seems to make all the difference. A close
second to that mixer would be hardware compression.
I mixed one of my tracks a couple years ago then re-edited it
digitally and bounced it. The mix just drops dead. It's really
telling. I can play those two examples for anybody and they have only
to listen with their own two earballs to hear the difference.
On 2/25/10, kent williams wrote:
> All hardware is The Detroit Way(tm), and one can't argue with results.
> Virtually ('Virtually'?) every track that defines Detroit Techno and
> House music was made with hardware synths and mixed down outside the
> computer. As it happens, prior to roughly 1998, a computer was of
> limited utility for anything other than MIDI sequencing.
>
> The sound of Detroit techno arose at least in part from the way
> working with the hardware influences the aesthetic choices made. The
> one measure drum loop is a limitation of Roland Drum Machines* so
> Techno mostly involves one measure rhythm loops. Within that
> limitation, producers soon used the tools available to them (volume
> controls for individual sounds, sound parameters, write-mode real-time
> step programming) to make something static come alive.
>
> I use a mix of hardware and software, and end up doing the mix in the
> computer. That's just what I've evolved into using over the years. I
> still have nearly every synth & drum machine I've ever bought, and got
> my latest analog synth in 2008.
>
> That being said, I think it is very possible to make good music
> without the hardware, and in fact many people who make tracks simply
> can't afford a full-on hardware studio. Software synths are free to
> cheap; a proper modern analog synth costs a minimum of $300-400, a
> TR909 -- if you can find one -- is $1000 or more. A usable laptop is
> $600, and sufficient software is free to cheap (or stolen).
>
> If you don't like how all-computer productions sound, you can spend
> the multiple thousands of dollars to equip yourself with 'real' gear**
> or you could learn to get the sound you want out of the computer. The
> production techniques required for working in the computer are
> different than working with outboard hardware.
>
> In the end it's always what your'e able to do with the gear more than
> the gear itself. Whatever inspires you or feels comfortable should
> your guide, not what anyone thinks that you 'should' be using.
>
> *You can use drum loops longer than one measure on Roland drum
> machines, but it isn't the easiest or most natural way to work.
>
> **My rule of thumb about buying external gear -- if it's just a
> computer on the inside, I'd rather save my money and use my computer.
> A lot of external synths -- e.g. Nord, Elektron Machine Drum, Alesis
> Micron -- are just computers in a fancy box. They may be useful for
> many reasons, but they don't do anything your computer can't, at least
> insofar as sound is concerned.
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Kevin Kennedy wrote:
>>
>> As a side note, I have gone back to using hardware, and there will be
>> results to post for everyone soon...
>>
>
Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
All hardware is The Detroit Way(tm), and one can't argue with results.
Virtually ('Virtually'?) every track that defines Detroit Techno and
House music was made with hardware synths and mixed down outside the
computer. As it happens, prior to roughly 1998, a computer was of
limited utility for anything other than MIDI sequencing.
The sound of Detroit techno arose at least in part from the way
working with the hardware influences the aesthetic choices made. The
one measure drum loop is a limitation of Roland Drum Machines* so
Techno mostly involves one measure rhythm loops. Within that
limitation, producers soon used the tools available to them (volume
controls for individual sounds, sound parameters, write-mode real-time
step programming) to make something static come alive.
I use a mix of hardware and software, and end up doing the mix in the
computer. That's just what I've evolved into using over the years. I
still have nearly every synth & drum machine I've ever bought, and got
my latest analog synth in 2008.
That being said, I think it is very possible to make good music
without the hardware, and in fact many people who make tracks simply
can't afford a full-on hardware studio. Software synths are free to
cheap; a proper modern analog synth costs a minimum of $300-400, a
TR909 -- if you can find one -- is $1000 or more. A usable laptop is
$600, and sufficient software is free to cheap (or stolen).
If you don't like how all-computer productions sound, you can spend
the multiple thousands of dollars to equip yourself with 'real' gear**
or you could learn to get the sound you want out of the computer. The
production techniques required for working in the computer are
different than working with outboard hardware.
In the end it's always what your'e able to do with the gear more than
the gear itself. Whatever inspires you or feels comfortable should
your guide, not what anyone thinks that you 'should' be using.
*You can use drum loops longer than one measure on Roland drum
machines, but it isn't the easiest or most natural way to work.
**My rule of thumb about buying external gear -- if it's just a
computer on the inside, I'd rather save my money and use my computer.
A lot of external synths -- e.g. Nord, Elektron Machine Drum, Alesis
Micron -- are just computers in a fancy box. They may be useful for
many reasons, but they don't do anything your computer can't, at least
insofar as sound is concerned.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Kevin Kennedy wrote:
>
> As a side note, I have gone back to using hardware, and there will be
> results to post for everyone soon...
>
Re: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
Great post. Will keep an eye out on the website. Always nice to see techno on the Internet regardless of personal music buying budget. :-) cheers C > Hello all. Been reading all of the comments about the > future/death/life/cycle of the 313 list. As long as we talk there > will be no death. > > We all know what everyone's hot button issues are...and sadly, less > and less of us are actively purchasing music due to many other issues > that we'll file under "life" or "growing up." > > Anyhow, I thought I would mention something that might pique many > listers interest: Arne Weinberg's label Diametric > (http://www.diametric-music.com/) has a new release: tangula's > descending ep...it's vinyl, limited to 300 copiesand I like > it...deep techno with something that most of the garbage created > nowadays doesn't have-a little funk to it. > > Maybe I'm talking out of school here, but Arne is set to release an > album on CD as the next project...and then there's a release by a guy > who calls himself fbk after...the ep is called "the expert escapist" > and will have some of my best work on it...funky, melodic, and > expressive...be on the lookout for that this summer (crosses fingers). > > I am really excited to say something about this, and will continue > to give up info as I get it. > > As a side note, I have gone back to using hardware, and there will be > results to post for everyone soon... > > Cheers from somewhere outside of detroit (but well within its magnetic > pull), > > > > > -- > fbk > > sleepengineering/absoloop US > >
RE: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
Nice one Kevin. It might feel like it's academic to yourself and perhaps it might well be to others, but I for one would still relish to hear your own personal decision in your own words as a producer, why you've gone back to using hardware. Cheers, Ken -Original Message- From: Kevin Kennedy [mailto:the...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:29 PM To: 313 Subject: (313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:) Hello all. Been reading all of the comments about the future/death/life/cycle of the 313 list. As long as we talk there will be no death. We all know what everyone's hot button issues are...and sadly, less and less of us are actively purchasing music due to many other issues that we'll file under "life" or "growing up." Anyhow, I thought I would mention something that might pique many listers interest: Arne Weinberg's label Diametric (http://www.diametric-music.com/) has a new release: tangula's descending ep...it's vinyl, limited to 300 copiesand I like it...deep techno with something that most of the garbage created nowadays doesn't have-a little funk to it. Maybe I'm talking out of school here, but Arne is set to release an album on CD as the next project...and then there's a release by a guy who calls himself fbk after...the ep is called "the expert escapist" and will have some of my best work on it...funky, melodic, and expressive...be on the lookout for that this summer (crosses fingers). I am really excited to say something about this, and will continue to give up info as I get it. As a side note, I have gone back to using hardware, and there will be results to post for everyone soon... Cheers from somewhere outside of detroit (but well within its magnetic pull), -- fbk sleepengineering/absoloop US
(313) Been Reading...now speaking...talking about the future (of fbk that is:)
Hello all. Been reading all of the comments about the future/death/life/cycle of the 313 list. As long as we talk there will be no death. We all know what everyone's hot button issues are...and sadly, less and less of us are actively purchasing music due to many other issues that we'll file under "life" or "growing up." Anyhow, I thought I would mention something that might pique many listers interest: Arne Weinberg's label Diametric (http://www.diametric-music.com/) has a new release: tangula's descending ep...it's vinyl, limited to 300 copiesand I like it...deep techno with something that most of the garbage created nowadays doesn't have-a little funk to it. Maybe I'm talking out of school here, but Arne is set to release an album on CD as the next project...and then there's a release by a guy who calls himself fbk after...the ep is called "the expert escapist" and will have some of my best work on it...funky, melodic, and expressive...be on the lookout for that this summer (crosses fingers). I am really excited to say something about this, and will continue to give up info as I get it. As a side note, I have gone back to using hardware, and there will be results to post for everyone soon... Cheers from somewhere outside of detroit (but well within its magnetic pull), -- fbk sleepengineering/absoloop US
