RE: (313) Production
or another chance is people are getting increasingly dumb - example: the recent monolake - you can smell 001010101010s from a mile yet 9 out of 10 ppl will say..it sounds like basic channel. which is...hardly sane ;/ eh? that alaska one? it does sound like basic channel, not exactly but the similarity is obvious enough. it also sounds very digital and modern but in a great way. it's an incredibly good record that makes most dub techno and just plain techno records sound like amateur hour tho imo, henke/monolake albums continue to be full of lots of less than lovable tracks, cold/clinical soundscapes, with a few moments of brilliance peppered instill respect henke to no end. one of the very best producers in the world imo
Re: (313) Production
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 03:57:32PM -0400, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote:
i dont think i agree with this part though. i feel like truly great
music speaks to all people, reguardless of what their taste might
be. for example, as a favor at our wedding, my wife and i made mix
CDs. the number of people whom have commented to us about them since
then is insane. they really LOVE them. and the first track is carl
craig's a wonderful life! theres tracks from 50s r+b to disco to
techno to rock on there. and the songs are such that they speak to the
peoples' souls directly. and we got comments from people from age 11
to age 70. music is probably the most universal language there is for
the human species. the best music does the same thing, reguardless of
who made it or where it comes from.
tom
Though I do believe that some of the greatest art manages to convey
something without you necessarily needing knowledge beforehand about its
background or cultural context, I don't think that is true to most art,
even truly excellent art.
Whether it is visual or musical, even 99.99% of the most excellent
examples of art have a certain cultural relativity to them and to
appreciate it you need to have a certain grasp of the context.
If someone gave your mix CD to some bushmen or nomadic tribe that is
unfamiliar with Western music, would they feel that the music speaks to
their souls the same way your wedding guests did?
If you had given the guests at your wedding party a mix CD of Chinese
opera, Tibetan chants, Appalachian yodelling and musique concrete, do you think
the music would speak to their souls?
--
{}0+|
(313) Production
Nice to see a discussion on 313 that involves no threats of mayhem. Tom, time and again, you make no concessions to anyone else's taste. While I like the stuff you like, and can listen to you DJ all the live long day and enjoy nearly every track, I like a lot of stuff you don't. I think I get what appeals to you about what you like, but there's more than one way to the top of the mountain. And I don't totally get your thesis in this discussion. Music technology either matters (which is what you seem to be saying when you complain about computer-produced music) or it doesn't (which is what you seem to be saying when you talk about people making great music, simply). I think the truth of the matter is more complicated than that. People evaluate Electronic Music in terms of sound design, in addition to the more traditional attributes of rhythm, melody, harmony, and structure. If you want to advance the state of the art, you try and build something, either in the world or in your computer, that makes a new sound. To do this new technology is important. Where artistry and talent come into play is in finding, manipulating, and arranging new sounds in a way that's pleasing to listeners. Believe me, I've spent hours and hours making 'sounds never heard before' in my studio, and most of them are awful. But the sounds you use isn't the only factor in producing music -- you need to consider things like rhythm, structure, and harmony, the balance between repetition and novelty, and production technique. More important than any one of those properties is whether the artist has anything to say through the music. An artist's music, to be truly worth listening to, needs to be something more than beats, notes, and noises. You can call it 'soul' but it's not a narrow, Ray Charles definition of Soul. It's more a sense that the music is inhabited by something, something that speaks to _your_ soul. Something that can't be reduced to formula and reproduced at will. And even if that spark is there, there's no guarantee that you'll respond to it. Everybody needs to find what speaks to their condition. Aesthetics can never be absolute. On the subject of production values . Guys like Larry Heard may have not obsessed over the latest gear, and made music very simply, but it's a mistake to say that they didn't spend considerable time and energy on getting the production right. Larry is a perfect example of this. He may just have a drum machine and a couple of synths going into a track, but they sound really, really, good. I know the machines Larry Heard used on his early tracks, and believe me, you can't just plug them into a Mackie 1202 and have something that sounds that good come out. There are plenty of closely guarded production tricks in dance music. You find that out if you get serious about producing tracks. It's not all in Keyboard or SOS or Electronic Musician. Every one of the people they interview isn't telling everything about how they work. Some of them jealously guard their secrets, and others aren't even conscious of doing anything unique when they build a track and mix it down. Because of their ears (and what's between them) they make hundreds of aesthetic and technical choices every hour in the studio. What it comes down to is this: It's the person, not the tools, that makes any art special. The fact that a bunch of clueless raver kids can string a few loops in Acid or Live has absolutely nothing to do with what real artists are doing. Most of the music that gets isn't any good, and a lot of it that is good isn't to your particular taste, or mine. No one has the perect, objective, comprehensive critical faculty to decide what is or isn't good.
Re: (313) Production
On 8/31/06, kent williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom, time and again, you make no concessions to anyone else's taste. While I like the stuff you like, and can listen to you DJ all the live long day and enjoy nearly every track, I like a lot of stuff you don't. I think I get what appeals to you about what you like, but there's more than one way to the top of the mountain. really what it boils down to for me is that i feel like any appreciation for production value and things of that ilk are completely separate from the appreciation of the music. personally, i love Chic's piano sounds. but its not that that makes me go nuts when their tunes are played, its how ridiculously brilliant all their records are. And I don't totally get your thesis in this discussion. Music technology either matters (which is what you seem to be saying when you complain about computer-produced music) or it doesn't (which is what you seem to be saying when you talk about people making great music, simply). ill try to be specific here. it SHOUDLN'T matter, if people have the right goal in mind. the reason it does matter is because using a computer opens you up to over production and all the other follies that afflict software prodction. for those things to happen in a hardware studio, youd pretty much have to be a millionaire and not care about how much you spend. it seems to be a temptation that way too few people are able to overcome. why that is, im not entirely sure. I think the truth of the matter is more complicated than that. People evaluate Electronic Music in terms of sound design, in addition to the more traditional attributes of rhythm, melody, harmony, and structure. If you want to advance the state of the art, you try and build something, either in the world or in your computer, that makes a new sound. To do this new technology is important. Where artistry and talent come into play is in finding, manipulating, and arranging new sounds in a way that's pleasing to listeners. Believe me, I've spent hours and hours making 'sounds never heard before' in my studio, and most of them are awful. exactly. and what happens when every timbre ever has been explored and beaten into the ground? will that fascination finally end? there's alot of sound possibilities, but compared to the range of human emotions it is very limited. exploring those emotions is what is interesting to me, and for me that rarely if ever happens through a sound alone. usually it has to do with a specific sound in its proper place, and i can think of maybe 20 instances of that in all music ive ever listened to. and it definitely had more to do with everything else going on in the song at the time than just the sound design. But the sounds you use isn't the only factor in producing music -- you need to consider things like rhythm, structure, and harmony, the balance between repetition and novelty, and production technique. More important than any one of those properties is whether the artist has anything to say through the music. An artist's music, to be truly worth listening to, needs to be something more than beats, notes, and noises. You can call it 'soul' but it's not a narrow, Ray Charles definition of Soul. i agree with all of this exactly. It's more a sense that the music is inhabited by something, something that speaks to _your_ soul. Something that can't be reduced to formula and reproduced at will. And even if that spark is there, there's no guarantee that you'll respond to it. Everybody needs to find what speaks to their condition. Aesthetics can never be absolute. i dont think i agree with this part though. i feel like truly great music speaks to all people, reguardless of what their taste might be. for example, as a favor at our wedding, my wife and i made mix CDs. the number of people whom have commented to us about them since then is insane. they really LOVE them. and the first track is carl craig's a wonderful life! theres tracks from 50s r+b to disco to techno to rock on there. and the songs are such that they speak to the peoples' souls directly. and we got comments from people from age 11 to age 70. music is probably the most universal language there is for the human species. the best music does the same thing, reguardless of who made it or where it comes from. On the subject of production values . Guys like Larry Heard may have not obsessed over the latest gear, and made music very simply, but it's a mistake to say that they didn't spend considerable time and energy on getting the production right. Larry is a perfect example of this. He may just have a drum machine and a couple of synths going into a track, but they sound really, really, good. I know the machines Larry Heard used on his early tracks, and believe me, you can't just plug them into a Mackie 1202 and have something that sounds that good come out. There are plenty of closely guarded production tricks in dance music. You find that out if
Re: (313) Production
music is probably the most universal language there is for the human species. the best music does the same thing, reguardless of who made it or where it comes from. i used to think that music was a universal language. then i had some cheesy LER class where the professor did some clever thing by asking the class if music is a universal language. everyone said yes. then she played some song from some far off place and asked us to write to the emotion that was being conveyed. everyone wrote down something pretty similar. saying it sounded happy or what not. after this the professor told us what it was about... mourning over death or something like that despite the fact that the class thought it was a happy sounding song. so yeah cheesy story but whatever... it fits. where i am going is that music comes out of different cultures across the word. emotion, or better yet methods of expressing emotion are not the same from culture to culture. therefore when expressing emotion through music is it is going to be expressed in each culture's specific manner causing these emotions to not be delivered or interpreted in the same way. so very culturally specific music is definitely not a universal language. maybe music that is a fusion of culturally specific forms of music (techno) can be a universal language. it represents many cultures combined so many more people will interpret it the same. i guess i could have made this post more simple by saying it's just not so black and white to say all music is universal language. techno may be but the traditional music of native *insert country* people is most likely not universally understood.
Re: (313) Production
Believe me, I've spent hours and hours making 'sounds never heard before' in my studio, and most of them are awful. ^and if you want to become one of them/the players - choose the most awful/ridiculous ones, loop them for about 5 mins or make some random patterns/sequences - put them out. but before: give it some geeky label and write some sort of a manifesto..ask some trendy journos for a positive review.. that's been done before and unfortunately worked pretty well.. that's what the recent evolution is (almost) all about - freaky, glitchy nonsense, farty basslines etc. that's what literally made me give up listening to new records by people i dont know - most the fresh stuff gives a headache after 4 bars of that garbage. i want to .believe me,im curious as ever - but my ears beg me to stop. at the same time it's the people who use the same old boxes for 20+ years that sound both fresh and good on many occasions. there are a few software optimists who claim that when you know how you can get any sound out of a computer..blablabla.. BUT - they either have a deal with a given software manufacturer or belong to the evergrowing group of people who used to produce amazing timbres but ended up releasing pathetic jokes. show me ONE software lopass filter that sounds warm with a narrow Q, without stuff like pSP vintage warmer put on every group channel or so it will never get there imho. or another chance is people are getting increasingly dumb - example: the recent monolake - you can smell 001010101010s from a mile yet 9 out of 10 ppl will say..it sounds like basic channel. which is...hardly sane ;/ enough, i guess. /12
Re: (313) Production
music is probably the most universal language there is for the human species. the best music does the same thing, reguardless of who made it or where it comes from. -- i guess i could have made this post more simple by saying it's just not so black and white to say all music is universal language. techno may be but the traditional music of native *insert country* people is most likely not universally understood. Any universal statement gets pretty hard to prove, unless you are God. They take exhaustive knowledge - about signs, meaning and perception, among other things - which just isn't available to anyone I can think on this plane of existence. That is not to say that music or other forms of communication cannot be transcultural, it means that it's a pretty hard thing to establish as true or normative. Best is a whole other ball of wax which is fraught with even more difficulties.
Re: Re: (313) Production
Any universal statement gets pretty hard to prove, I seem to remember from some lecture back in the myst of time that there's only two things that are universal, the rhythm with which children torment each other, nah na na nah and the syllable used for mother - Ma, I have no proof tho and gods knows why this info has stayed with me all this time...
Re: Re: (313) Production
and the lecture was on language, I think *lol* m - Original Message - From: Martin Dust [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:46 PM Subject: Re: Re: (313) Production Any universal statement gets pretty hard to prove, I seem to remember from some lecture back in the myst of time that there's only two things that are universal, the rhythm with which children torment each other, nah na na nah and the syllable used for mother - Ma, I have no proof tho and gods knows why this info has stayed with me all this time...
RE: (313) Production
Def agreed Skept... What you have said is so true... I have seen in it again and again... some people think that because techno is without words, and that because so many people around the world appreciate it, that everyone should have the same universal views... they also feel that everyones views should be the same... thats why we end up having so many arguments about what is considered good vs bad. Cultural differences are an interesting thing to study. Research into cultural differences shows that, even in cultures that are similar, ie within the USA (pittsburgh and detroit for example), unless you were born and raised in that specific city, there are a lot of hidden cultural differences that cause citizens to react differently. Detroiter's for example have a way of doing business that is unlike what I've seen in any other city. Its difficult to explain, but there's different politics and ethics of business here that I've not seen anywhere else. I always find it interesting when people who are from outside of Detroit place judgements about what is right for the city or the citizens, or the development of the music. No matter how much those people do research into the city, unless they were born here or lived it for a long time, they won't understand the city in the same way we will. Not that we dont want people to keep researching and be interested, as sharing of stories from other cultures helps people understand more, and us Detroiter's love that people from other cultures love ours so much. The whole point is that judging one culture based on the cultural views of another becomes a bit tricky sometimes. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 31/08/2006 21:21 To: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) Production music is probably the most universal language there is for the human species. the best music does the same thing, reguardless of who made it or where it comes from. i used to think that music was a universal language. then i had some cheesy LER class where the professor did some clever thing by asking the class if music is a universal language. everyone said yes. then she played some song from some far off place and asked us to write to the emotion that was being conveyed. everyone wrote down something pretty similar. saying it sounded happy or what not. after this the professor told us what it was about... mourning over death or something like that despite the fact that the class thought it was a happy sounding song. so yeah cheesy story but whatever... it fits. where i am going is that music comes out of different cultures across the word. emotion, or better yet methods of expressing emotion are not the same from culture to culture. therefore when expressing emotion through music is it is going to be expressed in each culture's specific manner causing these emotions to not be delivered or interpreted in the same way. so very culturally specific music is definitely not a universal language. maybe music that is a fusion of culturally specific forms of music (techno) can be a universal language. it represents many cultures combined so many more people will interpret it the same. i guess i could have made this post more simple by saying it's just not so black and white to say all music is universal language. techno may be but the traditional music of native *insert country* people is most likely not universally understood.
RE: (313) Production
BOOM BOOM! And I'm going with the dumb people answer. k -Original Message- From: v12 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 4:26 PM To: kent williams; 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) Production Believe me, I've spent hours and hours making 'sounds never heard before' in my studio, and most of them are awful. ^and if you want to become one of them/the players - choose the most awful/ridiculous ones, loop them for about 5 mins or make some random patterns/sequences - put them out. but before: give it some geeky label and write some sort of a manifesto..ask some trendy journos for a positive review.. that's been done before and unfortunately worked pretty well.. that's what the recent evolution is (almost) all about - freaky, glitchy nonsense, farty basslines etc. that's what literally made me give up listening to new records by people i dont know - most the fresh stuff gives a headache after 4 bars of that garbage. i want to .believe me,im curious as ever - but my ears beg me to stop. at the same time it's the people who use the same old boxes for 20+ years that sound both fresh and good on many occasions. there are a few software optimists who claim that when you know how you can get any sound out of a computer..blablabla.. BUT - they either have a deal with a given software manufacturer or belong to the evergrowing group of people who used to produce amazing timbres but ended up releasing pathetic jokes. show me ONE software lopass filter that sounds warm with a narrow Q, without stuff like pSP vintage warmer put on every group channel or so it will never get there imho. or another chance is people are getting increasingly dumb - example: the recent monolake - you can smell 001010101010s from a mile yet 9 out of 10 ppl will say..it sounds like basic channel. which is...hardly sane ;/ enough, i guess. /12
Re: (313) production and mastering (Juan Atkins)
Juan Atkins likes to use romplers, you can hear it in his music although he does an exceptional job at it. Romplers seem to have no problem achieving that smooth-Roland type sound. Kevin Saunderson insisted on only using a real TR-808 back in the techno heyday of the late 80's but that's a sound you don't hear anymore, TR-808's are now associated with electro. on 2/6/03 5:30 PM, ::) at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: most keyboard that play back lifelike sounds is a rompler rompler meaning the data is stored in a ROM or read only memory you hit a key, it plays the sound of a piano. different than a true synthesize, in that a synthesize does just what you'd think: synthesize. reply offlist if you'd like me to elaborate
Re: (313) production and mastering
On the subject of production and mastering I can see what Adrew is trying to say with the way today's techno and tech-house sounds but that has more to do with the production aspect of today's music, the types of effects and sounds people are using in tracks, you really cant blame it on ProTools which has been an industry standard for the past two decades. For example there are certain 313 labels that have released classic compilations, these compilations would have sounded better in my opinion if they digitally re-mastered the tracks using software like ProTools. Listen to the way an album on RS sounds, it sounds good on both vinyl and CD, whether an artist like Carl Craig is going for a 'raw' or 'dry' production sound like with 69 or a clean production. Also there have been classic Detroit techno tracks released on European labels such as Network that just sound better in my opinion because they do a better job mastering the tracks. I've passed certain '313-List' labels (which will stay anonymous) that are going for the 'dry' production sound because the mastering is a little too harsh and abrasive even though the music content was good.
Re: (313) production and mastering
I'm sorry, but I'm not blaming anything on Pro-Tools, it's the people using it with no imagination, a different point. When a producer stops using his/her brain and lets Pro-Tools take over their sound, then we get the situation we have now, with lots of boring tracks - but this is so obvious to be almost trivial. When a cool producer makes an amazing track, which is loud and well-produced, then f*ckin A. Hope I've cleared that up, Regards, Andrew On the subject of production and mastering I can see what Adrew is trying to say with the way today's techno and tech-house sounds but that has more to do with the production aspect of today's music, the types of effects and sounds people are using in tracks, you really cant blame it on ProTools which has been an industry standard for the past two decades. For example there are certain 313 labels that have released classic compilations, these compilations would have sounded better in my opinion if they digitally re-mastered the tracks using software like ProTools. Listen to the way an album on RS sounds, it sounds good on both vinyl and CD, whether an artist like Carl Craig is going for a 'raw' or 'dry' production sound like with 69 or a clean production. Also there have been classic Detroit techno tracks released on European labels such as Network that just sound better in my opinion because they do a better job mastering the tracks. I've passed certain '313-List' labels (which will stay anonymous) that are going for the 'dry' production sound because the mastering is a little too harsh and abrasive even though the music content was good. *** This email is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, you are in notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person: to do so could be a breach of confidence. Thank you for your co-operation. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of The RTL Group or its associated companies. Please contact our IT Helpdesk on +44 (0)20 7691 6996 or e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you require further assistance. ***
Re: (313) production and mastering
Pro Tools is really no difeerant that usin a hardware sequencer, it's not going to compose tracks for you. Most of today's vynil is either from a CD or DAT master Pro Tools is only going to make your master sound better if your using it properly, buy some nice analog outbourd gear, if you want something raw and warm record an EMU SP-12 and a Minimoog into ProTools and buy their Contol 24 mixer with Focusrite. If you use a Rompler with cheesy D*gital effects it's going to sound like an F*cking rompler. on 2/5/03 8:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sorry, but I'm not blaming anything on Pro-Tools, it's the people using it with no imagination, a different point. When a producer stops using his/her brain and lets Pro-Tools take over their sound, then we get the situation we have now, with lots of boring tracks - but this is so obvious to be almost trivial. When a cool producer makes an amazing track, which is loud and well-produced, then f*ckin A. Hope I've cleared that up, Regards, Andrew
Re: (313) production and mastering
Far be it for me to enter into a 'debate', but I didn't assert that Pro-Tools performs composition. However it can have a decisive effect on 'sound'. This is due to numerous factors, such as the A/D converters used (Digidesign, MOTU, Apogee etc.) and the software itself, i.e. the TDM system of DSP, which is far more powerful than most home systems. Even though it ends up on a DAT or CD, the difference is audible. Thanks for the advice on what equipment to use, although I'm afraid I've never heard of a 'Rompler'. Regards, Andrew Pro Tools is really no difeerant that usin a hardware sequencer, it's not going to compose tracks for you. Most of today's vynil is either from a CD or DAT master Pro Tools is only going to make your master sound better if your using it properly, buy some nice analog outbourd gear, if you want something raw and warm record an EMU SP-12 and a Minimoog into ProTools and buy their Contol 24 mixer with Focusrite. If you use a Rompler with cheesy D*gital effects it's going to sound like an F*cking rompler. *** This email is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, you are in notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person: to do so could be a breach of confidence. Thank you for your co-operation. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of The RTL Group or its associated companies. Please contact our IT Helpdesk on +44 (0)20 7691 6996 or e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you require further assistance. ***
Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get their tracks noticed, or to give them presence . . . I would suggest, if you find that people only notice your tracks when you eliminate your dynamic range and make everything blaringly-loud, you've probably got bigger worries than poor production. An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. But then I prefer digital to vinyl . . . *runs away* -- Brian balistic Prince http://www.bprince.com - art and techno
Re: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
I absolutely agree, and that's one of the things I had in mind when writing. The problem isn't compression itself, merely it's use as a balm. Maybe the visual interface afforded by the likes of Pro-Tools encourages producers to normalize, compress, or otherwise louden their work? When you see a small waveform, you want to make it bigger!? (I suppose this would apply to all screen-based DAWs, not just Pro-Tools.) As for preferring digital to vinyl, with SACDs coming out soon (at 192KHz rather than 44.1KHz) you may have an airtight case! The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get their tracks noticed, or to give them presence . . . I would suggest, if you find that people only notice your tracks when you eliminate your dynamic range and make everything blaringly-loud, you've probably got bigger worries than poor production. An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. But then I prefer digital to vinyl . . . *runs away* Andrew Hodgson Transmission Operator Central Playout LPC 1 Stephen St. London W1T 1AL Tel: (020) 7691 6225 / 5168 Fax: (020) 7691 6919 *** This email is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, you are in notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person: to do so could be a breach of confidence. Thank you for your co-operation. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of The RTL Group or its associated companies. Please contact our IT Helpdesk on +44 (0)20 7691 6996 or e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you require further assistance. ***
Re: (313) production and mastering
I would argue that most people using pro tools are using the LE version which is very limited in it's effect. once you get a TDM or Mix 24 there are so many more digital effect you can use. but lets not forget you can still use all you analog effect you just have to route a signal through them and record the out come.. I would also argue the pro tools is better than analog tape. it is a much cleaner medium. which makes things like a pre amp and mic play much more in the big picture of sound when you do not have to fight the noise floor of analog tape. I also like analog tape it has some very unique characteristics, that I dont beleive current any digital processing can simulate. they both have there purposes. but I really think it come down to money, when you can almost buy a whole Pro Tools studio for the price of one studer 16 track deck. which bring me back to these studio's also dont invest in a good PT system either. they don't get many dsp card so there processing power is low and they most likily don't get farm card because they don't invest in the good effect's like the tc stuff, amp farm and echo farm which are very expencive. the other digital processing equipment like motu, while it is very good quality. does not work with pro tools. unless you use the free version. which does work really well and is free. Far be it for me to enter into a 'debate', but I didn't assert that Pro-Tools performs composition. However it can have a decisive effect on 'sound'. This is due to numerous factors, such as the A/D converters used (Digidesign, MOTU, Apogee etc.) and the software itself, i.e. the TDM system of DSP, which is far more powerful than most home systems. Even though it ends up on a DAT or CD, the difference is audible. loosing those harmonics is very audible. when you record in pro tools you can record 24/96 which is a very good sample rate. and when you bounce it to a dat or cd you are dithering it to a 16 bit signal. so you end up loping off the top end of the spectrium. it is audible and when how play back systems can play back at those rate's I bet the record companies will be remastering like mad. I have also heard the neuindo (sp?) is very good. designed around the windows machine. I know there are issues with neuindo and the mac has some thing with the was the computer processes, a intel is a x86 and a mac is something else. as for getting a pro tools system. I have been seeing a lot of 882/20 on ebay for around $300 and today I saw an andromda card that went for $350 but the actual program i/o card are much harder to find then the 882's but this would be a 20-bit TDM pro tools system and you could use all the cool guy plugs with it and still come in under $1500 if you had to buy a computer. I see blue and white mac g3 for cheap on ebay these days. you could even use an older 8600 or 9600 because this pro tools hardware does most of the audio processing on board and doesn't require that much power to run the screen.
Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
Brian 'balistic' Prince wrote on Wed, 5 Feb 2003 about following: The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. many people try to hide the fact that they cannot mix without compressors; mixing the sounds of tune is more important than compressing the sh*t out of it. mixing is art, it takes time to master it. i tend to use compressors a bit; i try not to overuse them; and yes, i know, my mixing skills suck. (no, i'm not referring to playing records) sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html
RE: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
2 weeks ago Buzz Goreewas spinning over here, some guy booked him with 2 other DJ's who where playing banging looptechno, Buzz was playing the middle of them. All the looptechno records where extremely compressed, it was just one solid wall of sound pushing out of the speakers while the records Buzz was playing used a way more subtile compression giving these records lots more dynamics. I prefer to use compression in a more subtile way to, just to keep the dynamics and to keep the track alive Personally i think that the biggest advantage of digital systems like protools are for producers. No way you can hear in a club if it is mixed on an analog desk or a digital one. For producers it works faster and easier, sure it gives a cleaner sound but to be honest, that is almost not hearable on a soundsystem. [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. many people try to hide the fact that they cannot mix without compressors; mixing the sounds of tune is more important than compressing the sh*t out of it. mixing is art, it takes time to master it. i tend to use compressors a bit; i try not to overuse them; and yes, i know, my mixing skills suck. (no, i'm not referring to playing records) -- DISCLAIMER De gemeente Almelo aanvaardt voor haar medewerkers geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor eventueel onjuist, onrechtmatig of ontoelaatbaar geacht gebruik van e-mail (inclusief bijlagen). Dit e-mail bericht is door de gemeente Almelo gecontroleerd op de aanwezigheid van eventuele virussen. Wij kunnen echter geen garantie afgeven dat al onze e-mail berichten volledig virus vrij zijn. Het is daarom verstandig uw binnenkomende e-mail berichten zelf op de mogelijke aanwezigheid van virussen te controleren. --
Re: (313) production and mastering
** Entertainment UK Limited Registered Office: 243 Blyth Road, Hayes, Middlesex UB3 1DN. Registered in England Numbered 409775 This e-mail is only intended for the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. Unless stated to the contrary, any opinions or comments are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of the company. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your co-operation. ** -- Forwarded by Graham Bergdahl/Logistics/Blyth/EUK on 06/02/2003 09:03 --- Graham Bergdahl 06/02/2003 09:03 To: spw [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering (Document link: Graham Bergdahl) Can anyone share any good Compressor settings? Particulary for Kicks and B-lines. I use Cubase SX and Waves Comp. I'm also looking for a high end reverb plug in as I still haven't found anything great. Do Lexicon do anything? Threshold? Ratio? Make Up? Attack? Release? Regards production and mastering, my opinion is that the artist should be mixing the track from the very first note, making sure sounds go together well and EQ's are not fighting from the outset. It's all trial and error though, and f**king frusting at times. Bergs. spw [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 06/02/2003 02:02:43 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering Pro Tools is really no difeerant that usin a hardware sequencer, it's not going to compose tracks for you. Most of today's vynil is either from a CD or DAT master Pro Tools is only going to make your master sound better if your using it properly, buy some nice analog outbourd gear, if you want something raw and warm record an EMU SP-12 and a Minimoog into ProTools and buy their Contol 24 mixer with Focusrite. If you use a Rompler with cheesy D*gital effects it's going to sound like an F*cking rompler. on 2/5/03 8:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sorry, but I'm not blaming anything on Pro-Tools, it's the people using it with no imagination, a different point. When a producer stops using his/her brain and lets Pro-Tools take over their sound, then we get the situation we have now, with lots of boring tracks - but this is so obvious to be almost trivial. When a cool producer makes an amazing track, which is loud and well-produced, then f*ckin A. Hope I've cleared that up, Regards, Andrew
Re: (313) production and mastering
i've always been told to step away from my work when painting, to avoid 'overproducing' it. at some point the work is done, and by adding more to it, or trying to make things look better, the overall picture will loose it's identity, it's soul. isn't this the same thing that happens when you overproduce your music? by trying to make the record sound perfect, it will loose exactly those aspects that make it recognizable as a work created by THAT musician. jurren _ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: (313) production and mastering
No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ To me you you cant blame what your describing on 'over-production' it's more like 'over-processing' or the over use of DSP type effects. One big differance I hear in todays techno and 'tech-house' has more to do with the equipment people are using, buy a real TR-808 and a vintage synthesizer if you want to sound old school. on 2/5/03 8:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Far be it for me to enter into a 'debate', but I didn't assert that Pro-Tools performs composition. However it can have a decisive effect on 'sound'. This is due to numerous factors, such as the A/D converters used (Digidesign, MOTU, Apogee etc.) and the software itself, i.e. the TDM system of DSP, which is far more powerful than most home systems. Even though it ends up on a DAT or CD, the difference is audible. Thanks for the advice on what equipment to use, although I'm afraid I've never heard of a 'Rompler'. sample based sound modules. Regards, Andrew
Re: (313) production and mastering
spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html
RE: (313) production and mastering
there was a version called ProTools NT not long ago. You could only use it on a handfull of pc's that Digi decided they would support with WinNT4 running on it. -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003
RE: (313) production and mastering
The protools that comes with the digi001 (not the free one) supports XP (and better yet, digi released WDM drivers so you can use any windows prog with the hardware) and PT 6 will also run on XP. I am not a big fan of protools since the midi support still seems a little awkward (compared to logic or cubase anyway) but I cannot really talk smack about their hardware which is the best by a long shot. However, I think in a couple years the idea of using protools as a Techno production platform will not even come into play since PCs are outpacing Macs both in price and performance and the improvements in affordable sound interfaces will soon make the $50k, $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of the home studio. -raph -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html
Re: (313) production and mastering
Yee haa! I'd love run a Unix based music system - there's a great article in Sound on Sound this month (you've probably seen it), about Linux for music. Somehow I think there's something inherently techno-y about using Unix to do music!! Call it the geek quotient...;-) - Original Message - From: House of Suki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sakari Karipuro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering The protools that comes with the digi001 (not the free one) supports XP (and better yet, digi released WDM drivers so you can use any windows prog with the hardware) and PT 6 will also run on XP. I am not a big fan of protools since the midi support still seems a little awkward (compared to logic or cubase anyway) but I cannot really talk smack about their hardware which is the best by a long shot. However, I think in a couple years the idea of using protools as a Techno production platform will not even come into play since PCs are outpacing Macs both in price and performance and the improvements in affordable sound interfaces will soon make the $50k, $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of the home studio. -raph -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html
RE: (313) production and mastering
Protools 6 runs fine on OSX and so does Logic 5.x, Cubase SX, Reason 2.0 etc. we just have to wait for people like Native Instruments to convert the VST apps to Audio Units and then i am really happy :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yee haa! I'd love run a Unix based music system - there's a great article in Sound on Sound this month (you've probably seen it), about Linux for music. Somehow I think there's something inherently techno-y about using Unix to do music!! Call it the geek quotient...;-) - Original Message - From: House of Suki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sakari Karipuro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering The protools that comes with the digi001 (not the free one) supports XP (and better yet, digi released WDM drivers so you can use any windows prog with the hardware) and PT 6 will also run on XP. I am not a big fan of protools since the midi support still seems a little awkward (compared to logic or cubase anyway) but I cannot really talk smack about their hardware which is the best by a long shot. However, I think in a couple years the idea of using protools as a Techno production platform will not even come into play since PCs are outpacing Macs both in price and performance and the improvements in affordable sound interfaces will soon make the $50k, $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of the home studio. -raph -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html -- DISCLAIMER De gemeente Almelo aanvaardt voor haar medewerkers geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor eventueel onjuist, onrechtmatig of ontoelaatbaar geacht gebruik van e-mail (inclusief bijlagen). Dit e-mail bericht is door de gemeente Almelo gecontroleerd op de aanwezigheid van eventuele virussen. Wij kunnen echter geen garantie afgeven dat al onze e-mail berichten volledig virus vrij zijn. Het is daarom verstandig uw binnenkomende e-mail berichten zelf op de mogelijke aanwezigheid van virussen te controleren. --
RE: (313) production and mastering
House of Suki wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of Custom distro is a bad idea. Better one is to make software that works in whatever distro (you get more users). but now we are getting heavily off-topic. let's get back to the beats :) sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html
Re: (313) production and mastering
I wanted to use linux for production, but It didn't have the software I want looking for. until I wrote it. :) http://www.filter24.org/seq24/ rob buse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yee haa! I'd love run a Unix based music system - there's a great article in Sound on Sound this month (you've probably seen it), about Linux for music. Somehow I think there's something inherently techno-y about using Unix to do music!! Call it the geek quotient...;-) - Original Message - From: House of Suki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sakari Karipuro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering The protools that comes with the digi001 (not the free one) supports XP (and better yet, digi released WDM drivers so you can use any windows prog with the hardware) and PT 6 will also run on XP. I am not a big fan of protools since the midi support still seems a little awkward (compared to logic or cubase anyway) but I cannot really talk smack about their hardware which is the best by a long shot. However, I think in a couple years the idea of using protools as a Techno production platform will not even come into play since PCs are outpacing Macs both in price and performance and the improvements in affordable sound interfaces will soon make the $50k, $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of the home studio. -raph -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html ___ Sent through e-mol. E-mail, Anywhere, Anytime. http://www.e-mol.com
Re: (313) production and mastering
i like the look of thatas soon as i've sorted the Alsa stuff i think i should try it out. cheers robin... I wanted to use linux for production, but It didn't have the software I want looking for. until I wrote it. :) http://www.filter24.org/seq24/
Re: (313) production and mastering
In a couple of years I probably still be using old software on a Mac. Digital audio is digital audio regardless of what platform your using and if you have the latest computer model/ operating system. All you really need is a decent sound card, a good sound source, and most importantly good production skills. on 2/6/03 9:01 AM, Jongsma, K.J. at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Protools 6 runs fine on OSX and so does Logic 5.x, Cubase SX, Reason 2.0 etc. we just have to wait for people like Native Instruments to convert the VST apps to Audio Units and then i am really happy :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yee haa! I'd love run a Unix based music system - there's a great article in Sound on Sound this month (you've probably seen it), about Linux for music. Somehow I think there's something inherently techno-y about using Unix to do music!! Call it the geek quotient...;-) - Original Message - From: House of Suki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sakari Karipuro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering The protools that comes with the digi001 (not the free one) supports XP (and better yet, digi released WDM drivers so you can use any windows prog with the hardware) and PT 6 will also run on XP. I am not a big fan of protools since the midi support still seems a little awkward (compared to logic or cubase anyway) but I cannot really talk smack about their hardware which is the best by a long shot. However, I think in a couple years the idea of using protools as a Techno production platform will not even come into play since PCs are outpacing Macs both in price and performance and the improvements in affordable sound interfaces will soon make the $50k, $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of the home studio. -raph -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html -- DISCLAIMER De gemeente Almelo aanvaardt voor haar medewerkers geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor eventueel onjuist, onrechtmatig of ontoelaatbaar geacht gebruik van e-mail (inclusief bijlagen). Dit e-mail bericht is door de gemeente Almelo gecontroleerd op de aanwezigheid van eventuele virussen. Wij kunnen echter geen garantie afgeven dat al onze e-mail berichten volledig virus vrij zijn. Het is daarom verstandig uw binnenkomende e-mail berichten zelf op de mogelijke aanwezigheid van virussen te controleren. --
Re: (313) production and mastering
I read somewhere Fatboy Slim still uses (or at least did on his first album) Notator on an Atari ST. G. spw [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 06/02/2003 15:10:55 To: cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering In a couple of years I probably still be using old software on a Mac. Digital audio is digital audio regardless of what platform your using and if you have the latest computer model/ operating system. All you really need is a decent sound card, a good sound source, and most importantly good production skills. on 2/6/03 9:01 AM, Jongsma, K.J. at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Protools 6 runs fine on OSX and so does Logic 5.x, Cubase SX, Reason 2.0 etc. we just have to wait for people like Native Instruments to convert the VST apps to Audio Units and then i am really happy :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yee haa! I'd love run a Unix based music system - there's a great article in Sound on Sound this month (you've probably seen it), about Linux for music. Somehow I think there's something inherently techno-y about using Unix to do music!! Call it the geek quotient...;-) - Original Message - From: House of Suki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sakari Karipuro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering The protools that comes with the digi001 (not the free one) supports XP (and better yet, digi released WDM drivers so you can use any windows prog with the hardware) and PT 6 will also run on XP. I am not a big fan of protools since the midi support still seems a little awkward (compared to logic or cubase anyway) but I cannot really talk smack about their hardware which is the best by a long shot. However, I think in a couple years the idea of using protools as a Techno production platform will not even come into play since PCs are outpacing Macs both in price and performance and the improvements in affordable sound interfaces will soon make the $50k, $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of the home studio. -raph -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html -- DISCLAIMER De gemeente Almelo aanvaardt voor haar medewerkers geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor eventueel onjuist, onrechtmatig of ontoelaatbaar geacht gebruik van e-mail (inclusief bijlagen). Dit e-mail bericht is door de gemeente Almelo gecontroleerd op de aanwezigheid van eventuele virussen. Wij kunnen echter geen garantie afgeven dat al onze e-mail berichten volledig virus vrij zijn. Het is daarom verstandig uw binnenkomende e-mail berichten zelf op de mogelijke aanwezigheid van virussen te controleren. --
Re: (313) production and mastering
possibly, but fatboy slim sucks ab - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: spw [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 2:32 AM Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering I read somewhere Fatboy Slim still uses (or at least did on his first album) Notator on an Atari ST. G. spw [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 06/02/2003 15:10:55 To: cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering In a couple of years I probably still be using old software on a Mac. Digital audio is digital audio regardless of what platform your using and if you have the latest computer model/ operating system. All you really need is a decent sound card, a good sound source, and most importantly good production skills. on 2/6/03 9:01 AM, Jongsma, K.J. at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Protools 6 runs fine on OSX and so does Logic 5.x, Cubase SX, Reason 2.0 etc. we just have to wait for people like Native Instruments to convert the VST apps to Audio Units and then i am really happy :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yee haa! I'd love run a Unix based music system - there's a great article in Sound on Sound this month (you've probably seen it), about Linux for music. Somehow I think there's something inherently techno-y about using Unix to do music!! Call it the geek quotient...;-) - Original Message - From: House of Suki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sakari Karipuro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering The protools that comes with the digi001 (not the free one) supports XP (and better yet, digi released WDM drivers so you can use any windows prog with the hardware) and PT 6 will also run on XP. I am not a big fan of protools since the midi support still seems a little awkward (compared to logic or cubase anyway) but I cannot really talk smack about their hardware which is the best by a long shot. However, I think in a couple years the idea of using protools as a Techno production platform will not even come into play since PCs are outpacing Macs both in price and performance and the improvements in affordable sound interfaces will soon make the $50k, $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of the home studio. -raph -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html -- DISCLAIMER De gemeente Almelo aanvaardt voor haar medewerkers geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor eventueel onjuist, onrechtmatig of ontoelaatbaar geacht gebruik van e-mail (inclusief bijlagen). Dit e-mail bericht is door de gemeente Almelo gecontroleerd op de aanwezigheid van eventuele virussen. Wij kunnen echter geen garantie afgeven dat al onze e-mail berichten volledig virus vrij zijn. Het is daarom verstandig uw binnenkomende e-mail berichten zelf op de mogelijke aanwezigheid van virussen te controleren. --
Re: (313) production and mastering
possibly, but fatboy slim sucks agreed. you don't need much kit to make techno records. steve poindexter's 'work that muthaf**ker' was completely made on a Casio RZ1 it's imagination that counts robin... I read somewhere Fatboy Slim still uses (or at least did on his first album) Notator on an Atari ST.
RE: (313) production and mastering
that's so true W -Original Message- From: Alex Bates [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: donderdag 6 februari 2003 17:01 To: spw; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering possibly, but fatboy slim sucks ab - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: spw [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 2:32 AM Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering I read somewhere Fatboy Slim still uses (or at least did on his first album) Notator on an Atari ST. G. spw [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 06/02/2003 15:10:55 To: cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering In a couple of years I probably still be using old software on a Mac. Digital audio is digital audio regardless of what platform your using and if you have the latest computer model/ operating system. All you really need is a decent sound card, a good sound source, and most importantly good production skills. on 2/6/03 9:01 AM, Jongsma, K.J. at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Protools 6 runs fine on OSX and so does Logic 5.x, Cubase SX, Reason 2.0 etc. we just have to wait for people like Native Instruments to convert the VST apps to Audio Units and then i am really happy :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yee haa! I'd love run a Unix based music system - there's a great article in Sound on Sound this month (you've probably seen it), about Linux for music. Somehow I think there's something inherently techno-y about using Unix to do music!! Call it the geek quotient...;-) - Original Message - From: House of Suki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sakari Karipuro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering The protools that comes with the digi001 (not the free one) supports XP (and better yet, digi released WDM drivers so you can use any windows prog with the hardware) and PT 6 will also run on XP. I am not a big fan of protools since the midi support still seems a little awkward (compared to logic or cubase anyway) but I cannot really talk smack about their hardware which is the best by a long shot. However, I think in a couple years the idea of using protools as a Techno production platform will not even come into play since PCs are outpacing Macs both in price and performance and the improvements in affordable sound interfaces will soon make the $50k, $300/hour studio obsolete for dance music producers. Once Windows is taken out of the picture and companies get a little initiative (how about a custom Linux distro for Cubase ala final scratch?) we will see the true advent of the home studio. -raph -Original Message- From: Sakari Karipuro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:30 AM To: 313 Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering spw wrote on Thu, 6 Feb 2003 about following: No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ seems that it still is win98/me only on windows platform, and i'm sure pretty much nobody uses win98/me anymore. yes, i've tried it in win2k + xp, and it doesn't work. i don't actually need it for anything, but i would have wanted to try. sakke -- - * remixes out now * - http://www.arabuusimiehet.com/sakke/music.html -- DISCLAIMER De gemeente Almelo aanvaardt voor haar medewerkers geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor eventueel onjuist, onrechtmatig of ontoelaatbaar geacht gebruik van e-mail (inclusief bijlagen). Dit e-mail bericht is door de gemeente Almelo gecontroleerd op de aanwezigheid van eventuele virussen. Wij kunnen echter geen garantie afgeven dat al onze e-mail berichten volledig virus vrij zijn. Het is daarom verstandig uw binnenkomende e-mail berichten zelf op de mogelijke aanwezigheid van virussen te controleren. --
Re: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
This discussion came into my head this morning and I recalled a thing that happened several years ago. A friend of mine and I (both of us about the same age) were working at a job (must have been mid to late 1990s) with a younger guy who was into stuff like Smashing Pumpkins, Radiohead, Nirvana, etc. Decent music but he was curious about where the music had come from so we started feeding him stuff like the Sex Pistols, the Stooges, Ramones, etc. Except for the Ramones he didn't like the earlier music that much because of the sound quality. He said something to the effect that it sounded thin and low budget compared to the newer productions. MEK Brian 'balistic' Prince To: 313@hyperreal.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]cc: .comSubject: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering 02/05/03 10:56 PM Please respond to Brian 'balistic' Prince The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get their tracks noticed, or to give them presence . . . I would suggest, if you find that people only notice your tracks when you eliminate your dynamic range and make everything blaringly-loud, you've probably got bigger worries than poor production. An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. But then I prefer digital to vinyl . . . *runs away* -- Brian balistic Prince http://www.bprince.com - art and techno
RE: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
He thought the Stooges sounded thin compared to Smashing Pumpkins!! :o Its strange, I suppose someone who's only used to listening to music on a digital format must be listening in a totally different way, but to me it seems that he was mixing up precision with depth... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 February 2003 16:19 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering This discussion came into my head this morning and I recalled a thing that happened several years ago. A friend of mine and I (both of us about the same age) were working at a job (must have been mid to late 1990s) with a younger guy who was into stuff like Smashing Pumpkins, Radiohead, Nirvana, etc. Decent music but he was curious about where the music had come from so we started feeding him stuff like the Sex Pistols, the Stooges, Ramones, etc. Except for the Ramones he didn't like the earlier music that much because of the sound quality. He said something to the effect that it sounded thin and low budget compared to the newer productions. MEK Brian 'balistic' Prince To: 313@hyperreal.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]cc: .comSubject: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering 02/05/03 10:56 PM Please respond to Brian 'balistic' Prince The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get their tracks noticed, or to give them presence . . . I would suggest, if you find that people only notice your tracks when you eliminate your dynamic range and make everything blaringly-loud, you've probably got bigger worries than poor production. An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. But then I prefer digital to vinyl . . . *runs away* -- Brian balistic Prince http://www.bprince.com - art and techno
Re: (313) production and mastering
- Original Message -- From: scotto [EMAIL PROTECTED] but I really think it come down to money, when you can almost buy a whole Pro Tools studio for the price of one studer 16 track deck. thats all it comes down to. i really really wanted to record to tape multitrack, but it just wasnt feasable monetarily. for mad cheap i could hook up logic on a computer. however, i dont use logic for anything aside from multitracking and sequencing. im not really feeling all the digital EFX and virtual synths and whatnot. tom andythepooh.com
RE: (313) production and mastering
or you could buy a fast PC with a couple of Creamware Pulsar II's w/A16 IO boxes, Cubase SX, Mackie control surface, and have enough money left over to press your records after you're done. -Original Message- From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:44 AM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering - Original Message -- From: scotto [EMAIL PROTECTED] but I really think it come down to money, when you can almost buy a whole Pro Tools studio for the price of one studer 16 track deck. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003
RE: (313) production and mastering
yeah..whats a rompler, u mean using a pc cards rom to process and sample? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 6 February 2003 3:50 p.m. To: spw Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering Far be it for me to enter into a 'debate', but I didn't assert that Pro-Tools performs composition. However it can have a decisive effect on 'sound'. This is due to numerous factors, such as the A/D converters used (Digidesign, MOTU, Apogee etc.) and the software itself, i.e. the TDM system of DSP, which is far more powerful than most home systems. Even though it ends up on a DAT or CD, the difference is audible. Thanks for the advice on what equipment to use, although I'm afraid I've never heard of a 'Rompler'. Regards, Andrew Pro Tools is really no difeerant that usin a hardware sequencer, it's not going to compose tracks for you. Most of today's vynil is either from a CD or DAT master Pro Tools is only going to make your master sound better if your using it properly, buy some nice analog outbourd gear, if you want something raw and warm record an EMU SP-12 and a Minimoog into ProTools and buy their Contol 24 mixer with Focusrite. If you use a Rompler with cheesy D*gital effects it's going to sound like an F*cking rompler. *** This email is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, you are in notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person: to do so could be a breach of confidence. Thank you for your co-operation. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of The RTL Group or its associated companies. Please contact our IT Helpdesk on +44 (0)20 7691 6996 or e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you require further assistance. ***
RE: (313) production and mastering
rompler= sample playback synth, like a Roland JV/XV, E-Mu Proteus, Korg N-series/Trinity/01D, etc. -Original Message- From: Ralf Gill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:29 PM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering yeah..whats a rompler, u mean using a pc cards rom to process and sample? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 6 February 2003 3:50 p.m. To: spw Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering Far be it for me to enter into a 'debate', but I didn't assert that Pro-Tools performs composition. However it can have a decisive effect on 'sound'. This is due to numerous factors, such as the A/D converters used (Digidesign, MOTU, Apogee etc.) and the software itself, i.e. the TDM system of DSP, which is far more powerful than most home systems. Even though it ends up on a DAT or CD, the difference is audible. Thanks for the advice on what equipment to use, although I'm afraid I've never heard of a 'Rompler'. Regards, Andrew Pro Tools is really no difeerant that usin a hardware sequencer, it's not going to compose tracks for you. Most of today's vynil is either from a CD or DAT master Pro Tools is only going to make your master sound better if your using it properly, buy some nice analog outbourd gear, if you want something raw and warm record an EMU SP-12 and a Minimoog into ProTools and buy their Contol 24 mixer with Focusrite. If you use a Rompler with cheesy D*gital effects it's going to sound like an F*cking rompler. *** This email is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, you are in notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person: to do so could be a breach of confidence. Thank you for your co-operation. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of The RTL Group or its associated companies. Please contact our IT Helpdesk on +44 (0)20 7691 6996 or e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you require further assistance. *** --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003
Re: (313) production and mastering
can someone provide ralf with the addy please? Im at work and not able to log into my home pc + my laptop is away from home atm -Joe - Original Message - From: Ralf Gill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:26 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering whats the address for this list please? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 7 February 2003 6:15 a.m. To: spw; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering this is off topic. I wouldn't really care except that its turning into a marathon thread, and based on what I've read thus far, its less mastering tips and more arguing about protools and how to sound like someone else sounded 10 years ago (aka old school) I know there is a 313 production list for threads of this exact nature. -Joe No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ To me you you cant blame what your describing on 'over-production' it's more like 'over-processing' or the over use of DSP type effects. One big differance I hear in todays techno and 'tech-house' has more to do with the equipment people are using, buy a real TR-808 and a vintage synthesizer if you want to sound old school. on 2/5/03 8:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Far be it for me to enter into a 'debate', but I didn't assert that Pro-Tools performs composition. However it can have a decisive effect on 'sound'. This is due to numerous factors, such as the A/D converters used (Digidesign, MOTU, Apogee etc.) and the software itself, i.e. the TDM system of DSP, which is far more powerful than most home systems. Even though it ends up on a DAT or CD, the difference is audible. Thanks for the advice on what equipment to use, although I'm afraid I've never heard of a 'Rompler'. sample based sound modules. Regards, Andrew
Re: (313) production and mastering
most keyboard that play back lifelike sounds is a rompler rompler meaning the data is stored in a ROM or read only memory you hit a key, it plays the sound of a piano. different than a true synthesize, in that a synthesize does just what you'd think: synthesize. reply offlist if you'd like me to elaborate -Joe - Original Message - From: Ralf Gill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:29 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering yeah..whats a rompler, u mean using a pc cards rom to process and sample? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 6 February 2003 3:50 p.m. To: spw Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering Far be it for me to enter into a 'debate', but I didn't assert that Pro-Tools performs composition. However it can have a decisive effect on 'sound'. This is due to numerous factors, such as the A/D converters used (Digidesign, MOTU, Apogee etc.) and the software itself, i.e. the TDM system of DSP, which is far more powerful than most home systems. Even though it ends up on a DAT or CD, the difference is audible. Thanks for the advice on what equipment to use, although I'm afraid I've never heard of a 'Rompler'. Regards, Andrew Pro Tools is really no difeerant that usin a hardware sequencer, it's not going to compose tracks for you. Most of today's vynil is either from a CD or DAT master Pro Tools is only going to make your master sound better if your using it properly, buy some nice analog outbourd gear, if you want something raw and warm record an EMU SP-12 and a Minimoog into ProTools and buy their Contol 24 mixer with Focusrite. If you use a Rompler with cheesy D*gital effects it's going to sound like an F*cking rompler. *** This email is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, you are in notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person: to do so could be a breach of confidence. Thank you for your co-operation. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of The RTL Group or its associated companies. Please contact our IT Helpdesk on +44 (0)20 7691 6996 or e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you require further assistance. ***
RE: (313) production and mastering
[EMAIL PROTECTED] go to yahoogroups.com and sign up for the list from there. -Original Message- From: ::) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 6:29 PM To: 313@hyperreal.org Cc: Ralf Gill Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering can someone provide ralf with the addy please? Im at work and not able to log into my home pc + my laptop is away from home atm -Joe - Original Message - From: Ralf Gill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:26 PM Subject: RE: (313) production and mastering whats the address for this list please? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 7 February 2003 6:15 a.m. To: spw; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) production and mastering this is off topic. I wouldn't really care except that its turning into a marathon thread, and based on what I've read thus far, its less mastering tips and more arguing about protools and how to sound like someone else sounded 10 years ago (aka old school) I know there is a 313 production list for threads of this exact nature. -Joe No offence, but it sounds like you have never used Pro Tools. There is the free version at digidesign's web site if you want to become more familiarized with the software. http://www.digidesign.com/ To me you you cant blame what your describing on 'over-production' it's more like 'over-processing' or the over use of DSP type effects. One big differance I hear in todays techno and 'tech-house' has more to do with the equipment people are using, buy a real TR-808 and a vintage synthesizer if you want to sound old school. on 2/5/03 8:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Far be it for me to enter into a 'debate', but I didn't assert that Pro-Tools performs composition. However it can have a decisive effect on 'sound'. This is due to numerous factors, such as the A/D converters used (Digidesign, MOTU, Apogee etc.) and the software itself, i.e. the TDM system of DSP, which is far more powerful than most home systems. Even though it ends up on a DAT or CD, the difference is audible. Thanks for the advice on what equipment to use, although I'm afraid I've never heard of a 'Rompler'. sample based sound modules. Regards, Andrew --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003
