Re: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread)
I would actually make a difference between Hawtin mix CDs and live performances. His 'mix CDs' are made in the purpose of providing a new experience to the listener. They are quite unconventional. It clearly appears that the last two de9 episodes could not be done 'live', and that explains Hawtin purpose was to make something 'new' rather than the traditionnal DJ set. Keeping in mind he wanted to make a brand new piece of music makes a small matter the fact he uses pre-existing music for that IMO. Hawtin live performances are actually very basic DJ sets with tons of effects above the tracks (which I find boring). The use of the computer is actually just related to the use of Final Scratch, that allows him to play a lot of unreleased music and some edits. So well there is no big concept around that thing, except the concept behind any DJ 'rock the floor wich the music you play'. Benoît. Arturo Lopez a écrit : What do you people think about Hawtin's approach to music? I'm calling it hypersampling. So we're on the same page, I'm talking about taking snippets and loops from a wide library of pre-existing music, and then inserting those little snippets into a dj set via the current software of choice. I think it brings up a number of supposed pros and cons. On the one hand, it seems to give the artist a incredibly wide range of possibilities, taking just those parts of tracks that you like and putting them together in any way/shape/form that you like, hopefully coming up with something interesting as a result. On the other hand though, I feel like there's no soul left, for lack of a better term, with what you end up with. If you gut a track to just take the little part that you like, you are still gutting a track, something that was part of a cohesive sound that the producer of said track was going for. You end up with a hundred little pieces that might sound like very interesting little loops, but string them together for an hour and I frankly get a little bored with the results. Hawtin's mixes sound like flipping the channel on your TV every 3 seconds. There's no hook, it's just loop after loop after loop, even if put together in interesting combinations. This is very different from mixing records or even using regular samplers for the occasional insert or loop. You still come up with interesting new sounds when you've got two records playing at the same time, but I feel like it's more of an additive process, with both parts still intact and forming that nice third record, you know? The listener can follow what is going on, and take part/enjoy the new sounds being added, with a clear reference to what is changing and what is being dropped in. With this hypersampling stuff, everything is so completely stripped of its original source that it becomes irrelevant where it came from. I get a great feeling from hearing two or three distinct tracks put together in interesting ways to form new sounds, not two or three drum loops and five high-hats and some random sound effect from 20 different tracks. ...perhaps that one of the last remaining walls (or most of it) between the Studio and the Club has come down. That's Hawtin's quote from that RA link the other day. I personally think that wall can be very important, and shouldn't be knocked down. Beethoven didn't write a great symphony on the fly during a show, he wrote them in the studio. This isn't to discredit the awesome amount of talent and exciting things that live P.A. work brings about, some stuff is certainly better on the fly, but Hawtin's approach seems to discount and not really care about the sources of what he is extracting. One of the earlier posts described this mix as sonic wallpaper and I would agree, although I think the 2nd half does pick up a bit. There's no there there. As for Hawtin, I think he's a far better producer than performer. He's written some very, very good tracks, especially most of the plastikman stuff, I just don't care for the new approach to performing. -Arturo
Re: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread)
apparently he's not using turntables anymore. - Original Message - From: Benoît Pueyo [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313 Mailing List 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 5:25 AM Subject: Re: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread) I would actually make a difference between Hawtin mix CDs and live performances. His 'mix CDs' are made in the purpose of providing a new experience to the listener. They are quite unconventional. It clearly appears that the last two de9 episodes could not be done 'live', and that explains Hawtin purpose was to make something 'new' rather than the traditionnal DJ set. Keeping in mind he wanted to make a brand new piece of music makes a small matter the fact he uses pre-existing music for that IMO. Hawtin live performances are actually very basic DJ sets with tons of effects above the tracks (which I find boring). The use of the computer is actually just related to the use of Final Scratch, that allows him to play a lot of unreleased music and some edits. So well there is no big concept around that thing, except the concept behind any DJ 'rock the floor wich the music you play'. Benoît. Arturo Lopez a écrit : What do you people think about Hawtin's approach to music? I'm calling it hypersampling. So we're on the same page, I'm talking about taking snippets and loops from a wide library of pre-existing music, and then inserting those little snippets into a dj set via the current software of choice. I think it brings up a number of supposed pros and cons. On the one hand, it seems to give the artist a incredibly wide range of possibilities, taking just those parts of tracks that you like and putting them together in any way/shape/form that you like, hopefully coming up with something interesting as a result. On the other hand though, I feel like there's no soul left, for lack of a better term, with what you end up with. If you gut a track to just take the little part that you like, you are still gutting a track, something that was part of a cohesive sound that the producer of said track was going for. You end up with a hundred little pieces that might sound like very interesting little loops, but string them together for an hour and I frankly get a little bored with the results. Hawtin's mixes sound like flipping the channel on your TV every 3 seconds. There's no hook, it's just loop after loop after loop, even if put together in interesting combinations. This is very different from mixing records or even using regular samplers for the occasional insert or loop. You still come up with interesting new sounds when you've got two records playing at the same time, but I feel like it's more of an additive process, with both parts still intact and forming that nice third record, you know? The listener can follow what is going on, and take part/enjoy the new sounds being added, with a clear reference to what is changing and what is being dropped in. With this hypersampling stuff, everything is so completely stripped of its original source that it becomes irrelevant where it came from. I get a great feeling from hearing two or three distinct tracks put together in interesting ways to form new sounds, not two or three drum loops and five high-hats and some random sound effect from 20 different tracks. ...perhaps that one of the last remaining walls (or most of it) between the Studio and the Club has come down. That's Hawtin's quote from that RA link the other day. I personally think that wall can be very important, and shouldn't be knocked down. Beethoven didn't write a great symphony on the fly during a show, he wrote them in the studio. This isn't to discredit the awesome amount of talent and exciting things that live P.A. work brings about, some stuff is certainly better on the fly, but Hawtin's approach seems to discount and not really care about the sources of what he is extracting. One of the earlier posts described this mix as sonic wallpaper and I would agree, although I think the 2nd half does pick up a bit. There's no there there. As for Hawtin, I think he's a far better producer than performer. He's written some very, very good tracks, especially most of the plastikman stuff, I just don't care for the new approach to performing. -Arturo
Re: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread)
/0 wrote: apparently he's not using turntables anymore. For those who haven't checked it out, here's the interview re: the above and the mix in question that brought about this thread: http://www.residentadvisor.net/podcast-episode.aspx?id=100 And yesterday I posted re: Arturo's post on this subject, but I've yet to figure out how to get it through (has been rejected numerous times). Subject line I changed it to was sharing music vs. DJ ego. Will attempt again to get it posted here (I'm pretty dumb when it comes to technology; seriously). Andrew -- Andrew Duke--sound design/recording/composition/production courses: http://andrew-duke.com/course.html Andrew Duke--Chain Reaction downloadable sound FX samplepack: http://www.audiobase.com/product/SACR Andrew Duke--Consumer vs. User album: http://www.phthalo.com/cat.php?cat=phth40 Andrew Duke--columns/features/commentaries/more: http://cognitionaudioworks.com/read.html http://linkedin.com/in/AndrewDukeCognitionAudioworks http://www.facebook.com/people/Andrew_Duke/852160229 http://myspace.com/AndrewDuke http://myspace.com/CognitionAudioworks
Re: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread)
Andrew Duke a écrit : /0 wrote: apparently he's not using turntables anymore. For those who haven't checked it out, here's the interview re: the above and the mix in question that brought about this thread: http://www.residentadvisor.net/podcast-episode.aspx?id=100 And yesterday I posted re: Arturo's post on this subject, but I've yet to figure out how to get it through (has been rejected numerous times). Subject line I changed it to was sharing music vs. DJ ego. Will attempt again to get it posted here (I'm pretty dumb when it comes to technology; seriously). Andrew Hmm OK havent seen that before, so my post was inconsistant. Well it seems his setup is more or less the same as what Chris Liebing has been using for years ... -- Benoît. New email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nouvel email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread)
Soul comes from the way in which you arrange the samples. Done well, you can impart on it feeling and emotion, done poorly, it's just boom-tsck-boom-tsck-boom-tsck-boom-tsck. Hip hop artists have been doing it for the last couple of decades; a little snippet here, a little snippet there and you have a Pete Rock, 9th Wonder, Jay Dee/Dilla, or Beatminerz track full of soul. Arrangement might be the problem you're having with Hawtin. If its just loop after loop layered with another loop, that's a surefire way to bore someone to sleep. Arrange the pieces of the puzzle in such a way that you come off with something great to listen to on the dance floor as well as your headphones. -Original Message- From: Arturo Lopez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 12:30 PM To: 313 Mailing List Subject: (313) Hypersampling (was latest Hawtin thread) What do you people think about Hawtin's approach to music? I'm calling it hypersampling. So we're on the same page, I'm talking about taking snippets and loops from a wide library of pre-existing music, and then inserting those little snippets into a dj set via the current software of choice. I think it brings up a number of supposed pros and cons. On the one hand, it seems to give the artist a incredibly wide range of possibilities, taking just those parts of tracks that you like and putting them together in any way/shape/form that you like, hopefully coming up with something interesting as a result. On the other hand though, I feel like there's no soul left, for lack of a better term, with what you end up with. If you gut a track to just take the little part that you like, you are still gutting a track, something that was part of a cohesive sound that the producer of said track was going for. You end up with a hundred little pieces that might sound like very interesting little loops, but string them together for an hour and I frankly get a little bored with the results. Hawtin's mixes sound like flipping the channel on your TV every 3 seconds. There's no hook, it's just loop after loop after loop, even if put together in interesting combinations. This is very different from mixing records or even using regular samplers for the occasional insert or loop. You still come up with interesting new sounds when you've got two records playing at the same time, but I feel like it's more of an additive process, with both parts still intact and forming that nice third record, you know? The listener can follow what is going on, and take part/enjoy the new sounds being added, with a clear reference to what is changing and what is being dropped in. With this hypersampling stuff, everything is so completely stripped of its original source that it becomes irrelevant where it came from. I get a great feeling from hearing two or three distinct tracks put together in interesting ways to form new sounds, not two or three drum loops and five high-hats and some random sound effect from 20 different tracks. ...perhaps that one of the last remaining walls (or most of it) between the Studio and the Club has come down. That's Hawtin's quote from that RA link the other day. I personally think that wall can be very important, and shouldn't be knocked down. Beethoven didn't write a great symphony on the fly during a show, he wrote them in the studio. This isn't to discredit the awesome amount of talent and exciting things that live P.A. work brings about, some stuff is certainly better on the fly, but Hawtin's approach seems to discount and not really care about the sources of what he is extracting. One of the earlier posts described this mix as sonic wallpaper and I would agree, although I think the 2nd half does pick up a bit. There's no there there. As for Hawtin, I think he's a far better producer than performer. He's written some very, very good tracks, especially most of the plastikman stuff, I just don't care for the new approach to performing. -Arturo -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1413 - Release Date: 5/3/2008 11:22 AM
