Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
tom thanks for the kind words but NO THANKS!!! Im giving relivent information to the coversation that is relivent to MY life that just HAPPENS to relate to this thread like dale said this is a SECURITY issue its some thing I have seen 10s of times on lists and forums read it for what its worth take it how you want but the words are the words... if I was tring to promote my gig with jan I would have posted the flyer or the press release for that show on the 23rd into this thread, I havent donethat... if I wanted to promote gigs I would have posted info about sundays gig or the one Im playing with pheek on thursday in this thread BUT THEY ARE NOT RELIVENT TO THIS THREAD SO IM NOT!!! Im having dinner on the 23rd with an artist that is being discussed in THIS thread and said I can ask him in relation to this discussion and give you HIS input. if you are not secure with your life and want to poo poo mine that is your own issue but my life and the things that happen in are in realtion to THIS thread so DEAL with it!!! (I dont expect you to understand as obviously your to wrapped up in being hardcore and underground) neil www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
...that sound you hear is neil breaking his foot off in tom cox's tomcox Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: tom thanks for the kind words but NO THANKS!!! Im giving relivent information to the coversation that is relivent to MY life that just HAPPENS to relate to this thread like dale said this is a SECURITY issue its some thing I have seen 10s of times on lists and forums read it for what its worth take it how you want but the words are the words... if I was tring to promote my gig with jan I would have posted the flyer or the press release for that show on the 23rd into this thread, I havent donethat... if I wanted to promote gigs I would have posted info about sundays gig or the one Im playing with pheek on thursday in this thread BUT THEY ARE NOT RELIVENT TO THIS THREAD SO IM NOT!!! Im having dinner on the 23rd with an artist that is being discussed in THIS thread and said I can ask him in relation to this discussion and give you HIS input. if you are not secure with your life and want to poo poo mine that is your own issue but my life and the things that happen in are in realtion to THIS thread so DEAL with it!!! (I dont expect you to understand as obviously your to wrapped up in being hardcore and underground) neil www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
LMAO On Tue, 5 Sep 2006, /0 wrote: ...that sound you hear is neil breaking his foot off in tom cox's tomcox Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: tom thanks for the kind words but NO THANKS!!! Im giving relivent information to the coversation that is relivent to MY life that just HAPPENS to relate to this thread like dale said this is a SECURITY issue its some thing I have seen 10s of times on lists and forums read it for what its worth take it how you want but the words are the words... if I was tring to promote my gig with jan I would have posted the flyer or the press release for that show on the 23rd into this thread, I havent donethat... if I wanted to promote gigs I would have posted info about sundays gig or the one Im playing with pheek on thursday in this thread BUT THEY ARE NOT RELIVENT TO THIS THREAD SO IM NOT!!! Im having dinner on the 23rd with an artist that is being discussed in THIS thread and said I can ask him in relation to this discussion and give you HIS input. if you are not secure with your life and want to poo poo mine that is your own issue but my life and the things that happen in are in realtion to THIS thread so DEAL with it!!! (I dont expect you to understand as obviously your to wrapped up in being hardcore and underground) neil www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
On 9/5/06, /0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...that sound you hear is neil breaking his foot off in tom cox's tomcox it sounded to me like more blatant self promotion. but then again i guess its all subjective, right? suckers. tom
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
ok now your being a twat my stuff is released properly you ass!! Im tring to save you some time and money if you want then go and buy my stuff its all on noise factory records distributed in europe and the UK where I think you are by cargo, in japan by polp and in NA by outside music...or itunes also in case your to much of a shut in and wont leave your house oh wait you are still on DIAL UP!!!LMAO internet backwater!!! On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: so what's the optimum stream? a cda quality? well i cant wait to hear that ;/ or get your stuff out properly so we can talk about audio detail /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:43 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
oh ok then he can get my stuff at the local shop in polan cargo services poland On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, kent williams wrote: He's in Poland, give him a break. The whole world isn't like Canada or the US. On 9/3/06, Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
kent williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Honestly, what matters besides the actual compositions? maybe i'm taking this one line too much out of context, but that sounds like a frighteningly traditionalist rhetorical question. in one sense i do agree, hence my bringing up that there's something lacking in the actual compositions. it should be about the song. it's true, there are too many bad songs out there with no compositional ability or it's all basically cribbed from radio formula...badly. but there are plenty of forms of music, such as ambient and experimental, where the composition is very, even entirely, dependent on the sound. things that involve subtleties of tone and texture. if those aren't accurately captured and reproduced, the piece just sounds like a drone. even more traditional recorded music in which i believe that special something is partially contained in the way it was captured. does everybody care about this? probably not. does this always mean analog is better? no. i've heard some mp3s on myspace, that were recorded with a simple little mic straight into the computer, and that type of lo-fi fits the songs. it's not the same as if it were done to cassette, but it's the digital equivalent in a sense, noisy but clear. in other cases, i've heard realaudio samples of music and then been disappointed with the official release because the awful bitrate actually make the tracks sound raw in a good way. a good example of this was massive attack's 100th window. I'm enough of a studio rat to care about things are produced, but the actual method that someone uses is irrelevant, except as it facilitates the result. It's not like you can't make sh*t tracks with analog gear. yeah agreed, i said this in a different part of what was originally a longer post. so the bit below is out of context where i talked about how bad some 80s analog stuff was (both gear and music). I program computers for a living, and do the people who use my software to outline the anatomical features of the brain and measure their volume care whether I used a stack, a queue, or a linked list? i think what you're saying is they basically want the result they asked for, which you give them, and the means don't matter. in your example it sounds like you're saying the resulting software is the same no matter what, but what i'm saying is in the case of audio, it isn't. it may seem pretty much the same to most listeners though. this goes back into my other rant about people can't hear anymore because they're used to everything sounding not so good. maybe it's only musicians and an_l retentive audiophiles who care about this? It's easy to play a piano. You just sit down and bang away at the keys. Doesn't make you Glenn Gould innit? too right. On 9/3/06, chthonic streams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it is much easier to get a track up and going and sounding like something close to what they expect to hear (based on the sound coming out of computers and mp3 players) with software like acid. and so tracks can be completed in a short amount of time without learning much about how to make them sound good (and let's not even get started on the actual composition of the pieces).
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Self-appointed golden ears dismiss feeling and creativity, because anyone can appreciate those qualities in music (though not always at first blush, since some tastes are acquired), whereas it takes a genuine superior class of lonely douche to prioritize the production pipeline in their evaluation of a record. i think feeling and creativity are paramount, but if poorly captured sonically, sometimes those things do not come across. without the right mic or compressor we might not hear a certain emotive quality in the singer's voice. without the right balance, all the little things thrown into the background of the music can get lost. without the proper EQ or mastering, the kick drum might not be banging to the level that makes people go insane. it doesn't take golden ears to hear or miss those things. recorded music is not simply music that's been recorded; it's a medium in and of itself, and every step in the chain matters to an extent. but yes, great tracks are made without everything being perfect, and without the initial greatness all the rest is just frosting with no cake. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
It's myspace... those are mp3's... low quality mp3's at that because that is all that myspace will let you upload. You can not reproduce a warm sound with a compressed music file. (ie: mp3s) Most of the audio spectrum that compression filters prioritize is at the high end because the higher you go on the spectrum the more detail and bandwidth you need to even approximate the sound. mp3's sound crunchy and dry... even the high quality ones. In order to make a proper comparison you're going to have to either go get a copy of the real thing, or download an uncompressed wave file, burn it to a cd, and listen to it on your normal system. Maybe this is pointless too... At 04:53 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
Well, don't be too frightened. All I'm saying is ... well it's right there in the Bible Matthew 7:16: By their fruits ye shall know them. It's been a long way around through a sometimes interesting debate, but the bottom line for me is that it's an argument that pretty silly. I make tracks, so I'm interested in production techniques. For anyone else it's just inside baseball, and it shouldn't matter -- either the results speak to your condition or they don't. On 9/3/06, chthonic streams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: kent williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Honestly, what matters besides the actual compositions? maybe i'm taking this one line too much out of context, but that sounds like a frighteningly traditionalist rhetorical question.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Why is it that when I make a good solid argument it somehow becomes pointless... and then the reason isn't even backed up with anything else that is solid? It's like the decision was made long ago, and when the logic is at point blank range it still isn't acknowledged. There are a bunch of may-as-well-be-5-years-olds who never touched a keyboard, and they are not even aware of what a waveform is at all. They will turn on their computers, install some so-called 'music software' and make complete s#!%. It's not pointless because you are insulting every truly creative person that uses a computer because of the people that aren't using it creatively the baby and the bath water analogy... I'm here in their defense to tell you why I believe that you are wrong. Errr... I mean, this is pointless. At 04:49 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote: sweet fng jesus ;/ In a computer it is the same thing, there are a lot of elements that are geared to that same mainstream audience, as well as all of those garbage loop and prefab rhythm programs/plug-ins, and you have to get past that just like with real world synths and make your own sounds. You have to make them your own. A good artist will synth and tweak every sound in their production themselves and have total control ^that's ok when you start the topic with a bunch of 5 year-olders who never touched a keyboard.. who are not aware of what sort of waveforms surround them ;/ etc. as you probably noticed - this is not the case.. cliche aside.. or let's end the discussion before it reaches new levels of pointlessness* /12
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Because arguments aren't fair. If you make a point that refutes something someone says, they can always say that wasn't actually what they said. Or they can take one thing out of your statement and provide what they think is a counter-example, and then use that to think they've refuted everything they've said. Or they can ignore everything you've said and hang on to the precious preconceptions from which they began the argument, and attack you personally for disagreeing with them. Or they can act as though their personal taste in music is an objective measurement of musical quality. Or if they can't convince you, or anyone else that disagrees with them, they can claim that the argument wasn't worth discussing in the first place. Dale, meet Internet. Internet, meet Dale. On 9/3/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it that when I make a good solid argument it somehow becomes pointless...
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
indeed it isnt, there are countries where you actually have to think before you do or say something ...imagine? - Original Message - From: kent williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 12:31 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. He's in Poland, give him a break. The whole world isn't like Canada or the US. On 9/3/06, Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
what for? quality toilet paper is widely available and does its job really. i dont need substitutes, if i change my mind - you'll be the first to know.. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 1:40 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. oh ok then he can get my stuff at the local shop in polan cargo services poland On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, kent williams wrote: He's in Poland, give him a break. The whole world isn't like Canada or the US. On 9/3/06, Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
:) well, then take some jazz trak,compress the audio down to 128 kbps do the same to your average laptop trak..and guess what..the quality sucks in both cases, but the laptop trak sounds incomparably more bright, stiff, lifeless... than the other one. how come? i'll tell you when you learn to accept reality as it is. /12 - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 2:21 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. It's myspace... those are mp3's... low quality mp3's at that because that is all that myspace will let you upload. You can not reproduce a warm sound with a compressed music file. (ie: mp3s) Most of the audio spectrum that compression filters prioritize is at the high end because the higher you go on the spectrum the more detail and bandwidth you need to even approximate the sound. mp3's sound crunchy and dry... even the high quality ones. In order to make a proper comparison you're going to have to either go get a copy of the real thing, or download an uncompressed wave file, burn it to a cd, and listen to it on your normal system. Maybe this is pointless too... At 04:53 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
go and buy my stuff its all on noise factory records distributed in europe ^this is the stuff i was waiting for; you think it's easy to get onto my record shelf? that acting like some backward canadian brat on some mailing list is enough of a reason to put you among kdjs, 69s or drexciyas? congrats kid, now you got my nearly fallen off my chair :) and dont forget to update your myspace pics, kiddies /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 1:40 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. ok now your being a twat my stuff is released properly you ass!! Im tring to save you some time and money if you want then go and buy my stuff its all on noise factory records distributed in europe and the UK where I think you are by cargo, in japan by polp and in NA by outside music...or itunes also in case your to much of a shut in and wont leave your house oh wait you are still on DIAL UP!!!LMAO internet backwater!!! On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: so what's the optimum stream? a cda quality? well i cant wait to hear that ;/ or get your stuff out properly so we can talk about audio detail /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:43 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
dale like you Im beginning to thinkthat this whole thread has become pointless.. neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Dale Lawrence wrote: Maybe this is pointless too... At 04:53 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
dont bother you wont like it regardless musically producers like myself and dale are obviously far to complex for some one who uses toilet paper enjoy the view from your high horse when you fall off your horse we can then again talk... better yet if you want the real deal Ill probally be playing in warsaw in march 2007 so I can hand you that toilet paper in your hand if I can reach that high up where you are! On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: what for? quality toilet paper is widely available and does its job really. i dont need substitutes, if i change my mind - you'll be the first to know.. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 1:40 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. oh ok then he can get my stuff at the local shop in polan cargo services poland On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, kent williams wrote: He's in Poland, give him a break. The whole world isn't like Canada or the US. On 9/3/06, Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
dont worry I wont give up making, releaseing and giging my music simply becasue you wont grace my music on your shelf.. in fact many of the more then talented producers on this list whom you have insulted wont give up eather... your one consumer in a sea of music lovers...your views wont stop or discourage any one from doing what they love...but your view will discourge your personaly ablity to continue to enjoy music that has been made since 1998... enjoy your collection of music limited to 8 years of music making... On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: go and buy my stuff its all on noise factory records distributed in europe ^this is the stuff i was waiting for; you think it's easy to get onto my record shelf? that acting like some backward canadian brat on some mailing list is enough of a reason to put you among kdjs, 69s or drexciyas? congrats kid, now you got my nearly fallen off my chair :) and dont forget to update your myspace pics, kiddies /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 1:40 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. ok now your being a twat my stuff is released properly you ass!! Im tring to save you some time and money if you want then go and buy my stuff its all on noise factory records distributed in europe and the UK where I think you are by cargo, in japan by polp and in NA by outside music...or itunes also in case your to much of a shut in and wont leave your house oh wait you are still on DIAL UP!!!LMAO internet backwater!!! On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: so what's the optimum stream? a cda quality? well i cant wait to hear that ;/ or get your stuff out properly so we can talk about audio detail /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:43 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Ok, now we have come to the point were we are insulting people, this threat is now officially dead (Godwin law's maybe?). Lets stop this, don't reply to this anymore and think it never happened. KJ On 4-sep-2006, at 6:43, v12 wrote: what for? quality toilet paper is widely available and does its job really. i dont need substitutes, if i change my mind - you'll be the first to know..
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
make one more jokes of my geo-location and i'll call things directly what they are again,unless you ban me from the list on time.. /12 - Original Message - From: Klaas-Jan Jongsma [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313 Mailinglist List 313@hyperreal.org Cc: Kent Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 11:04 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. Ok, now we have come to the point were we are insulting people, this threat is now officially dead (Godwin law's maybe?). Lets stop this, don't reply to this anymore and think it never happened. KJ On 4-sep-2006, at 6:43, v12 wrote: what for? quality toilet paper is widely available and does its job really. i dont need substitutes, if i change my mind - you'll be the first to know..
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
march 2007, i'll send someone for it.. remind me a week before if you could... /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 7:30 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. dont bother you wont like it regardless musically producers like myself and dale are obviously far to complex for some one who uses toilet paper enjoy the view from your high horse when you fall off your horse we can then again talk... better yet if you want the real deal Ill probally be playing in warsaw in march 2007 so I can hand you that toilet paper in your hand if I can reach that high up where you are! On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: what for? quality toilet paper is widely available and does its job really. i dont need substitutes, if i change my mind - you'll be the first to know.. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 1:40 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. oh ok then he can get my stuff at the local shop in polan cargo services poland On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, kent williams wrote: He's in Poland, give him a break. The whole world isn't like Canada or the US. On 9/3/06, Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
I don't presume to know how people live their lives; the most one can address is what people actually write to the list. It sure must be a slow month for new releases. On 9/2/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You live your life based on oversimplified stereotypes.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Not to stir the pot, stir please, what else are email discussion lists for? That being a lot of my favorite Detroit and Chicago tracks were made in a certain way that I think made them more exciting. Specifically, it's setting up a bunch of gear and recording it live to two track, with one or more people working the gear. Drexciya did it that way, as did all the early Chicago house heads. A lot of the classic UR tracks were recorded mostly live. that's inspiring and exciting. not even to multitrack huh? well i guess they didn't have the money to record twice as it were (recording and then mixing) and they came from a different head (DJ culture, mix it live). kinda reminds me about when old timers talk about benny goodman and his orchestra all standing around one microphone. and you can still make great recordings like that too. In order to work that way, those artists had to be as good at running a drum machine, synths, effects and a mixing board. They had to have a definite idea of the sound they wanted. They had to know how to play, and to embrace and roll with happy accidents. there are a lot of skills one has to have to make *good* laptop-based music as well. people on lists like this forget or never heard all the musical travesties made with the same gear. with the glow of hindsight, 80s gear and its results have been romanticized out of proportion. there were loads of analog synths, drum machines, tube amps, and recorders that were just awful. true, there was some excellent gear made, but mostly it was gear that was made famous by someone who took what they had and went with it. their creativity, and subsequent success, is what people *really* want - the gear is just an over-fetishized substitution. having said that i do share some of the same fetish but won't be blinded by it. I honestly think the same thing is possible with Laptops, but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. agreed. a big problem when switching over to computer, just like from analog to digital, is that the rules change. the issue is similar to what gareth jones said in an interview about recording with daniel miller and depeche mode: new music goes through a formica stage. some the first analog synths were used to put out things like switched on bach where synths tried to mimic and replace each instrument in a classical orchestra. cute, but why bother? it's not an orchestra so don't try because it will fail misreably and sound cheesy (unless that's what you're going for). a convincing trompe l'oeil (or l'oreille in this case) is hard to do and only works in a controlled environment, which music is not often experienced in. moving from analog to digital we had the same issue, and now again from hardware/sequencer/recorder-based technology to the laptop environment. the tendency is to mimic what's gone before. there is a good deal of laptop music that does not try to be other than what it is, or explores those boundaries rather than trying to make the laptop be a replacement for something else. analog modelers are pretty amazing, but i'm sorry they're not the same. even the ones that are exactly the same except without the unpredicatability and the noise - well, hell, unpredictability and noise are HUGE factors in music. certain plugins go a long way toward warming and fattening up music - but if whatever it's affecting just isn't there in the first place, it's not going to be the same. in recorded sound, the most important element is the source, followed by the initial capturing of that source, and then by whatever you do to it afterward, and finally in the playback. there are some people who turn this on its ear, warping the most incredible things out of something very mundane. but they still started with the original characteristics, which in turn affected the building blocks of their sound. again, having said this, i enjoy some music made on laptops very much, some of it even doing a decent replicating job i sort of spoke against. whatever works. every tool you use has its own characteristics, strengths and weaknesses. do and use whatever makes sense to you. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
I acctually also want to my view that supports what I said as a seasoned producer and that goes along with autecher's view is that not only is it the person whos making the tack A LARGE and let me repeat A LARGE amount of creit for warmth goes to the person who is matering the final product that makes things sound warm or cold... Ive had tracks mastered by twerk that suddenly went from luck warm to boiling hot.. simply because he knows what he is doing ... On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: show me a 100% pc-made trak that would sound even close to rod modell's deepchord 14 or rhythm n sound's carrier. speaking of rod - any of his traks on ecchocord. or afx's blue calx or laricheard or mike parker's caesura 1 or andres' LP on mahogani/ kdj 29 either you're all joking..or you simply can not hear the elementary difference in sound-detail. i test my hearing once a month in a dedicated lab,and it's bat-good so to speak. the rest is fair - not only i wont support the dull brightness spread around me by thousands of ridiculous labels but i'll take any occcasion to say what i think about it.. i remember autechre's interview in which they said the same as most of you: that it's not the computers' fault, it's the ppl who use it that are responsible for the cold lifeless sound - it would sound much more reasonable if they ever made one vibrant,warm sounding record imo. the stuff i got on warp cassettes [tri repetae/chiastic slide] appeared to sound miserable on cd and so on blablabla /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - sound
but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. no, true. it's the lifeless,stiff, ear-scratching bright sound that is the problem.. it's like a plastic doll,with or without make-up it's still nothing more than a pathetic substitute.. unlucky imitation of a great thing.. widely accepted as the real thing requires way more skills. i think the limitations of certain aspects of digital technology available to most people (meaning, people who record in 16/44.1 and process the life out of everything using free plugins) is partially at fault. however it's also how people's ears are changing and that has to do with the interface between the computer and the ear. you can't hear what it really sounds like in there if you're using the headphone jack, some sub-par powered speakers, or even a converter box and amp that's not up to snuff. people also listen to music in their earbuds too loud, and the way most mp3s are encoded (the old mp3.com, itunes and myspace being the worst and most widespread offenders) remove many subtleties of warmth and depth. as more and more people get used to this sound, and want everything super-compressed, bright and in your face. sadly this includes some people making music, and they worsen the trend by recording things with no warmth or depth to begin with, or processing until it sounds like what they're used to. there are ways around this, but most don't bother to find them. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Not to stir the pot, stir please, what else are email discussion lists for? That being a lot of my favorite Detroit and Chicago tracks were made in a certain way that I think made them more exciting. Specifically, it's setting up a bunch of gear and recording it live to two track, with one or more people working the gear. Drexciya did it that way, as did all the early Chicago house heads. A lot of the classic UR tracks were recorded mostly live. that's inspiring and exciting. not even to multitrack huh? well i guess they didn't have the money to record twice as it were (recording and then mixing) and they came from a different head (DJ culture, mix it live). kinda reminds me about when old timers talk about benny goodman and his orchestra all standing around one microphone. you can still make great recordings like that too. In order to work that way, those artists had to be as good at running a drum machine, synths, effects and a mixing board. They had to have a definite idea of the sound they wanted. They had to know how to play, and to embrace and roll with happy accidents. there are a lot of skills one has to have to make *good* laptop-based music as well. people on lists like this forget or never heard all the musical travesties made with the same gear. with the glow of hindsight, 80s gear and its results have been romanticized out of proportion. there were loads of analog synths, drum machines, tube amps, and recorders that were just awful. true, there was some excellent gear made, but mostly it was gear that was made famous by someone who took what they had and went with it. their creativity, and subsequent success, is what people *really* want - the gear is just an over-fetishized substitution. having said that i do share some of the same fetish but won't be blinded by it. I honestly think the same thing is possible with Laptops, but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. agreed. a big problem when switching over to computer, just like from analog to digital, is that the rules change. the issue is similar to what gareth jones said in an interview about recording with daniel miller and depeche mode: new music goes through a formica stage. some the first analog synths were used to put out things like switched on bach where synths tried to mimic and replace each instrument in a classical orchestra. cute, but why bother? it's not an orchestra so don't try because it will fail misreably and sound cheesy (unless that's what you're going for). a convincing trompe l'oeil (or l'oreille in this case) is hard to do and only works in a controlled environment, which music is not often experienced in. moving from analog to digital we had the same issue, and now again from hardware/sequencer/recorder-based technology to the laptop environment. the tendency is to mimic what's gone before. there is a good deal of laptop music that does not try to be other than what it is, or explores those boundaries rather than trying to make the laptop be a replacement for something else. analog modelers are pretty amazing, but i'm sorry they're not the same. even the ones that are exactly the same except without the unpredicatability and the noise - well, hell, unpredictability and noise are HUGE factors in music. certain plugins go a long way toward warming and fattening up music - but if whatever it's affecting just isn't there in the first place, it's not going to be the same. in recorded sound, the most important element is the source, followed by the initial capturing of that source, and then by whatever you do to it afterward, and finally in the playback. there are some people who turn this on its ear, warping the most incredible things out of something very mundane. but they still started with the original characteristics, which in turn affected the building blocks of their sound. again, having said this, i enjoy some music made on laptops very much, some of it even doing a decent replicating job i sort of spoke against. whatever works. every tool you use has its own characteristics, strengths and weaknesses. do and use whatever makes sense to you. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
acctually let me explain a little better about what I emant below... reuses live instrumentation that he plays as sound source material for his music... its not just him sampleing from records... how how he samples this stuff and gets it on to his machines are all up to him from my discussions with him he uses all sorts of different recording and micing methods... any how I think regardless of what he does he still a fine example of digital music made with a laptop that sounds super warm... I can find out more about his techniques when I play with him later this month in toronto (sept 23rd) and give you direct examples of what hes doing but ultimatly its warm music made digitally not by the fetishized analogue gear... oh and by the way rob model from what I understand uses actual intruments like a electric guitars to get his sounds...its later processed like crap to end up as they sound... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Neil Wiernik wrote: bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Ive had tracks mastered by twerk that suddenly went from luck warm to boiling hot.. simply because he knows what he is doing ... ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about..
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
At 10:25 PM 9/2/2006, you wrote: I don't presume to know how people live their lives; the most one can address is what people actually write to the list. It sure must be a slow month for new releases. On 9/2/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You live your life based on oversimplified stereotypes. That was the irony... that because I had to simplify what I was saying, it made the message so vague that it became a stereotype of its own. ...but its really just irrelevant nonsense.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Analog vs. Digital, PC vs. Mac, Richie vs. Jeff Please stop discussing this, there is no point, there will be no winner. It is all about whether you like digital sounding productions or not. It is not about good or bad it is about like it or not. On 3-sep-2006, at 8:15, v12 wrote: Ive had tracks mastered by twerk that suddenly went from luck warm to boiling hot.. simply because he knows what he is doing ... ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about..
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
since neil mentioned it, i'll take a second to promote my friends mastering business. www.audibleoddities.com heres his client list: http://www.audibleoddities.com/index.php?p=mast - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:46 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. I acctually also want to my view that supports what I said as a seasoned producer and that goes along with autecher's view is that not only is it the person whos making the tack A LARGE and let me repeat A LARGE amount of creit for warmth goes to the person who is matering the final product that makes things sound warm or cold... Ive had tracks mastered by twerk that suddenly went from luck warm to boiling hot.. simply because he knows what he is doing ... On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: show me a 100% pc-made trak that would sound even close to rod modell's deepchord 14 or rhythm n sound's carrier. speaking of rod - any of his traks on ecchocord. or afx's blue calx or laricheard or mike parker's caesura 1 or andres' LP on mahogani/ kdj 29 either you're all joking..or you simply can not hear the elementary difference in sound-detail. i test my hearing once a month in a dedicated lab,and it's bat-good so to speak. the rest is fair - not only i wont support the dull brightness spread around me by thousands of ridiculous labels but i'll take any occcasion to say what i think about it.. i remember autechre's interview in which they said the same as most of you: that it's not the computers' fault, it's the ppl who use it that are responsible for the cold lifeless sound - it would sound much more reasonable if they ever made one vibrant,warm sounding record imo. the stuff i got on warp cassettes [tri repetae/chiastic slide] appeared to sound miserable on cd and so on blablabla /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
actually jan uses plugs and logic. I've got a friend thats done work with him and yet other friends that have played live with him most of his samples are from old jazz records (ie loop finding jazz records) - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:57 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
loop finding jazz records sounded nice as far as i remember but the traks were too long (a matter of taste though) i liked it much more than most of the farben stuff that ive heard... /12 actually jan uses plugs and logic. I've got a friend thats done work with him and yet other friends that have played live with him most of his samples are from old jazz records (ie loop finding jazz records) - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:57 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
To me, James Holden is a good example of good (and deep) music made with computers... One of the funny thing is that he uses a free software taht i also use at home, and that everybody who has seen that working say hey with that kindof soft, nobody will ever produce any good track. -- Benoît.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate./loop fin ding jazz recs
...but having it played right now i must say it's the looped samples / sustained piano tails, chimes etc that sound sweet all the electronic snippets spoil the impression. it would sound better to me without all the clicky rubbish flying around /12 - Original Message - From: v12 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: /0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 2:56 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. loop finding jazz records sounded nice as far as i remember but the traks were too long (a matter of taste though) i liked it much more than most of the farben stuff that ive heard... /12 actually jan uses plugs and logic. I've got a friend thats done work with him and yet other friends that have played live with him most of his samples are from old jazz records (ie loop finding jazz records) - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:57 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
still trying to get this one through...did some edits so we'll see. Not to stir the pot, stir please, what else are email discussion lists for? That being a lot of my favorite Detroit and Chicago tracks were made in a certain way that I think made them more exciting. Specifically, it's setting up a bunch of gear and recording it live to two track, with one or more people working the gear. Drexciya did it that way, as did all the early Chicago house heads. A lot of the classic UR tracks were recorded mostly live. not even to multitrack huh? well i guess they didn't have the money to record twice as it were (recording and then mixing) and they came from a different place (DJ culture, mix it live). kinda reminds me of when old timers talk about benny goodman and his orchestra all standing around one microphone. you can still make great recordings like that too. In order to work that way, those artists had to be as good at running a drum machine, synths, effects and a mixing board. They had to have a definite idea of the sound they wanted. They had to know how to play, and to embrace and roll with happy accidents. there are a lot of skills one has to have to make good laptop-based music as well. people on lists like this forget or never heard all the musical travesties made with the same gear. with the glow of hindsight, 80s gear and its results have been romanticized out of proportion. there were loads of analog synths, drum machines, tube amps, and recorders that were just awful. true, there was some excellent gear made, but mostly it was gear that was made famous by someone who took what they had and went with it. their creativity, and subsequent success, is what people really want - the gear is just an over-fetishized substitution. having said that i do share some of the same attitude but won't be blinded by it. I honestly think the same thing is possible with Laptops, but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. agreed. a big problem when switching over to computer, just like from analog to digital, is that the rules change. the issue is similar to what gareth jones said in an interview about recording with daniel miller and depeche mode: new music goes through a formica stage. some the first analog synths were used to put out things like switched on bach where synths tried to mimic and replace each instrument in a classical orchestra. cute, but why bother? it's not an orchestra so don't try because it will fail misreably and sound cheesy (unless that's what you're going for). a convincing trompe l'oeil (or l'oreille in this case) is hard to do and only works in a controlled environment, which music is not often experienced in. moving from analog to digital we had the same issue, and now again from hardware/sequencer/recorder-based technology to the laptop environment. the tendency is to mimic what's gone before. there is a good deal of laptop music that does not try to be other than what it is, or explores those boundaries rather than trying to make the laptop be a replacement for something else. analog modelers are pretty amazing, but i'm sorry they're not the same. even the ones that are exactly the same except without the unpredicatability and the noise - well, hell, unpredictability and noise are HUGE factors in music. certain plugins go a long way toward warming and fattening up music - but if whatever it's affecting just isn't there in the first place, it's not going to be the same. in recorded sound, the most important element is the source, followed by the initial capturing of that source, and then by whatever you do to it afterward, and finally in the playback. there are some people who turn this on its ear, warping the most incredible things out of something very mundane. but they still started with the original characteristics, which in turn affected the building blocks of their sound. again, having said this, i enjoy some music made on laptops very much, some of it even doing a decent replicating job i sort of spoke against. whatever works. every tool you use has its own characteristics, strengths and weaknesses. do and use whatever makes sense to you. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
certain plugins go a long way toward warming and fattening up music - but if whatever it's affecting just isn't there in the first place, it's not going to be the same. in recorded sound, the most important element is the source, followed by the initial capturing of that source, and then by whatever you do to it afterward, and finally in the playback. there are some people who turn this on its ear, warping the most incredible things out of something very mundane. but they still started with the original characteristics, which in turn affected the building blocks of their sound. again, having said this, i enjoy some music made on laptops very much, some of it even doing a decent replicating job i sort of spoke against. whatever works. d. (seeing if one section of my long reply at a time gets through)
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
and why does he not fit??? becasue you say so? his a digital artist samples or not he fits... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: did i say samples from records? and what did i ask for? he doesnt fit if you read carefully... - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 7:07 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. acctually let me explain a little better about what I emant below... reuses live instrumentation that he plays as sound source material for his music... its not just him sampleing from records... how how he samples this stuff and gets it on to his machines are all up to him from my discussions with him he uses all sorts of different recording and micing methods... any how I think regardless of what he does he still a fine example of digital music made with a laptop that sounds super warm... I can find out more about his techniques when I play with him later this month in toronto (sept 23rd) and give you direct examples of what hes doing but ultimatly its warm music made digitally not by the fetishized analogue gear... oh and by the way rob model from what I understand uses actual intruments like a electric guitars to get his sounds...its later processed like crap to end up as they sound... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Neil Wiernik wrote: bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
I know loop finding was samples from old jazz records but his other material is all live instrumentation sampled and manipulated... from what hes told me maybe hes changed his process any how Ill find out on the 23rd... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, /0 wrote: actually jan uses plugs and logic. I've got a friend thats done work with him and yet other friends that have played live with him most of his samples are from old jazz records (ie loop finding jazz records) - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:57 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
I honestly think the same thing is possible with Laptops, but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. agreed. a big problem when switching over to computer, just like from analog to digital, is that the rules change. the issue is similar to what gareth jones said in an interview about recording with daniel miller and depeche mode: new music goes through a formica stage. some the first analog synths were used to put out things like switched on bach where synths tried to mimic and replace each instrument in a classical orchestra. cute, but why bother? it's not an orchestra so don't try because it will fail misreably and sound cheesy (unless that's what you're going for). a convincing trompe l'oeil (or l'oreille in this case) is hard to do and only works in a controlled environment, which music is not often experienced in. moving from analog to digital we had the same issue, and now again from hardware/sequencer/recorder-based technology to the laptop environment. the tendency is to mimic what's gone before. there is a good deal of laptop music that does not try to be other than what it is, or explores those boundaries rather than trying to make the laptop be a replacement for something else. analog modelers are pretty amazing, but i'm sorry they're not the same. even the ones that are exactly the same except without the unpredicatability and the noise - well, hell, unpredictability and noise are HUGE factors in music. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY ^thats why i say he doesnt fit. if it wasnt for his analog sources he wouldnt get anywhere. - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:19 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. and why does he not fit??? becasue you say so? his a digital artist samples or not he fits... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: did i say samples from records? and what did i ask for? he doesnt fit if you read carefully... - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 7:07 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. acctually let me explain a little better about what I emant below... reuses live instrumentation that he plays as sound source material for his music... its not just him sampleing from records... how how he samples this stuff and gets it on to his machines are all up to him from my discussions with him he uses all sorts of different recording and micing methods... any how I think regardless of what he does he still a fine example of digital music made with a laptop that sounds super warm... I can find out more about his techniques when I play with him later this month in toronto (sept 23rd) and give you direct examples of what hes doing but ultimatly its warm music made digitally not by the fetishized analogue gear... oh and by the way rob model from what I understand uses actual intruments like a electric guitars to get his sounds...its later processed like crap to end up as they sound... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Neil Wiernik wrote: bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
(313) Re: *****SPAM***** Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
so what you are saying basically is that laptop and computer music are still in relative infancy so the majority (or at least a large number) of the users/musicians still haven't progressed much beyond the discovery stage. philosophically speaking therefore, this music is not inherently crap, just unripe. time will tell. f. - Original Message - From: chthonic streams [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:40 PM Subject: *SPAM* Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound Spam detection software, running on the system mxavas7.fe.aruba.it, has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see http://vademecum.aruba.it/start/mail/antispam/ for details. Content preview: I honestly think the same thing is possible with Laptops, but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. [...] Content analysis details: (5.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description -- -- 5.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% [score: 0.9963] No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/436 - Release Date: 01/09/2006
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
so what you are saying basically is that laptop and computer music are still in relative infancy so the majority (or at least a large number) of the users/musicians still haven't progressed much beyond the discovery stage. philosophically speaking therefore, this music is not inherently crap, just unripe. or more appropriately, the people are. it is much easier to get a track up and going and sounding like something close to what they expect to hear (based on the sound coming out of computers and mp3 players) with software like acid. and so tracks can be completed in a short amount of time without learning much about how to make them sound good (and let's not even get started on the actual composition of the pieces). i don't think making music needs to be hard in order to produce good results (oh, how i suffer for my art!). however, i believe that in general, rather than easiness being a boon to creativity it has chiefly been a boon to productivity. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Real world synthesizers always come with presets, and those presets are usually the most awful sounds you'll ever hear coming out of a keyboard. They're overdone and geared toward a mainstream audience of bells and whistles. Good artists don't use these presets but harness their gear back down to something real and pure-- and most importantly, their own. A lot of these are those deep sounds everyone here knows and loves. In a computer it is the same thing, there are a lot of elements that are geared to that same mainstream audience, as well as all of those garbage loop and prefab rhythm programs/plug-ins, and you have to get past that just like with real world synths and make your own sounds. You have to make them your own. A good artist will synth and tweak every sound in their production themselves and have total control from the synth pads, to the bass, to the percussion. Classic 808 and 909 sounds are nice, but if everyone still only used those sounds in their songs the music would be dead in its tracks (Are guitar bands still making Hair Metal?) The music had to mature and evolve... A good artist can make their computer sound deep, rich, and 'loose' if they want to, but they have to know their tool well enough to make it a reality. Forget your 808 and 909... make your *own* sounds, the way *you* envision them. I use a mastering filter on almost every individual sound or part that I have running in the mix. The beauty of the computer is that the synth itself isn't the only part of sound production... like in Live, you can drag whatever filter you want and apply it to a part-- in essence you are building your own extension of the synthesizer to your own specification in each separate part. Some parts I could have 8-10 filters going at once, and others none at all. They are simply extensions of the filters we have always had *inside* of the synthesizer but tailored to the synthesizer *we* want to build-- and the beauty is the ability to make it unique to every sound---*for* that sound. Almost every sound or part I have in the music I create is absolutely nothing like the original sound coming out of the base synth itself--sometimes completely unrecognizable... it is the filters I apply after it that truly lets me mold and shape them. This was not 'gear-head' nonsense that I planned and researched ahead to figure out. It was all in moments of inspiration while learning a new tool and it felt completely natural. It was fresh and exciting for me-- oh, I can do *this* now!... and everything came together. There were no presets. No loops. Nothing created by anyone else but me. I just had even more control. Someone will chime in and say, See, you overproduce in the computer, but every real world analog synthesizer (subtractive synthesis) has its own filters inside that you have to utilize to control and build the sound from the base operator square, triangle, sine waves. To not use those filters in the real world synths you would be forced to make music with nothing but pure blips and tones. To say using post-synth filters in the computer is over-production is to say you would have to strip all of the internal filters out of your real world synths as well and make music with nothing but those pure basic tones to 'keep it real'. The artist has full control over a warm or crispy mix if they choose. Personally, I like the clarity you can mold in the computer but still like a thick low-end... on the same token I want to be able to put my cd in my car stereo without having to turn down the bass. Some of that BC/CR stuff I have to jack the bass way down just to be able to jack the rest of the volume up. All of this, of course, is my personal preference. At 11:12 AM 9/3/2006, you wrote: certain plugins go a long way toward warming and fattening up music - but if whatever it's affecting just isn't there in the first place, it's not going to be the same. in recorded sound, the most important element is the source, followed by the initial capturing of that source, and then by whatever you do to it afterward, and finally in the playback. there are some people who turn this on its ear, warping the most incredible things out of something very mundane. but they still started with the original characteristics, which in turn affected the building blocks of their sound. again, having said this, i enjoy some music made on laptops very much, some of it even doing a decent replicating job i sort of spoke against. whatever works. d. (seeing if one section of my long reply at a time gets through)
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
gee that is a really huge sweeping and closed minded statement to make... your sound more and more like an old closed minded fart when you say stuff like this... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY ^thats why i say he doesnt fit. if it wasnt for his analog sources he wouldnt get anywhere. - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:19 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. and why does he not fit??? becasue you say so? his a digital artist samples or not he fits... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: did i say samples from records? and what did i ask for? he doesnt fit if you read carefully... - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 7:07 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. acctually let me explain a little better about what I emant below... reuses live instrumentation that he plays as sound source material for his music... its not just him sampleing from records... how how he samples this stuff and gets it on to his machines are all up to him from my discussions with him he uses all sorts of different recording and micing methods... any how I think regardless of what he does he still a fine example of digital music made with a laptop that sounds super warm... I can find out more about his techniques when I play with him later this month in toronto (sept 23rd) and give you direct examples of what hes doing but ultimatly its warm music made digitally not by the fetishized analogue gear... oh and by the way rob model from what I understand uses actual intruments like a electric guitars to get his sounds...its later processed like crap to end up as they sound... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Neil Wiernik wrote: bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
yeah maybe after you're done signing autographs you could grill him about his technique ;p - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:24 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. I know loop finding was samples from old jazz records but his other material is all live instrumentation sampled and manipulated... from what hes told me maybe hes changed his process any how Ill find out on the 23rd... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, /0 wrote: actually jan uses plugs and logic. I've got a friend thats done work with him and yet other friends that have played live with him most of his samples are from old jazz records (ie loop finding jazz records) - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:57 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
what are you talking about I dont do autographs but I will be talking to him over dinner...so I could ask him stuff like that... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, /0 wrote: yeah maybe after you're done signing autographs you could grill him about his technique ;p - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:24 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. I know loop finding was samples from old jazz records but his other material is all live instrumentation sampled and manipulated... from what hes told me maybe hes changed his process any how Ill find out on the 23rd... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, /0 wrote: actually jan uses plugs and logic. I've got a friend thats done work with him and yet other friends that have played live with him most of his samples are from old jazz records (ie loop finding jazz records) - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:57 AM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. bizz WRONG jelinek uses live instrumentation for the most part hes only used samples for a small amount of recordings and acctually they are samples of his own music playing On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12 www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
Honestly, what matters besides the actual compositions? I'm enough of a studio rat to care about things are produced, but the actual method that someone uses is irrelevant, except as it facilitates the result. It's not like you can't make sh*t tracks with analog gear. I program computers for a living, and do the people who use my software to outline the anatomical features of the brain and measure their volume care whether I used a stack, a queue, or a linked list? It's easy to play a piano. You just sit down and bang away at the keys. Doesn't make you Glenn Gould innit? On 9/3/06, chthonic streams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it is much easier to get a track up and going and sounding like something close to what they expect to hear (based on the sound coming out of computers and mp3 players) with software like acid. and so tracks can be completed in a short amount of time without learning much about how to make them sound good (and let's not even get started on the actual composition of the pieces).
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
At 01:31 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote: On 9/3/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...but its really just irrelevant nonsense. when did we start talking about your music? tmo I speak from my own experience. Should I pretend I don't make music? Would that make my opinions more valid? Do I intimidate you? Are you scared? Tell me your fears... Neil is having dinner with Jan Jelinek... and he can ask a question pertinent to a discussion about him personally. Should he pretend he'll never meet the guy and that he himself works at McDonalds?... Staying true to the underground? It's hard to juggle experience, or even your own successes (even if only moderate), when talking to other people... it's a difficult line between simply being yourself and discussing your experience-- which is after all who you are-- or just bragging.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
On 9/3/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do I intimidate you? not a chance. Neil is having dinner with Jan Jelinek... and he can ask a question pertinent to a discussion about him personally. Should he pretend he'll never meet the guy and that he himself works at McDonalds?... Staying true to the underground? neil has a habit of posting only when it helps him look good, like for his upcoming gigs, or to mention having dinner with jan jenelik. i tend not to namedrop (though the late night dinner at the world famous O in pittsburgh with Louis Haiman and Titonton Duvante the other night was in fact quite scrumptous! :) because i'm not a tool who cares what other people think of me, and i dont think people will think more highly of me or my opinion because of whom i call my friends. It's hard to juggle experience, or even your own successes (even if only moderate), when talking to other people... it's a difficult line between simply being yourself and discussing your experience-- which is after all who you are-- or just bragging. its really not that hard. i know plenty of people who say what they think, and my knowledge of their experiences is the only way in which said experiences enter the discussion. i know you have made many records, its completely irrelevent to me. you could be joker X from some mailing list (wait a second, you are!) and i would treat you exactly the same. tom
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
kent williams wrote: Honestly, what matters besides the actual compositions? I'm enough of a studio rat to care about things are produced, but the actual method that someone uses is irrelevant, except as it facilitates the result. It's not like you can't make sh*t tracks with analog gear. Self-appointed golden ears dismiss feeling and creativity, because anyone can appreciate those qualities in music (though not always at first blush, since some tastes are acquired), whereas it takes a genuine superior class of lonely douche to prioritize the production pipeline in their evaluation of a record. see also: missing the point of art - bp
RE: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
I'm confused now. Can someone summarise or conclude this thread for me. Is analogue better than digital or vice versa??? -Original Message- From: Brian Prince [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 4 September 2006 6:35 a.m. To: kent williams Cc: list 313 Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound kent williams wrote: Honestly, what matters besides the actual compositions? I'm enough of a studio rat to care about things are produced, but the actual method that someone uses is irrelevant, except as it facilitates the result. It's not like you can't make sh*t tracks with analog gear. Self-appointed golden ears dismiss feeling and creativity, because anyone can appreciate those qualities in music (though not always at first blush, since some tastes are acquired), whereas it takes a genuine superior class of lonely douche to prioritize the production pipeline in their evaluation of a record. see also: missing the point of art - bp This e-mail message and any accompanying attachments may contain information that is confidential and subject to legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message.
RE: (313) The Laptop Debate - the imitation of sound
Ralf Gill \(healthAlliance\) wrote: I'm confused now. Can someone summarise or conclude this thread for me. Is analogue better than digital or vice versa??? Good music is better than bad music. - bp
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
thanks dale you took the words right out of my mouth!!! :) On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Dale Lawrence wrote: At 01:31 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote: On 9/3/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...but its really just irrelevant nonsense. when did we start talking about your music? tmo I speak from my own experience. Should I pretend I don't make music? Would that make my opinions more valid? Do I intimidate you? Are you scared? Tell me your fears... Neil is having dinner with Jan Jelinek... and he can ask a question pertinent to a discussion about him personally. Should he pretend he'll never meet the guy and that he himself works at McDonalds?... Staying true to the underground? It's hard to juggle experience, or even your own successes (even if only moderate), when talking to other people... it's a difficult line between simply being yourself and discussing your experience-- which is after all who you are-- or just bragging. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
sweet fng jesus ;/ In a computer it is the same thing, there are a lot of elements that are geared to that same mainstream audience, as well as all of those garbage loop and prefab rhythm programs/plug-ins, and you have to get past that just like with real world synths and make your own sounds. You have to make them your own. A good artist will synth and tweak every sound in their production themselves and have total control ^that's ok when you start the topic with a bunch of 5 year-olders who never touched a keyboard.. who are not aware of what sort of waveforms surround them ;/ etc. as you probably noticed - this is not the case.. cliche aside.. or let's end the discussion before it reaches new levels of pointlessness* /12
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
He's in Poland, give him a break. The whole world isn't like Canada or the US. On 9/3/06, Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you under estimate my knowlege sir get off dial up and listen to what Im talking about once your out of the internet dark ages we can continue this conversation ... as streaming bandwitdh does change the sound of things... neil.. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: listened to the first one (which was a pain in the *ss as im on a dial up till 25th) , i dont know what to say.. you surely are familiar with any of the examples of warm sound i mentioned earlier? i'll pretend i havent heard anyone saying boiling hot today .. /12 - Original Message - From: Neil Wiernik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate. fair enough go here http://www.myspace.com/nawmusic the tracks from the green nights orange days record are prime examples of my music mastered BY twerk sounding warm so first listen to mid winter sailboat ride, and penny fishing north of main the 2 tracks there as part of the unrelease titled birch bark ceiling wax and 4 by 6 are made using the same technology, tools and recorded only a month after the green nights orange days record was but was NOT mastered by twerk but rather mastered by someone else using a similar studio set up to what twerk uses. you can directly hear the difference right away... neil... On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, v12 wrote: ^honestly, i gave you examples/titles as i know what i am saying. if you say the opposite -pls stop the general statements about some ghost recordings and give me examples/titles in return. that really saves time. btw twerk/sutekh and related producers are repsonsible for the most absurd audio ive heard so let me hear the boiling hot you talk about.. www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. no, true. it's the lifeless,stiff, ear-scratching bright sound that is the problem.. it's like a plastic doll,with or without make-up it's still nothing more than a pathetic substitute.. unlucky imitation of a great thing.. widely accepted as the real thing requires way more skills.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Record your mixdowns to a reel to reel. Or better yet, cut it to a 78 lacquer. Fetishing old gear is ultimately as irrelevant as fetishing new gear. It sounds like you've been listening to the wrong records. You don't have to convince me that analog recordings sound nice, but anyone who makes tinny annoying records made tinny annoying records on purpose. Either that or they lost the top end of their hearing with their heads in a bass bin. Either way, if you hear crap don't buy it. But don't blame the messenger. Most people make a violin sound really ugly too. On 9/2/06, v12 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. no, true. it's the lifeless,stiff, ear-scratching bright sound that is the problem.. it's like a plastic doll,with or without make-up it's still nothing more than a pathetic substitute.. unlucky imitation of a great thing.. widely accepted as the real thing requires way more skills.
RE: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Is it an analogue or a digital laptop? -Original Message- From: kent williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 2 September 2006 1:30 p.m. To: list 313 Subject: (313) The Laptop Debate. Not to stir the pot, but I've been practicing making tracks with a computer for 12 years. In that time I've come up with 3 tracks I felt This e-mail message and any accompanying attachments may contain information that is confidential and subject to legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
snip And they were doing it before there was anyone telling them how to do it. They had to master an unwieldy, complicated instrument, and make it sing. And there was always that moments of excitement in the track that would be irretrievable if the DA30 ate the DAT. You can still get the live vibe by hooking up controllers, keyboards and just jamming across the kit you have, it's not all point and click :) People said the same kinda thing about sequencers (i.e. just build in blocks), but it is all possible with a bit of work. m
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
I agree with martin this whole laptop or computer music is not as warm sounding as analogue gear is a compleatly irrellivent argument. I have ehard tracks made using all sorts of tools and its not the tools that make some thing warm or cool soundings its the maker ... the person behind the machines not the machines them self. like any thing it takes time and energy to learn your tools of the trade to be able to make them do what you want them to do... Iv been making electronic music since the late 80s and switched from analogue gear to 100 percent computer based music making in 1996 and well like the analogue gear if I want to make a cold sounding track I can make the software Im using do that just like how I can make my music sound warm... here ou be the judge from one of my live sets there are times where it sounds warm and other times where it sounds cold... http://www.vagueterrain.net/content/archives/mp3/01%20naw%20live%20at%20mutek%20may%2030%202006.mp3 so from this example you can see that its all up to the artist making the music...an if you dont like the cold souding material dont listen to it or buy it... its as simple as that If you dont like what the artist if out putting then dont support the work... neil aka naw www.phoniq.net releases available on: www.noisefactoryrecords.com publication: www.vagueterrain.net On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, Martin Dust wrote: You can still get the live vibe by hooking up controllers, keyboards and just jamming across the kit you have, it's not all point and click :) People said the same kinda thing about sequencers (i.e. just build in blocks), but it is all possible with a bit of work. m
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
show me a 100% pc-made trak that would sound even close to rod modell's deepchord 14 or rhythm n sound's carrier. speaking of rod - any of his traks on ecchocord. or afx's blue calx or laricheard or mike parker's caesura 1 or andres' LP on mahogani/ kdj 29 either you're all joking..or you simply can not hear the elementary difference in sound-detail. i test my hearing once a month in a dedicated lab,and it's bat-good so to speak. the rest is fair - not only i wont support the dull brightness spread around me by thousands of ridiculous labels but i'll take any occcasion to say what i think about it.. i remember autechre's interview in which they said the same as most of you: that it's not the computers' fault, it's the ppl who use it that are responsible for the cold lifeless sound - it would sound much more reasonable if they ever made one vibrant,warm sounding record imo. the stuff i got on warp cassettes [tri repetae/chiastic slide] appeared to sound miserable on cd and so on blablabla /12
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
and i dont say digital is bad - not at all - i.e. look at convextion..much of his stuff sounds really good. i dont know about his whole audio signal circuitry but i remember he was using a digital jd800 as sound source for many of his track.. it aint deepchord,but still much more ear pleasing than the regular software synth driven piles of lego ;) J.T. correct me if im wrong or check snorri arnarson's (octal/thule) timbres getting out of his clavia synth - to get a fuller image of what i mean..
RE: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
This laptop debate is very boring - it's too cold and emotionless - it doesn't have enough warmth and crackle :P -Original Message- From: v12 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 September 2006 17:30 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices. and i dont say digital is bad - not at all - i.e. look at convextion..much of his stuff sounds really good. i dont know about his whole audio signal circuitry but i remember he was using a digital jd800 as sound source for many of his track.. it aint deepchord,but still much more ear pleasing than the regular software synth driven piles of lego ;) J.T. correct me if im wrong or check snorri arnarson's (octal/thule) timbres getting out of his clavia synth - to get a fuller image of what i mean.. # Note: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Channel Four Television Corporation unless specifically stated. This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank You. #
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
it's the lifeless,stiff, ear-scratching bright sound that is the problem.. It's possible to make a digital track sound convincingly analog in any decent software package. Soft saturation on the EQ, tape compression, add a little hiss ... nobody will know the difference. Record an analog track to a computer at a sufficient bitrate and it still sounds analog. The set of acoustic characteristics responsible for the old-school flavor are degradations (in the technical sense) which can be applied procedurally in a digital production environment. But I think that the over-use of such techniques is, more often than not, a little tacky. It's like printing a digital painting on canvas to try to make it look like an oil painting. It's difficult to make good, forward-facing art if you're constantly ashamed of the tools you were using. Techno's godfathers were *proud* of the synthetic nature of their instruments. They didn't try to make their strings and basslines sound real. Techno, for me, is about putting the soul of the future in the listener's face. It's about bangin' the robo-beat with whatever you can get your hands on. I draw much of my inspriation from the compositions and feelings of the old-school, not the recording gear and cabling thereof. - bp
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
v12 wrote: the stuff i got on warp cassettes [tri repetae/chiastic slide] appeared to sound miserable on cd and so on blablabla That's because you're listenting to two different mastering pipelines, dude. Record the tapes to CD and they'll sound identical. Otherwise, I've got a $6000 power cable and some quantum resonance damping audio rocks to sell you. - bp
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
I'd cite some of Lusine's work, and Jan Jellinek, and Fennesz Endless Summer, but you might not like them, or hear the musicality and warmth I do in them. I love the way cassettes sound too -- but then I end up digitizing that sound. Sad fact is everything goes through a computer at some point. The only truly analog are people who can do it all with their hands, mouths, acoustic instruments and no amplification. But I doubt someone like that could move a thousand sweaty punters in a dark club at half three. Or if they could, they'd be my heros. On 9/2/06, v12 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: show me a 100% pc-made trak that would sound even close to rod modell's deepchord 14 or rhythm n sound's carrier. speaking of rod - any of his traks on ecchocord. or afx's blue calx or laricheard or mike parker's caesura 1 or andres' LP on mahogani/ kdj 29 either you're all joking..or you simply can not hear the elementary difference in sound-detail. i test my hearing once a month in a dedicated lab,and it's bat-good so to speak. the rest is fair - not only i wont support the dull brightness spread around me by thousands of ridiculous labels but i'll take any occcasion to say what i think about it.. i remember autechre's interview in which they said the same as most of you: that it's not the computers' fault, it's the ppl who use it that are responsible for the cold lifeless sound - it would sound much more reasonable if they ever made one vibrant,warm sounding record imo. the stuff i got on warp cassettes [tri repetae/chiastic slide] appeared to sound miserable on cd and so on blablabla /12
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
You should print the thread and read it on paper, that will add some warmth to it :) or even transcribe it down to paper and than read it :)) IMHO it's best to use best of both worlds. For pure sound analog sounds better than software, but software can do some things that no analog hardware can do, and it would be silly to totally ignore it. Jernej www.octex.si Robert Taylor wrote: This laptop debate is very boring - it's too cold and emotionless - it doesn't have enough warmth and crackle :P -Original Message- From: v12 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 September 2006 17:30 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices. and i dont say digital is bad - not at all - i.e. look at convextion..much of his stuff sounds really good. i dont know about his whole audio signal circuitry but i remember he was using a digital jd800 as sound source for many of his track.. it aint deepchord,but still much more ear pleasing than the regular software synth driven piles of lego ;) J.T. correct me if im wrong or check snorri arnarson's (octal/thule) timbres getting out of his clavia synth - to get a fuller image of what i mean.. # Note: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Channel Four Television Corporation unless specifically stated. This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank You. # 29092006 Club K4, Ljubljana [DJ set]
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Don't try too hard to fight the tool you are using. Keyboards came out and people did try to use them to make 'real' sounds, and as the technology progressed they were able to achieve that to some degree-- that's when old-school analog came back into fashion People started to celebrate the synthesizer for what it was-- a device... and electronic device... .with it's warm juicy tones, like my two Juno 106's and people that were trying to emulate real instruments went back to actually using real instruments. Champion analog? Play with your analog synths to your hearts content... Software brings about a whole new list of possibilities. They made a whole slew of analog emulation plugins to appease the obligatory naysayers that it was all the same. It's a new tool... and just like synths have had more than their share of mindless candy coated gimmicks, so too will people use their computer no further than what is right in front of them... as people explore further and discover new sounds that are inherent in the computer we can begin to celebrate the software for its own unique properties and personality. Dale At 01:32 PM 9/2/2006, Brian Prince wrote: it's the lifeless,stiff, ear-scratching bright sound that is the problem.. It's possible to make a digital track sound convincingly analog in any decent software package. Soft saturation on the EQ, tape compression, add a little hiss ... nobody will know the difference. Record an analog track to a computer at a sufficient bitrate and it still sounds analog. The set of acoustic characteristics responsible for the old-school flavor are degradations (in the technical sense) which can be applied procedurally in a digital production environment. But I think that the over-use of such techniques is, more often than not, a little tacky. It's like printing a digital painting on canvas to try to make it look like an oil painting. It's difficult to make good, forward-facing art if you're constantly ashamed of the tools you were using. Techno's godfathers were *proud* of the synthetic nature of their instruments. They didn't try to make their strings and basslines sound real. Techno, for me, is about putting the soul of the future in the listener's face. It's about bangin' the robo-beat with whatever you can get your hands on. I draw much of my inspriation from the compositions and feelings of the old-school, not the recording gear and cabling thereof. - bp
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
You should print the thread and read it on paper, that will add some warmth to it :) or even transcribe it down to paper and than read it :)) ^guess what - if a post is longer than say 15-20 lines i do print it. unless it's some pointless nonsense by someone i know he couldnt come up with anything relevant) i do have problems with full understanding of more complex stuff read off a screen. i learn/aquire much better..from paper plus i love its mobility.. and yes, i hate the super-white light-reflecting sheets, i prefere 3rd class yellow vintage paper to be honest.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Not to stir the pot, stir please, what else are email discussion lists for? That being a lot of my favorite Detroit and Chicago tracks were made in a certain way that I think made them more exciting. Specifically, it's setting up a bunch of gear and recording it live to two track, with one or more people working the gear. Drexciya did it that way, as did all the early Chicago house heads. A lot of the classic UR tracks were recorded mostly live. that's inspiring and exciting. not even to multitrack huh? well i guess they didn't have the money to record twice as it were (recording and then mixing) and they came from a different head (DJ culture, mix it live). kinda reminds me about when old timers talk about benny goodman and his orchestra all standing around one microphone. and you can still make great recordings like that too. In order to work that way, those artists had to be as good at running a drum machine, synths, effects and a mixing board. They had to have a definite idea of the sound they wanted. They had to know how to play, and to embrace and roll with happy accidents. there are a lot of skills one has to have to make *good* laptop-based music as well. people on lists like this forget or never heard all the musical travesties made with the same gear. with the glow of hindsight, 80s gear and its results have been romanticized out of proportion. there were loads of analog synths, drum machines, tube amps, and recorders that just sucked ass. true, there was some excellent gear made, but mostly it was gear that was made famous by someone who took what they had and went with it. their creativity, and subsequent success, is what people *really* want - the gear is just an over-fetishized substitution. having said that i do share some of the same fetish but won't be blinded by it. I honestly think the same thing is possible with Laptops, but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. agreed. a big problem when switching over to computer, just like from analog to digital, is that the rules change. the issue is similar to what gareth jones said in an interview about recording with daniel miller and depeche mode: new music goes through a formica stage. some the first analog synths were used to put out things like switched on bach where synths tried to mimic and replace each instrument in a classical orchestra. cute, but why bother? it's not an orchestra so don't try because it will fail misreably and sound cheesy (unless that's what you're going for). a convincing trompe l'oeil (or l'oreille in this case) is hard to do and only works in a controlled environment, which music is not often experienced in. moving from analog to digital we had the same issue, and now again from hardware/sequencer/recorder-based technology to the laptop environment. the tendency is to mimic what's gone before. there is a good deal of laptop music that does not try to be other than what it is, or explores those boundaries rather than trying to make the laptop be a replacement for something else. analog modelers are pretty amazing, but i'm sorry they're not the same. even the ones that are exactly the same except without the unpredicatability and the noise - well, hell, unpredictability and noise are HUGE factors in music. certain plugins go a long way toward warming and fattening up music - but if whatever it's affecting just isn't there in the first place, it's not going to be the same. in recorded sound, the most important element is the source, followed by the initial capturing of that source, and then by whatever you do to it afterward, and finally in the playback. there are some people who turn this on its ear, warping the most incredible things out of something very mundane. but they still started with the original characteristics, which in turn affected the building blocks of their sound. again, having said this, i enjoy some music made on laptops very much, some of it even doing a decent replicating job i sort of spoke against. whatever works. every tool you use has its own characteristics, strengths and weaknesses. do and use whatever makes sense to you. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
It's possible to make a digital track sound convincingly analog in any decent software package. Soft saturation on the EQ, tape compression, add a little hiss ... nobody will know the difference. nobody? it's all futile attempt - analog devices lacked stability,that meant milions un-copyable micro-details per minute.. you cant name them ,point at one - but the general image is much much different from the digital emulation imho. ___ Record an analog track to a computer at a sufficient bitrate and it still sounds analog. ^ true, much more analog than the software emulation of tape saturation and all that ... Techno's godfathers were *proud* of the synthetic nature of their instruments. They didn't try to make their strings and basslines sound real. ^ their synthetic was somehow half-organic/half-synthetic when i look at it now.. the word synthetic in 2006 means something completely differnt.. it reached the ridiculous extreme, biting its own tale.. ___ someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
^guess what - if a post is longer than say 15-20 lines i do print it. unless it's some pointless nonsense by someone i know he couldnt come up with anything relevant) I hate that. Just delete that sewage.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate.
Not to stir the pot, stir please, what else are email discussion lists for? That being a lot of my favorite Detroit and Chicago tracks were made in a certain way that I think made them more exciting. Specifically, it's setting up a bunch of gear and recording it live to two track, with one or more people working the gear. Drexciya did it that way, as did all the early Chicago house heads. A lot of the classic UR tracks were recorded mostly live. that's inspiring and exciting. not even to multitrack huh? well i guess they didn't have the money to record twice as it were (recording and then mixing) and they came from a different head (DJ culture, mix it live). kinda reminds me about when old timers talk about benny goodman and his orchestra all standing around one microphone. and you can still make great recordings like that too. In order to work that way, those artists had to be as good at running a drum machine, synths, effects and a mixing board. They had to have a definite idea of the sound they wanted. They had to know how to play, and to embrace and roll with happy accidents. there are a lot of skills one has to have to make *good* laptop-based music as well. people on lists like this forget or never heard all the musical travesties made with the same gear. with the glow of hindsight, 80s gear and its results have been romanticized out of proportion. there were loads of analog synths, drum machines, tube amps, and recorders that just sucked ass. true, there was some excellent gear made, but mostly it was gear that was made famous by someone who took what they had and went with it. their creativity, and subsequent success, is what people *really* want - the gear is just an over-fetishized substitution. having said that i do share some of the same fetish but won't be blinded by it. I honestly think the same thing is possible with Laptops, but maybe we haven't seen the Ron Hardy or Derrick May of the laptop yet. But it's silly to argue that computers, in and of themselves, are the problem. agreed. a big problem when switching over to computer, just like from analog to digital, is that the rules change. the issue is similar to what gareth jones said in an interview about recording with daniel miller and depeche mode: new music goes through a formica stage. some the first analog synths were used to put out things like switched on bach where synths tried to mimic and replace each instrument in a classical orchestra. cute, but why bother? it's not an orchestra so don't try because it will fail misreably and sound cheesy (unless that's what you're going for). a convincing trompe l'oeil (or l'oreille in this case) is hard to do and only works in a controlled environment, which music is not often experienced in. moving from analog to digital we had the same issue, and now again from hardware/sequencer/recorder-based technology to the laptop environment. the tendency is to mimic what's gone before. there is a good deal of laptop music that does not try to be other than what it is, or explores those boundaries rather than trying to make the laptop be a replacement for something else. analog modelers are pretty amazing, but i'm sorry they're not the same. even the ones that are exactly the same except without the unpredicatability and the noise - well, hell, unpredictability and noise are HUGE factors in music. certain plugins go a long way toward warming and fattening up music - but if whatever it's affecting just isn't there in the first place, it's not going to be the same. in recorded sound, the most important element is the source, followed by the initial capturing of that source, and then by whatever you do to it afterward, and finally in the playback. there are some people who turn this on its ear, warping the most incredible things out of something very mundane. but they still started with the original characteristics, which in turn affected the building blocks of their sound. again, having said this, i enjoy some music made on laptops very much, some of it even doing a decent replicating job i sort of spoke against. whatever works. every tool you use has its own characteristics, strengths and weaknesses. do and use whatever makes sense to you. d.
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
On 9/2/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ^guess what - if a post is longer than say 15-20 lines i do print it. unless it's some pointless nonsense by someone i know he couldnt come up with anything relevant) I hate that. Just delete that sewage. i think he might have been referring to your posts. i know i havent been able to make it through them because its just too much going on and on. tom
Re: (313) The Laptop Debate/other digital devices.
At 05:25 PM 9/2/2006, you wrote: On 9/2/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ^guess what - if a post is longer than say 15-20 lines i do print it. unless it's some pointless nonsense by someone i know he couldnt come up with anything relevant) I hate that. Just delete that sewage. i think he might have been referring to your posts. i know i havent been able to make it through them because its just too much going on and on. tom Are people really that mean? Wow, I knew I was a tool... I can't even tell when people are taking a jab at me. Anyway... I'm sorry, I'll try to simple it down for you next time. If you quit reiterating what I said as if it was your own argument it would've been a lot shorter. I'll sum it up: You live your life based on oversimplified stereotypes. Better?
