Re: (313) really
On 8/31/06, Stoddard, Kamal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course computers are used for lots of stuff. Guitars have one purpose. No-brainer. but it does help create the problem! Hey! you ever see this band called peelander-z? I have. One of the things they do in their act is at a certain point they recruit audience members to come up onstage and play their instruments for them while they do other things with bowling pins and such. Before this though, they get the music to such a fever pitch of screaming guitar-feedback madness that, unless the dude who got picked for drums sucks bad you can barely tell it's not them. Ever hear of the noise core rock stuff. A lot of that is just guys that can't play guitar a lick hitting the strings as hard as they can and screaming. As long as you market it right you can sell anything. Music is no exception and knowing this, I can't believe you still see this as an issue with the artists/tools instead of with the idiots that buy it. yeah, it might be marketed and sold, but its not going to be really hitting people musically. things like that are fun to see live, more like performance art. we used to book local cats like the joysticks (who went on to produce that girltalk guy iirc! E) and big daddy bullseal to do goofy things while bands and deejays played. and i can appreciate that kind of thing for sure. but it still doesnt make the music good! Any new convenience will make people do less to achieve more by definition. If it didn't make things easier, it wouldn't be convenient would it? It would be making things more complicated (which we both abhor). I personally stick with gear when I can, but I wouldn't let these cats off the hook as easily as you Tom. I'd never let a punk fakin' uncreative hack blame his wackness on the availability of the arpeggiator (which, when introduced to the all gear studio world, heard the same cries of but they just hit that random button) or some preset. im not sure any of them are blaming the gear! i think theyll support it because it helps them camoflauge their lack of good ideas. I've heard cats work them fxcking presets to the bone. And in my experience in big studios, that cost model has proven to weed out more of the creatives and put the control factor solely in the hands of those with the cash to pay. Usually that's not the guy who's tormented by his creative genius. I've had to watch more than a few real live geniuses get raped for their ideas and soul because they either needed the money to get a studio, or were under the thumb of the guy that paid for the time (AR). so it's a good theory, but it actually works the other way around in real life (according to my experience). this is true, which is why i said i support the idea of music making being easy to obtain in theory. of course, you could just rock old thrift store kinds of gear, and really wack hardware. i use the hr-16 which can be had for like $75 or less even! dr rhythms are another source of good variety of sounds and programmability at a really cheap price. you could save your lunch money in high school for a couple weeks and afford a used one. You been buying some of it, some gets obscured by the shxtpile of weak shxt, and the rest is on the way. If you haven't found it and we tell you it's there, maybe you just gotta dig deeper...or in another hole/shop. :)I run with a crew of real sampleheads and the crate diggers credo has always been, it's out there...I just gotta cop it before you. So go get it man. that is who i run with! but the problem with that is that we're buying all old records. we dont want to be buying only old records, we want new stuff. we did an order from hardwax a couple weeks ago to pick up some of the new stuff we needed that wasnt around here. we still ended up ordering mostly older records. i go wherever the music is, i check sites like juno, hardwax, emporium50, submerge, picadilly, etc. im a fiend baby, if its out there and its good, ill find it somehow. i check peoples reccomendations on various lists and message boards in many many genres. i might miss some things here and there, but as soon as i find out about them, i hunt them down. I think this is where the crux of the matter lies. No tool will make up for artistic integrity and creativity. What it can do is allow you to approximate these with less effort. If you choose to be happy with that, okay then. Plenty of guys I know are happy just to go outside, play some football, get hurt again and call it a day. They're not shooting for the premier league or anything and that's fine. but if youre just making music for yourself to listen to or whatever, thats one thing. but putting it out in wide distribution on vinyl is as much responsible for why people dont wanna buy records anymore as anything else. if the music was better, people wouldnt mind paying! For me it's a no- lose situation. See, for every crap record out by dj slackfingers, there's someone with crap
Re: (313) really
All I want to listen to is honesty. .simon
Re: (313) really
ha ha ah http://obscure.co.nz/profiles/turnstyle Obscure loves Techno! psst: NZ techno mailing list http://obscure.co.nz/incoming/909_revolution haha http://obscure.co.nz/profiles/lrs --- www.obscure.co.nz www.psurkit.net -- m. +64 275 606012
Re: (313) really
It may be me, but.. Isn't a computer just a hardware synthesiser with a different interface? In fact I think some synths actually have computers inside them, I could be wrong though. There is some irony in technophobes on a techno mailing list? Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: On 8/30/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --but I thought you said the tools didn't matter? Which is it? All the ground is already broken then? the tools DON'T matter, as long as theyre not being used a substitute for ideas and good music. which in the case of dylan and kraftwerk, they werent. in the case of X number of computer musicians, they are. i prefer people who keep it simple and limited because it makes it almost ALL about the ideas and music as opposed to some programming trick or DSP nonsense. Do you think people really just press return on their computer? uh, yes? isnt it obvious? Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving resistance in their infancy? its not really a new point, and i understand it. however, im skeptical of any technology that makes things more complex for no reason. with the power of the modern computer based stuido, it should easily be possible for people to crank out tunes much better than the original house and techno tracks, right? well that's just not happening, only a deluded person would say that the quality of tracks has increased in direct proportion to the complexity of the equipment being used to make them. This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system: you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
RE: (313) really
Original Message- From: Michael Lees [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 September 2006 13:38 Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) really It may be me, but.. Isn't a computer just a hardware synthesiser with a different interface? Yes. To qualify that though, dedicated RAM in digital synth vs. RAM used by myriad other competing applications (meaning potentially less available for sound quality) plus more than likely better DACs in digital synths than in a computer and even an external soundcard. Finally, the routing: for a synth it's likely more direct - out of box into mixer/pre-amp, vs. in a computer, lord knows where else it's been, plus again, likely, the gain will need to be boosted. As we know any extra messing you have to do to a signal before you can use it is going to degrade it, relatively speaking. Ken
Re: RE: (313) really
To qualify that though, dedicated RAM in digital synth vs. RAM used by myriad other competing applications (meaning potentially less availablefor sound quality) a friend of mine has some neat winxp tricks to get around this. he has a really tweaked out machine where he has disabled all but the absolutely necessary services to run the machine and to use the necessary audio and other hardware of course. then there is more to be done once the machine is started up. he starts 1 explorer to launch everything from. then he kills every last process that is not needed. the box doesn't have a desktop, start menu or anything. just all black with one explorer window. it runs beautifully. if any of you are interested i can send the guide that he followed to the list this evening from home. - Original Message - From: Odeluga, Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, September 1, 2006 8:46 am Subject: RE: (313) really To: 313@hyperreal.org To qualify that though, dedicated RAM in digital synth vs. RAM used by myriad other competing applications (meaning potentially less availablefor sound quality) plus more than likely better DACs in digital synths than in a computer and even an external soundcard.
Re: (313) really
I would love to see that guide! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To qualify that though, dedicated RAM in digital synth vs. RAM used by myriad other competing applications (meaning potentially less availablefor sound quality) a friend of mine has some neat winxp tricks to get around this. he has a really tweaked out machine where he has disabled all but the absolutely necessary services to run the machine and to use the necessary audio and other hardware of course. then there is more to be done once the machine is started up. he starts 1 explorer to launch everything from. then he kills every last process that is not needed. the box doesn't have a desktop, start menu or anything. just all black with one explorer window. it runs beautifully. if any of you are interested i can send the guide that he followed to the list this evening from home. - Original Message - From: Odeluga, Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, September 1, 2006 8:46 am Subject: RE: (313) really To: 313@hyperreal.org To qualify that though, dedicated RAM in digital synth vs. RAM used by myriad other competing applications (meaning potentially less availablefor sound quality) plus more than likely better DACs in digital synths than in a computer and even an external soundcard. -- Jamil Ali (416) 364-9227 ext. 31 www.orcsoftware.com
Re: (313) really
I rambled on too long and I thought this message was too big to fit through the chokepoint. Then I thought that figuring this out might entitle me to get my WorldGeek membership card back... I figured maybe it was just all the profanity, so I edited it for prime-time... Nothing. Then finally Kent emailed me like the novice that I am, after reading my two blocked attempts, and told me it was simply because I wasn't sending in plain text. Alas, I'll never get back into the club... At 12:25 PM 8/30/2006, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: On 8/30/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --but I thought you said the tools didn't matter? Which is it? All the ground is already broken then? the tools DON'T matter, as long as theyre not being used a substitute for ideas and good music. which in the case of dylan and kraftwerk, they werent. in the case of X number of computer musicians, they are. i prefer people who keep it simple and limited because it makes it almost ALL about the ideas and music as opposed to some programming trick or DSP nonsense. For every hack artist that installs some software and declares themselves a musician there are hundreds of individuals in the past who picked up a guitar and thought they were rock stars. Dylan knows how to play guitar, etc... Kraftwerk knows how to work their synthesizers (and they use a computer as their sequencer--if not having moved completely over to software synthesis in their own studio already)... hell, *I* know how to work synthesizers too... Producing sound in real-time within the computer is just another tool. Either you're good at it or you aren't. Some get the A grade... others get the F... and a whole lot of in between. Personally, if we're talking about tools, I only use Live and one plug-in, which is simply a synthesizer that I like. I've rarely even read a manual for a piece of gear. I've figured out all of the synthesis parameters out there myself, and have usually stayed out of gear discussions because I already had the tools/gear I wanted and really didn't care about anything else. I was never a gear head, I am a music head. There are so many people out there that are exactly the same way... many that have strolled in and out of this list over the years. Do you think people really just press return on their computer? uh, yes? isnt it obvious? Yes, every morning I wake up, turn on my computer, double-click the Live 5.0 icon on my desktop, and press return. The songs just come pouring out. Check my page. It's astounding. I hope nobody else figures out what program I use. I'll be ruined. Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving resistance in their infancy? its not really a new point, Extraneous insult ignored. and i understand it. however, im skeptical You may understand it, but I'm not sure if the point is sinking in. Is photography art? If so, why? All you have to do is press a button. Some people make masterpieces with their Polaroids while others make trash with their elaborate camera systemsand vice versa. I'm also a designer. Should we dismiss all of the art and design of today that was made with a computer? I love progressive design, but there is a lot of garbage out there and I cringe at something awful I see every single day. Do I blame the tool? Blame the artist. Samplers. Some people sample entire loops of other people's music, add a beat, and sing over it. Other people use a sampler to record just a drum kick, the sound of a glass breaking, or their grandmother belching, then rework it and use it successfully in a track as an instrument. Are samplers evil because MC Hammer and Puff Daddy blatantly misused them? What if someone had a disease of some sort, like Parkinson's, where they just couldn't keep their hands steady, but they had a brilliant mind just overflowing with creative vision, and the computer allowed them to finally bring those visions to reality and share them with us? Are they not keeping it real? Stephen Hawking doesn't keep it real. He's a hack. I have sounds in my head that I've never heard in real life and I've still never been able to get them out, but with software I'm a little bit closer. I'm sorry if the sound I want to use in a song isn't made by an analog synth, korg wavestation, guitar, ukelele, tribal drum, leaf blower, car crash, or anything else found in the universe today. Isn't that striving towards something groundbreaking? Trying to realize something that no one has ever heard before? Many people are trying to achieve this goal using the computer. Alternately, though, simply making a sound that no one has heard yet doesn't make it good. You still need creativity and skill to make it worthy of recognition. Knives can kill, but they also cut your dinner. Cars can suck up oil, but
RE: (313) really
Well stated. I like that you have sounds that you can't get out yet. Thought I was the only one. Sometimes I think about what would happen if I was able to realize everything in my head finally, you know, get it all out. It's kinda scary to think about. Like all my special is inside there and if I let it all out I won't have any special left. Dunno. Freaks me right out though sometimes. Like that bird that's always watching me in the morning. Can't even sleep with the blind open anymore...peeping bxstard... K Mwnb -Original Message- From: Dale Lawrence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 12:46 PM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) really I rambled on too long and I thought this message was too big to fit through the chokepoint. Then I thought that figuring this out might entitle me to get my WorldGeek(tm) membership card back... I figured maybe it was just all the profanity, so I edited it for prime-time... Nothing. Then finally Kent emailed me like the novice that I am, after reading my two blocked attempts, and told me it was simply because I wasn't sending in plain text. Alas, I'll never get back into the club... At 12:25 PM 8/30/2006, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: On 8/30/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --but I thought you said the tools didn't matter? Which is it? All the ground is already broken then? the tools DON'T matter, as long as theyre not being used a substitute for ideas and good music. which in the case of dylan and kraftwerk, they werent. in the case of X number of computer musicians, they are. i prefer people who keep it simple and limited because it makes it almost ALL about the ideas and music as opposed to some programming trick or DSP nonsense. For every hack artist that installs some software and declares themselves a musician there are hundreds of individuals in the past who picked up a guitar and thought they were rock stars. Dylan knows how to play guitar, etc... Kraftwerk knows how to work their synthesizers (and they use a computer as their sequencer--if not having moved completely over to software synthesis in their own studio already)... hell, *I* know how to work synthesizers too... Producing sound in real-time within the computer is just another tool. Either you're good at it or you aren't. Some get the A grade... others get the F... and a whole lot of in between. Personally, if we're talking about tools, I only use Live and one plug-in, which is simply a synthesizer that I like. I've rarely even read a manual for a piece of gear. I've figured out all of the synthesis parameters out there myself, and have usually stayed out of gear discussions because I already had the tools/gear I wanted and really didn't care about anything else. I was never a gear head, I am a music head. There are so many people out there that are exactly the same way... many that have strolled in and out of this list over the years. Do you think people really just press return on their computer? uh, yes? isnt it obvious? Yes, every morning I wake up, turn on my computer, double-click the Live 5.0 icon on my desktop, and press return. The songs just come pouring out. Check my page. It's astounding. I hope nobody else figures out what program I use. I'll be ruined. Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving resistance in their infancy? its not really a new point, Extraneous insult ignored. and i understand it. however, im skeptical You may understand it, but I'm not sure if the point is sinking in. Is photography art? If so, why? All you have to do is press a button. Some people make masterpieces with their Polaroids while others make trash with their elaborate camera systemsand vice versa. I'm also a designer. Should we dismiss all of the art and design of today that was made with a computer? I love progressive design, but there is a lot of garbage out there and I cringe at something awful I see every single day. Do I blame the tool? Blame the artist. Samplers. Some people sample entire loops of other people's music, add a beat, and sing over it. Other people use a sampler to record just a drum kick, the sound of a glass breaking, or their grandmother belching, then rework it and use it successfully in a track as an instrument. Are samplers evil because MC Hammer and Puff Daddy blatantly misused them? What if someone had a disease of some sort, like Parkinson's, where they just couldn't keep their hands steady, but they had a brilliant mind just overflowing with creative vision, and the computer allowed them to finally bring those visions to reality and share them with us? Are they not keeping it real? Stephen Hawking doesn't keep it real. He's a hack. I have sounds in my head that I've never heard in real life and I've still never been able to get them out
Re: (313) really
On 8/31/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For every hack artist that installs some software and declares themselves a musician there are hundreds of individuals in the past who picked up a guitar and thought they were rock stars. it could be that it was like that in the past. but i bet the number right now of people who own a computer without making music is far more than the number of people who own a guitar that sits around for no reason. so for those people, it takes almost no effort to DL and install any variety of music software, whereas if you wanna play guitar youve gotta go out and buy a guitar, learn how to play it (no matter how basic your music is going to be), and find people to play in a band with, and then on top of that either buy or borrow equipment to actually record and mixdown said music. with a laptop, you can do everything and have it posted on the web in under 2 hours. you dont even have to have any idea how to physically play any instrument, you can just point and click with your mouse, a technique many people already have mastered! we're only at the start of the use of computers to make music, really. and if the quality keeps going down the way it has been, one day people will be yearning for the early 00's. Dylan knows how to play guitar, etc... Kraftwerk knows how to work their synthesizers (and they use a computer as their sequencer--if not having moved completely over to software synthesis in their own studio already)... hell, *I* know how to work synthesizers too... Producing sound in real-time within the computer is just another tool. Either you're good at it or you aren't. Some get the A grade... others get the F... and a whole lot of in between. the problem with the tool of course is that it requires nothing in addition to work. no techiques, no abilities, nothing. hell, you can even get sample packs on the web of every drum machine ever and use them all. nothing at all is required to get going. which i appreciate in theory. in practice however, it makes people really lazy and more than willing to just copy and bite things left and right. if you want to start a band or even just use a hardware electronic music studio, its going to require 10 times more thought and effort just to get going than it is to make a remedial track in most software apps. that efforts weeds out jokers. not all of them, unfortunately, but alot of them. Personally, if we're talking about tools, I only use Live and one plug-in, which is simply a synthesizer that I like. I've rarely even read a manual for a piece of gear. I've figured out all of the synthesis parameters out there myself, and have usually stayed out of gear discussions because I already had the tools/gear I wanted and really didn't care about anything else. I was never a gear head, I am a music head. There are so many people out there that are exactly the same way... many that have strolled in and out of this list over the years. for all these music heads, where is the good music? are they just not working hard enough? too many people bite the trendy style, too many people follow the paint by numbers method of making music in genre X. and that isnt limited to computer users, but it seems extremely prevalent amongst them. Yes, every morning I wake up, turn on my computer, double-click the Live 5.0 icon on my desktop, and press return. The songs just come pouring out. Check my page. It's astounding. I hope nobody else figures out what program I use. I'll be ruined. hey man, YOU might not. but many other people do just use their programs in the same old way and make the same old crap. im not gonna say what i feel about your tracks because this isnt what the discussion is about. but i bet you can guess. Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving resistance in their infancy? its not really a new point, Extraneous insult ignored. which extraneous insult was that? You may understand it, but I'm not sure if the point is sinking in. Is photography art? If so, why? All you have to do is press a button. Some people make masterpieces with their Polaroids while others make trash with their elaborate camera systemsand vice versa. but the point is that if you try to substitute the elaborate setup for talent, it doesnt work! but thats not really where the true difference is. what a photo does is the same as what music does, it captures a feeling. think of it as the difference between someone who takes candid shots vs someone who sets up their shots. thats really where the difference comes in more. you can elaborate in setting up a photo and suck all the interesting things out of the subject that were there when you got the inspiration to frame it the way you want it in the first place. worrying about lighting and whatnot doesnt matter if youre not getting the feeling across. and thats the same thing that
Re: (313) really]
Original Message Subject: Re: (313) really From:Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date:Thu, August 31, 2006 6:51 pm To: 313@hyperreal.org -- Relax guys. Just do your own thing and you should be happy. Who gives a hoot what some idiot is doing on their laptop. It's bogus to even consider the biters in the equation. The more the market is flooded with non sense the more your music should stand out. Its a good thing. Mr. Twon On 8/31/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For every hack artist that installs some software and declares themselves a musician there are hundreds of individuals in the past who picked up a guitar and thought they were rock stars. it could be that it was like that in the past. but i bet the number right now of people who own a computer without making music is far more than the number of people who own a guitar that sits around for no reason. so for those people, it takes almost no effort to DL and install any variety of music software, whereas if you wanna play guitar youve gotta go out and buy a guitar, learn how to play it (no matter how basic your music is going to be), and find people to play in a band with, and then on top of that either buy or borrow equipment to actually record and mixdown said music. with a laptop, you can do everything and have it posted on the web in under 2 hours. you dont even have to have any idea how to physically play any instrument, you can just point and click with your mouse, a technique many people already have mastered! we're only at the start of the use of computers to make music, really. and if the quality keeps going down the way it has been, one day people will be yearning for the early 00's. Dylan knows how to play guitar, etc... Kraftwerk knows how to work their synthesizers (and they use a computer as their sequencer--if not having moved completely over to software synthesis in their own studio already)... hell, *I* know how to work synthesizers too... Producing sound in real-time within the computer is just another tool. Either you're good at it or you aren't. Some get the A grade... others get the F... and a whole lot of in between. the problem with the tool of course is that it requires nothing in addition to work. no techiques, no abilities, nothing. hell, you can even get sample packs on the web of every drum machine ever and use them all. nothing at all is required to get going. which i appreciate in theory. in practice however, it makes people really lazy and more than willing to just copy and bite things left and right. if you want to start a band or even just use a hardware electronic music studio, its going to require 10 times more thought and effort just to get going than it is to make a remedial track in most software apps. that efforts weeds out jokers. not all of them, unfortunately, but alot of them. Personally, if we're talking about tools, I only use Live and one plug-in, which is simply a synthesizer that I like. I've rarely even read a manual for a piece of gear. I've figured out all of the synthesis parameters out there myself, and have usually stayed out of gear discussions because I already had the tools/gear I wanted and really didn't care about anything else. I was never a gear head, I am a music head. There are so many people out there that are exactly the same way... many that have strolled in and out of this list over the years. for all these music heads, where is the good music? are they just not working hard enough? too many people bite the trendy style, too many people follow the paint by numbers method of making music in genre X. and that isnt limited to computer users, but it seems extremely prevalent amongst them. Yes, every morning I wake up, turn on my computer, double-click the Live 5.0 icon on my desktop, and press return. The songs just come pouring out. Check my page. It's astounding. I hope nobody else figures out what program I use. I'll be ruined. hey man, YOU might not. but many other people do just use their programs in the same old way and make the same old crap. im not gonna say what i feel about your tracks because this isnt what the discussion is about. but i bet you can guess. Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving resistance in their infancy? its not really a new point, Extraneous insult ignored. which extraneous insult was that? You may understand it, but I'm not sure if the point is sinking in. Is photography art? If so, why? All you have to do is press a button. Some people make masterpieces with their Polaroids while others make trash with their elaborate camera systemsand vice versa. but the point is that if you try to substitute the elaborate setup for talent, it doesnt
RE: (313) really
devil's advocate it could be that it was like that in the past. but i bet the number right now of people who own a computer without making music is far more than the number of people who own a guitar that sits around for no reason. Of course computers are used for lots of stuff. Guitars have one purpose. No-brainer. the problem with the tool of course is that it requires nothing in addition to work. Hey! you ever see this band called peelander-z? I have. One of the things they do in their act is at a certain point they recruit audience members to come up onstage and play their instruments for them while they do other things with bowling pins and such. Before this though, they get the music to such a fever pitch of screaming guitar-feedback madness that, unless the dude who got picked for drums sucks bad you can barely tell it's not them. Ever hear of the noise core rock stuff. A lot of that is just guys that can't play guitar a lick hitting the strings as hard as they can and screaming. As long as you market it right you can sell anything. Music is no exception and knowing this, I can't believe you still see this as an issue with the artists/tools instead of with the idiots that buy it. in practice however, it makes people really lazy and more than willing to just copy and bite things left and right. if you want to start a band or even just use a hardware electronic music studio, its going to require 10 times more thought and effort just to get going than it is to make a remedial track in most software apps. that efforts weeds out jokers. not all of them, unfortunately, but alot of them. Any new convenience will make people do less to achieve more by definition. If it didn't make things easier, it wouldn't be convenient would it? It would be making things more complicated (which we both abhor). I personally stick with gear when I can, but I wouldn't let these cats off the hook as easily as you Tom. I'd never let a punk fakin' uncreative hack blame his wackness on the availability of the arpeggiator (which, when introduced to the all gear studio world, heard the same cries of but they just hit that random button) or some preset. I've heard cats work them fxcking presets to the bone. And in my experience in big studios, that cost model has proven to weed out more of the creatives and put the control factor solely in the hands of those with the cash to pay. Usually that's not the guy who's tormented by his creative genius. I've had to watch more than a few real live geniuses get raped for their ideas and soul because they either needed the money to get a studio, or were under the thumb of the guy that paid for the time (AR). so it's a good theory, but it actually works the other way around in real life (according to my experience). for all these music heads, where is the good music? You been buying some of it, some gets obscured by the shxtpile of weak shxt, and the rest is on the way. If you haven't found it and we tell you it's there, maybe you just gotta dig deeper...or in another hole/shop. :)I run with a crew of real sampleheads and the crate diggers credo has always been, it's out there...I just gotta cop it before you. So go get it man. but using computers doesnt make people more creative, or have more skill. their music would still be good if it was made on an acoustic guitar. I think this is where the crux of the matter lies. No tool will make up for artistic integrity and creativity. What it can do is allow you to approximate these with less effort. If you choose to be happy with that, okay then. Plenty of guys I know are happy just to go outside, play some football, get hurt again and call it a day. They're not shooting for the premier league or anything and that's fine. For me it's a no- lose situation. See, for every crap record out by dj slackfingers, there's someone with crap taste that's ready to buy it. YAY! They win. For me, I have a zero tolerance policy for that kind of music, so not only do I not listen to it. It's like the fxcking easter bunny to me...not even real. So it doesn't bother me. It's only as annoying as a fly in traffic. Not very when it comes to the day to day. /devils advocate Bottom line: hold artists responsible for their failures. Hold yourself responsible for the effects of your taste on your psyche. And above all, hold the system responsible for it's oppressive nature that allows these a$$hole to thrive and gives us a reason to hate.. Word. :) k -Original Message- From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 1:52 PM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) really On 8/31/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For every hack artist that installs some software and declares themselves a musician there are hundreds of individuals in the past who picked up a guitar and thought they were rock stars. so for those people, it takes almost no effort to DL and install any variety of music software
Re: (313) really
sounds like a computer :p - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 6:13 PM Subject: Re: (313) really Ok, here: http://www.myspace.com/theoremthx/ All brand new... because you tricked me into it with your wit and prowess. I submit. At 05:55 PM 8/29/2006, you wrote: go make music instead - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 11:50 AM Subject: Re: (313) really At 11:54 PM 8/28/2006, you wrote: To quote the Simpsons no one will ever mention it again... under penalty of torture. My email was down all weekend... I feel like Commodus in Gladiator when he marches in, stumbles off of his horse and begs, Have I missed it?... Have I missed the battle? Now my popcorn is stale. I suppose I'll just troll parakeet owner forums instead, looking for someone to piss on...
Re: (313) really
Did you hear? Bob Dylan used an electric guitar in his set last week? WTF? Oh no... Kraftwerk's Numbers sounds like it was made on... *gasp*... electronic instruments. I thought that band was cool until I found out their percussionist was a drum machine. That's not music. Oh, he isn't keeping it real... All he does is use a sampler to record someone else's work and puts his name on it. Computer? Press return! At 07:11 PM 8/29/2006, you wrote: sounds like a computer :p - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 6:13 PM Subject: Re: (313) really Ok, here: http://www.myspace.com/theoremthx/ All brand new... because you tricked me into it with your wit and prowess. I submit. At 05:55 PM 8/29/2006, you wrote: go make music instead - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 11:50 AM Subject: Re: (313) really At 11:54 PM 8/28/2006, you wrote: To quote the Simpsons no one will ever mention it again... under penalty of torture. My email was down all weekend... I feel like Commodus in Gladiator when he marches in, stumbles off of his horse and begs, Have I missed it?... Have I missed the battle? Now my popcorn is stale. I suppose I'll just troll parakeet owner forums instead, looking for someone to piss on...
Re: (313) really
On 8/29/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you hear? Bob Dylan used an electric guitar in his set last week? WTF? Oh no... Kraftwerk's Numbers sounds like it was made on... *gasp*... electronic instruments. good luck being on the level with kraftwerk and dylan. tom
Re: (313) really
Why would I settle for just leveling? At 11:47 PM 8/29/2006, you wrote: On 8/29/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you hear? Bob Dylan used an electric guitar in his set last week? WTF? Oh no... Kraftwerk's Numbers sounds like it was made on... *gasp*... electronic instruments. good luck being on the level with kraftwerk and dylan. tom
Re: (313) really
we might as well talk about politics and religion.. - Original Message - From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 5:47 AM Subject: Re: (313) really On 8/29/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you hear? Bob Dylan used an electric guitar in his set last week? WTF? Oh no... Kraftwerk's Numbers sounds like it was made on... *gasp*... electronic instruments. good luck being on the level with kraftwerk and dylan. tom -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/432 - Release Date: 29/08/2006
Re: (313) really
Well, Bob Dylan is definitely about politics and religion. - we might as well talk about politics and religion.. - Original Message - From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 5:47 AM Subject: Re: (313) really On 8/29/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you hear? Bob Dylan used an electric guitar in his set last week? WTF? Oh no... Kraftwerk's Numbers sounds like it was made on... *gasp*... electronic instruments. good luck being on the level with kraftwerk and dylan. tom -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/432 - Release Date: 29/08/2006
Re: (313) really
On 8/30/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would I settle for just leveling? you have no hope of getting even close. the instruments didnt matter to those guys, they were brilliant visionaries. im glad you think the same of yourself. tom
Re: (313) really
ok, i'll get off your stupid lawn already. On Aug 30, 2006, at 8:12, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: On 8/30/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would I settle for just leveling? you have no hope of getting even close. the instruments didnt matter to those guys, they were brilliant visionaries. im glad you think the same of yourself. tom -- matt kane's brain http://hydrogenproject.com aim - mkbatwerk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (313) really
I don't think Dale meant that at all, Tom. I think he was commenting on the hating on artists that goes on on 313. My mamma always said don't go looking for trouble, it will find you soon enough. On 8/29/06, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/29/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you hear? Bob Dylan used an electric guitar in his set last week? WTF? Oh no... Kraftwerk's Numbers sounds like it was made on... *gasp*... electronic instruments. good luck being on the level with kraftwerk and dylan. tom
Re: (313) really
Hehe... you're cute. *kiss* At 08:12 AM 8/30/2006, you wrote: On 8/30/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would I settle for just leveling? you have no hope of getting even close. the instruments didnt matter to those guys, they were brilliant visionaries. im glad you think the same of yourself. tom
Re: (313) really
Yes yes... When photography was invented the painters cried foul, etc... and the cycle of violence continued. Mr /0 and I were really just messing with each other anyway. We had a laugh off-list. At 09:24 AM 8/30/2006, kent williams wrote: I don't think Dale meant that at all, Tom. I think he was commenting on the hating on artists that goes on on 313. My mamma always said don't go looking for trouble, it will find you soon enough. On 8/29/06, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/29/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you hear? Bob Dylan used an electric guitar in his set last week? WTF? Oh no... Kraftwerk's Numbers sounds like it was made on... *gasp*... electronic instruments. good luck being on the level with kraftwerk and dylan. tom
Re: (313) really
Did you hear? Bob Dylan used an electric guitar in his set last week? WTF? Oh no... Kraftwerk's Numbers sounds like it was made on... *gasp*... electronic instruments. good luck being on the level with kraftwerk and dylan. tom I beliave that it is very important for us to understand well music structures, put some strenght on owr creativity, and understand well how the mass midia works. theres no point in considering the mass midia sucsesfull artists on another level. it can be that many people dont have enought interest in music, or dont put his strengnt on music, treating it as a hobby forever. but if someone is FOR REAL TRYING to make good music, puting his full stenght on it, it is not wise to daught this person. theres always the metter of the natural talent. but this is a very interesting and obscure field to think about. I have fluid musicality, for example. but since I can recall, music is the thing I put all my atention at. I have somre friends who are almost death to music, but in fact, they never cared about music. my point is: if you consider dylan and kraftwerk on another level, take all your strenght and attention and put it in the apreciation of those artists work. Im sure that with time you will be able to follow all them melodic work with your mind. and if you try hard to vocalize the notes, without being shy, you will become a singer also. and then, if you search truly for what you have to say for the world, you will find your relevant lyrics and your melody will be constructed with all the good music that you give atention to. but of course Im not talking about an easy path. most peple will not try such a hard thing. but some people try this, for years and years. how can we daught them? Im new here and trully from a diferent world (or not?), but if we will discuss music lets put some strenght in it. I see no point in wining discussions and I really no understanding those ego fighting Im seeing. what about if we discuss the kinda conscience that detroitish eletronic music estimulate? whats the point to search hard for the better string sound, to build an nicefull hihat, puttin lots of care in the reverb amount we will use? what about the feeling that the song Icon can give us. It was made for a dancefloor apreciation combined with alcohol and compulsive sexual desire, or it proporcionate such meditation (wish is for sure danceble) that will put us away from some behaviers and feelings that rule the everyday vibe that is making mankind to implode planet Earth? lets care more about the music. the synths, strings and drums on soulfull tracks are talking about something that we apear to be missing. this days I discovered such a nice song: marco bernardi - complete direction. a lot of meditation on it. _ Chegou o Windows Live Spaces com rede social. Confira http://spaces.live.com/
RE: (313) really
That is such a breath of fresh air, nay fresh spirit Henrique. You have hit the nail on the head and driven it deep into the heart of the matter - or what *should* be the heart of the matter, imo. You're dead right. The fact is that the noise of the past few days is further evidence of most people eschewing those high ideals they ought to strive for in order to create and/or appreciate the music which we are held to love so well. Naturally, if people did aspire like you, to those ideals, they wouldn't have enough energy left over for engaging in pitiful skirmishes about nothing would they?!?!?! Never mind. What you just wrote made up (for me at least) for the carnage of the last few days. Thanks for reminding some of us, and putting it so well. Ken
Re: (313) really
On 8/30/06, henrique casanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I beliave that it is very important for us to understand well music structures, put some strenght on owr creativity, and understand well how the mass midia works. theres no point in considering the mass midia sucsesfull artists on another level. it can be that many people dont have enought interest in music, or dont put his strengnt on music, treating it as a hobby forever. but if someone is FOR REAL TRYING to make good music, puting his full stenght on it, it is not wise to daught this person. theres always the metter of the natural talent. but this is a very interesting and obscure field to think about. I have fluid musicality, for example. but since I can recall, music is the thing I put all my atention at. I have somre friends who are almost death to music, but in fact, they never cared about music. what this has to do with comparing the feats of groundbreaking artists to anyone using a computer to make music is beyond me. but thanks i guess. tom
Re: (313) really
what this has to do with comparing the feats of groundbreaking artists to anyone using a computer to make music is beyond me. but thanks i guess. Yo Tom, check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMPc4Q3AHcQ Make sure you don't end up like this man ;) m PS Can some hit me up with some deep/soulful mixes please, I think I'm ready to try and get into Theo again
Re: (313) really
cheers ken, headphones locked and digg'in for the old Theo stuff I have left on 12... m On 30 Aug 2006, at 16:32, Jari Tolkkinen wrote: PS Can some hit me up with some deep/soulful mixes please, I think I'm ready to try and get into Theo again In case you missed: http://www.ken-guru.net/mix_flow.shtml
Re: (313) really
At 11:09 AM 8/30/2006, you wrote: what this has to do with comparing the feats of groundbreaking artists to anyone using a computer to make music is beyond me. but thanks i guess. tom --but I thought you said the tools didn't matter? Which is it? All the ground is already broken then? Do you think people really just press return on their computer? Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving resistance in their infancy? History has proven that the antagonists always end up looking like fools... are you just trolling?
RE: (313) really
a guy leaves for a while and comes back to the same old bickering... I missed you guys!!! 313 just wouldn't be the same if everyone weren't arguing like siblings. George Jones IV - Logic7/KonceptG http://members.cox.net/logic7 -Original Message- From: Dale Lawrence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 8:58 AM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) really At 11:09 AM 8/30/2006, you wrote: what this has to do with comparing the feats of groundbreaking artists to anyone using a computer to make music is beyond me. but thanks i guess. tom --but I thought you said the tools didn't matter? Which is it? All the ground is already broken then? Do you think people really just press return on their computer? Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving resistance in their infancy? History has proven that the antagonists always end up looking like fools... are you just trolling? -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/432 - Release Date: 8/29/2006
Re: (313) really
On 8/30/06, Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --but I thought you said the tools didn't matter? Which is it? All the ground is already broken then? the tools DON'T matter, as long as theyre not being used a substitute for ideas and good music. which in the case of dylan and kraftwerk, they werent. in the case of X number of computer musicians, they are. i prefer people who keep it simple and limited because it makes it almost ALL about the ideas and music as opposed to some programming trick or DSP nonsense. Do you think people really just press return on their computer? uh, yes? isnt it obvious? Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving resistance in their infancy? its not really a new point, and i understand it. however, im skeptical of any technology that makes things more complex for no reason. with the power of the modern computer based stuido, it should easily be possible for people to crank out tunes much better than the original house and techno tracks, right? well that's just not happening, only a deluded person would say that the quality of tracks has increased in direct proportion to the complexity of the equipment being used to make them. History has proven that the antagonists always end up looking like fools... are you just trolling? always, eh? tom
Re: (313) really
I think it is not impossible to someone make groundbraker music using only a computer these days. anyway, who will breack the ground next with musical work? and how will them do it? we cant know this right now. From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) really Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 11:09:27 -0400 On 8/30/06, henrique casanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I beliave that it is very important for us to understand well music structures, put some strenght on owr creativity, and understand well how the mass midia works. theres no point in considering the mass midia sucsesfull artists on another level. it can be that many people dont have enought interest in music, or dont put his strengnt on music, treating it as a hobby forever. but if someone is FOR REAL TRYING to make good music, puting his full stenght on it, it is not wise to daught this person. theres always the metter of the natural talent. but this is a very interesting and obscure field to think about. I have fluid musicality, for example. but since I can recall, music is the thing I put all my atention at. I have somre friends who are almost death to music, but in fact, they never cared about music. what this has to do with comparing the feats of groundbreaking artists to anyone using a computer to make music is beyond me. but thanks i guess. tom _ Descubra como mandar Torpedos Messenger do computador para o celular http://www.msn.com.br/artigos/maguire/default.asp
RE: (313) really
anyway, who will break the ground next with musical work? and how will them do it? That's the question, and the direction this convo should be going IMO. I'm not sure I even have a quick answer for this one. I ould think of a few folks I'd say *could* be the next to break ground, but the real stumper is, how will they do it?. Will it be via process(glitch tech), aesthetic(neo-soul), cultural influence(afro-beat), what? What'll the next something pull it's identity from? Will it just be a gimmick in the end? And on a related but other note, do you think a sound has to have a scene/movement associated with it's name in order to justify it as breaking anything? Or is the artistic enough? Holla. V12, I'd really be interested in your particular point of view here. :) k mwnb
Re: (313) really
i will try to offer my opinion coherently i remember back in the early 90s, magazines like The Face or I-D were heralding the new decade as the triumph of sample culture, where artistic expression was to be characterized by the mix-and-matching of different styles and inspirations, drawing from the myriad of cultural and artistic production across mankind's different cultures and ages. Nowadays it seems that the opposite is true. It has been said that all the possible combination of notes has been played, it is therefore impossible to create any new musical arrangements. Popular music seems to be totally dominated by fake-nostalgia bands re-hashing the late 70s, the early 80s - i have even heard some bands that sound suspiciously like 90s revival bands. To sum it up, it seems as if there is no new ideas concerning music. I find that this is not true about electronic music. Although there are definite trends and cliques (glitch/minimal, detroit, grime, looped bangers, you name it...), I firmly believe that electronic music in general (and generally speaking) is, and has ALWAYS been about exploration, innovation, progression. And this is where I place so-called computer music, laptop djing, final scratch, ableton live etc. These examples are one tangible evidence of the evolution of electronic dance music today; but the contrary is not necessarily true - I am not saying that those who use hardware or analog equipment do not innovate or are not innovators. Having said this, I think that one possible direction in electronic music can be to transcend the different trends and go back to that artistic ideal that was hyped in back in the 90s, maybe by hybridizing genres and styles, fishing from everything that has been done before. Just like good djs who spin good music regardless of what style it is, musicians can do the same. And they already do. Please excuse me, Im too tired to wrack my brain to find some pertinent examples but I have noticed music coming out lately (the last year or so) that I feel has gone beyond normal genre boundaries by creating interesting hybrids and new future music. I am aware that there is apparent contradiction in what I am saying: i talk of generes within electronic music, music that I say is inherently progressive and then I go on to state that one possible form of ground breaking is to transcend these genres. But for me these 2 aspects are complementary and not in contrast. You could say that electronic dance music is innovative music, therefore mixing its different styles would necessarily produce our holy grail, ground-breaking music. my 2 euro cent, fab Stoddard, Kamal Scrive: anyway, who will break the ground next with musical work? and how will them do it? That's the question, and the direction this convo should be going IMO. I'm not sure I even have a quick answer for this one. I ould think of a few folks I'd say *could* be the next to break ground, but the real stumper is, how will they do it?. Will it be via process(glitch tech), aesthetic(neo-soul), cultural influence(afro-beat), what? What'll the next something pull it's identity from? Will it just be a gimmick in the end? And on a related but other note, do you think a sound has to have a scene/movement associated with it's name in order to justify it as breaking anything? Or is the artistic enough? Holla. V12, I'd really be interested in your particular point of view here. :) k mwnb
Re: (313) really
At 11:54 PM 8/28/2006, you wrote: To quote the Simpsons no one will ever mention it again... under penalty of torture. My email was down all weekend... I feel like Commodus in Gladiator when he marches in, stumbles off of his horse and begs, Have I missed it?... Have I missed the battle? Now my popcorn is stale. I suppose I'll just troll parakeet owner forums instead, looking for someone to piss on...
Re: (313) really
go make music instead - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 11:50 AM Subject: Re: (313) really At 11:54 PM 8/28/2006, you wrote: To quote the Simpsons no one will ever mention it again... under penalty of torture. My email was down all weekend... I feel like Commodus in Gladiator when he marches in, stumbles off of his horse and begs, Have I missed it?... Have I missed the battle? Now my popcorn is stale. I suppose I'll just troll parakeet owner forums instead, looking for someone to piss on...
Re: (313) really
Missed this message, did you? http://elists.resynthesize.com/313/2004/05/105844/ On Aug 29, 2006, at 17:55, /0 wrote: go make music instead - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- matt kane's brain http://hydrogenproject.com aim - mkbatwerk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (313) really
I saw that one, and ones that you havent seen. I think I understand the angle to which you refer, and my original comment stands :) - Original Message - From: Matt Kane's Brain [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: /0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313 313@hyperreal.org; Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 6:00 PM Subject: Re: (313) really Missed this message, did you? http://elists.resynthesize.com/313/2004/05/105844/ On Aug 29, 2006, at 17:55, /0 wrote: go make music instead - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- matt kane's brain http://hydrogenproject.com aim - mkbatwerk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (313) really
Ok, here: http://www.myspace.com/theoremthx/ All brand new... because you tricked me into it with your wit and prowess. I submit. At 05:55 PM 8/29/2006, you wrote: go make music instead - Original Message - From: Dale Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 313 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 11:50 AM Subject: Re: (313) really At 11:54 PM 8/28/2006, you wrote: To quote the Simpsons no one will ever mention it again... under penalty of torture. My email was down all weekend... I feel like Commodus in Gladiator when he marches in, stumbles off of his horse and begs, Have I missed it?... Have I missed the battle? Now my popcorn is stale. I suppose I'll just troll parakeet owner forums instead, looking for someone to piss on...
Re: (313) Really cool Carl Craig mix from Pacou..
thanks for posting martin. on the carl craig tip - theres a new 12 on planet e classics today with new track off remade landcruising lp sparkle and also the remake of home entertainment (i think) i spent a fortune on the triple pack lp and would rather have the 12, but hey ho thats what you get for being impatient. available at piccadilly records _ - End of message text This e-mail is sent by the above named in their individual, non-business capacity and is not on behalf of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP may monitor outgoing and incoming e-mails and other telecommunications on its e-mail and telecommunications systems. By replying to this e-mail you give your consent to such monitoring.
Re: (313) Really cool Carl Craig mix from Pacou..
awesome! thanks! on yousendit even haha...that bandwidth gonna be gone quick... -Original Message- From: Martin Dust [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Dec 1, 2005 8:42 AM To: list 313 313@hyperreal.org Subject: (313) Really cool Carl Craig mix from Pacou.. T.Brookes+A.Soul - City Life (Craigs Caya Dub) -RushHour Really cool Carl Craig mix from Pacou http://s35.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2AQWAHP6BZMKV2G26AH6X2MKK2 Carl Craig - 4 My Peepz-planet e Carl Craig - Darkness -planet e Johnny L - This Time (Craig Mix) - XL Paperclip People - Throw-planet e Quadrant - Infinition(Craig Mix)-planet e Psyche-Andromeda(Craig Mix)-Transmat SpaceTime Continuum - Kairo Craig Remix-Reflective Designer Music Vol 1 - Problemz-planet e Dave Angel - Take Off (Craig Mix)-Blunted Psyche-Elements-Planet e Remake (eich me son sche)-planet e Carl Craig vs. Johnny Blas - Picadillo 7-ubiquity Paperclip People-Steam - Open Inner City - Goodlife (Craig Mix) - Pias Ultramarine - Hooter(Craig Rmx)-Real Soon Carl Craig - Technology-planet e Carl Craig - Climax(reworked)-Open Chez Damier - Help Myself (Craig Mix)-KMS 69 - rushed-planet e/ R+S Reese Project - I Believe(Craig Dub)-Giant/ Warner BFC - Static Friendly-Fragile Designer Music Vol. 1 - Good Girls-planet e UFO - The Planet Plan (Craig Mix) - talkin loud Paperclip People - Floor - planet e Designer Music Vol 1 - Latin Chic behind door#1-planet e Innerzone Orchestra - nitwit-planet e Paperclip People - Paperclip Man- Open 69 - Extraterrestial Raggabeats - planet e Innerzone Orchestra - Bug In the Bassbin - planet e Carl Craig - No more Words - retroactive BFC - Sleep - beechwood
RE: (313) Really cool Carl Craig mix from Pacou..
Yeah - by the time I get to download it, it'll be gone. :( -Original Message- From: J.T. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 December 2005 15:13 To: Martin Dust; list 313 Subject: Re: (313) Really cool Carl Craig mix from Pacou.. awesome! thanks! on yousendit even haha...that bandwidth gonna be gone quick... -Original Message- From: Martin Dust [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Dec 1, 2005 8:42 AM To: list 313 313@hyperreal.org Subject: (313) Really cool Carl Craig mix from Pacou.. T.Brookes+A.Soul - City Life (Craigs Caya Dub) -RushHour Really cool Carl Craig mix from Pacou http://s35.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2AQWAHP6BZMKV2G26AH6X2MKK2 Carl Craig - 4 My Peepz-planet e Carl Craig - Darkness -planet e Johnny L - This Time (Craig Mix) - XL Paperclip People - Throw-planet e Quadrant - Infinition(Craig Mix)-planet e Psyche-Andromeda(Craig Mix)-Transmat SpaceTime Continuum - Kairo Craig Remix-Reflective Designer Music Vol 1 - Problemz-planet e Dave Angel - Take Off (Craig Mix)-Blunted Psyche-Elements-Planet e Remake (eich me son sche)-planet e Carl Craig vs. Johnny Blas - Picadillo 7-ubiquity Paperclip People-Steam - Open Inner City - Goodlife (Craig Mix) - Pias Ultramarine - Hooter(Craig Rmx)-Real Soon Carl Craig - Technology-planet e Carl Craig - Climax(reworked)-Open Chez Damier - Help Myself (Craig Mix)-KMS 69 - rushed-planet e/ R+S Reese Project - I Believe(Craig Dub)-Giant/ Warner BFC - Static Friendly-Fragile Designer Music Vol. 1 - Good Girls-planet e UFO - The Planet Plan (Craig Mix) - talkin loud Paperclip People - Floor - planet e Designer Music Vol 1 - Latin Chic behind door#1-planet e Innerzone Orchestra - nitwit-planet e Paperclip People - Paperclip Man- Open 69 - Extraterrestial Raggabeats - planet e Innerzone Orchestra - Bug In the Bassbin - planet e Carl Craig - No more Words - retroactive BFC - Sleep - beechwood # 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) really great jeff mills interview
As usual, Mills not only has a pretty cerebral approach to the mechanics of actually djing, but a conceptual approach to the art of djing too. This three-dimensional snapshot of a real-time experience of performing a set is prety unique - even if the actual *act* of performing a set is not. Grasping the un-obvious from an 'obvious' situation is the mark of a good mind I think (mho). k -Original Message- From: ian cheshire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 10:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org Subject: RE: (313) really great jeff mills interview sorry and this bit, it just gives me great inspiration.. Thats a very important point. Im not worrying about mistakes, only creating something unique. Mistakes happen but you learn to recover. -Original Message- From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 November 2003 19:41 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: (313) really great jeff mills interview http://hackneyedcentral.blogspot.com/ tommm -- Still running tings andythepooh.com --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 10/11/03 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 10/11/03
RE: (313) really great jeff mills interview
Great post man :) my fav bit is this as I just love his honesty, It’s maybe not easy or comfortable a thing for other DJs to do – by filming in three different directions you can really see someone’s flaws and maybe some of the DJ’s wouldn’t feel comfortable with that - and you can’t stop to do something over again. But it is what it is and I think it’s a rather unique mix project.” btw when is this released , is it in Jan? -Original Message- From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 November 2003 19:41 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: (313) really great jeff mills interview http://hackneyedcentral.blogspot.com/ tommm -- Still running tings andythepooh.com --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 10/11/03 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 10/11/03
RE: (313) really great jeff mills interview
sorry and this bit, it just gives me great inspiration.. That’s a very important point. I’m not worrying about mistakes, only creating something unique. Mistakes happen but you learn to recover.” -Original Message- From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 November 2003 19:41 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: (313) really great jeff mills interview http://hackneyedcentral.blogspot.com/ tommm -- Still running tings andythepooh.com --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 10/11/03 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 10/11/03
Re: [313] Really experimental hip hop?
--- Cyclone Wehner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think some of the commercial hip-hop is really cutting-edge - especially on the production front - Timbaland is amazing. actually, in an interview, Four Tet mentioned that he was a big fan of Timbaland and his productions. In the Four Tet vs. Pole album there is a great track he did (sorry dont have my rekids on me:)), and its clear the influence is there. http://www.allmusic.com/cg/x.dll d __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Re: [313] Really experimental hip hop?
I think some of the commercial hip-hop is really cutting-edge - especially on the production front - Timbaland is amazing. I am sure someone will flame me for this but I really liked the Nelly album (I keep hearing the Hot S**t acapella over Green Velvet's Answering Machine in my head) and I think some of the beats on Jay-Z's Dynasty were great. Busta's first three albums. Outkast is good and you should check out Organized Konfusion, really underrated. Also The Roots, Common. Also Slum Village. I haven't checked out JayDee's new Welcome To Detroit but I am sure it would be good. On the turntablist tip, The X-cutioners' album of a few years ago was really avant garde and the most musical turntable album I have ever heard. Then when of the most brilliant albums I heard last year was the Tupac Shakur spoken word tribute The Rose That Grew From Concrete, Volume 1 - the final track, The Sun The Moon, is spoken by Chief Okena Littlehawk and it has a Red Planet feel to it. It is amazing.
