General Music Chat

Hopefully this will not flare up any because it is a serious question and one in my view that gets mistaken since.............

Well...

OK. If you are unplugged band you'll know that only the sounds from your instruments are what your audience hears but wait a minute. In a large crowd those are often amplified.

Going further. If they are amplified? Then a measure of mixing takes place and thus the sound from said instrument has been altered.

What I am trying to get at here is that there have been some connotations towards anyone mixing and mastering in solo on a studio and using 'Sound Effects' (Not someone else's riffs mind) as being less than the real thing, not someone who plays anything, not a musician? (Probably get slated for that comment?)

I've seen enough complaints about band members and having been in many bands myself know how fickle a thing a band can be too so from my point of view the best way is to get the ideas down, copyright them, enjoy them and the rest can go whatever way it wishes? (Not planning on stardom etc!)

Do mistakes count? Remember that post?
I do they are part of being live so far as I see it but what if you are on your own, have no one that will share your style, vision?

Mistakes:
By doing what I do now on the computer. (Notice how I carefully omit PC!)

I enable myself to backtrack and rectify something using the various tools that I have. It's tough enough playing one track live and not screwing up let alone 7, 8, 9?

But I'm not too touchy about it. The sound of everything together I really am.

I think its impossible not to screw up especially in the theater of the solo studio. Things are just way too relaxed and you can walk in, walk out and come back again. Of course your particular level of perfection will kick in and depending on your level of expertise wish software (We all use it in some form - please don't cry) You'll end up with something that YOU like.

So where are you in all of this? Do you consider your Electric instrument, your wind instrument, bongos, drums cymbals to be the end of that story or do accept that something will have to interfere with your sound in order for it to be heard?

Tough call isn't it.

Hopefully this will not flare up any because it is a serious question and one in my view that gets mistaken since.............

Well...

OK. If you are unplugged band you'll know that only the sounds from your instruments are what your audience hears but wait a minute. In a large crowd those are often amplified.

Going further. If they are amplified? Then a measure of mixing takes place and thus the sound from said instrument has been altered.

What I am trying to get at here is that there have been some connotations towards anyone mixing and mastering in solo on a studio and using 'Sound Effects' (Not someone else's riffs mind) as being less than the real thing, not someone who plays anything, not a musician? (Probably get slated for that comment?)

I've seen enough complaints about band members and having been in many bands myself know how fickle a thing a band can be too so from my point of view the best way is to get the ideas down, copyright them, enjoy them and the rest can go whatever way it wishes? (Not planning on stardom etc!)

Do mistakes count? Remember that post?
I do they are part of being live so far as I see it but what if you are on your own, have no one that will share your style, vision?

Mistakes:
By doing what I do now on the computer. (Notice how I carefully omit PC!)

I enable myself to backtrack and rectify something using the various tools that I have. It's tough enough playing one track live and not screwing up let alone 7, 8, 9?

But I'm not too touchy about it. The sound of everything together I really am.

I think its impossible not to screw up especially in the theater of the solo studio. Things are just way too relaxed and you can walk in, walk out and come back again. Of course your particular level of perfection will kick in and depending on your level of expertise wish software (We all use it in some form - please don't cry) You'll end up with something that YOU like.

So where are you in all of this? Do you consider your Electric instrument, your wind instrument, bongos, drums cymbals to be the end of that story or do accept that something will have to interfere with your sound in order for it to be heard?

Tough call isn't it.

As I said in an earlier post, music is just a bunch of soud waves colliding. How you make them collide doesn't much matter to me personally, and how you modify them after you play them into a recording is part of that process. It really boils down to what sounds good to the ear in the end, and of course much of that is subjective : case in point, I hate the doors and the rolling stones with a passion, but only because I don't like the sound waves they put out

That's just me ^.-

Are you asking do you want
this:



or this

I vote for

Erm?

On "Heads Up!" I used samples. I sampled a live flute, but the rest were canned samples on discs for my keyboard, & live vocals & instruments. I did this because I don't play flute, & I don't have a piano. I don't feel guilty about it, cuz I played them all live on the recording, I did NOT program them with software for a machine to play. I also did not use anyone else's sampled riffs. I wrote & played everything you hear.

I did that on quite a few tunes.

No, I cannot produce these songs like they are recorded, live. I couldn't even if I looped 'em like Paul. Still, they are MY WORK. I wrote 'em & I PLAYED 'em.

These recordings I made are examples of me, whether or not you think I should be able to play them live makes no difference to me. I could if I hired a buncha guns & taught the tunes to them.

If these recordings were better, I'd try to sell them, & it wouldn't matter to me if I could play them live or not. I figure that they took me more work than your average band puts into a recording, cuz I did it all, myself. There wasn't anyone to pick up any slack at all. Every instrument. Every voice. All my work.

I wuold never try to sell something I stuck together on one of those garageband-type of programs, but that's just me. I think it's cheesy & sleazy & oh so f*cking WRONG.

I've played unplugged, plugged & layered (on recordings) & I think that as long as it's MY work, it's okay to do it, no matter what I decide to do.

Yeah !!! What Phil said !!!

And its another day in Paradise !!!

I feel it is really a personal thing. My instrument is not the end all. But it is the soul. It is the link if you will, between my soul and the listeners ears.
As an example: My guitar work is my guitar work. It is irrelevent if I pick it with my fingers, a nylon pic, a peso, or a piece of broken beer bottle.

Electronics are machines to be used to make better music. Amplifiers, effects pedals, hotter pickups, they all change the natural sound of the electric guitar and lot's of times they cover mistakes. I'll bet that if you could hear some of Hendrix's guitar work without the distortion, echo and wah, you would hear plenty of mistakes. But those devices were his tools of the trade and he used them as separate instruments in their own right. Now, software is also a tool of the trade and we use them to cover mistakes, maybe not in the same way, but still...
So where to draw the line? I think you can use anything at your disposal as long as you are actually creating the music. If you can get a keyboard that has programmed sounds, use it. Why take the time to program all of your sounds if your looking for a sound that is already there for you to use? Now, sampling parts of someone elses licks to me is going too far. You didn't create those licks, just copied them and used them in your song. (Funky Cold Medina comes to mind using Van Halen's licks from Jamie's Crying.)
And that's my take on it.

You have to adapt to your performing area. Use electronics to assist in accoustic venues when it is needed. If you were playing at the Verizon Ampatheatre you will lose your audience without the help of electricity. But play in a small coffee shop, you could lose your audience if you USE electricity. Either way if you want an acoustic sound you need to have the acoustic hook up even where "Benjamin's Follie" is needed. If that makes sense.

Philby, Just want to let you know that I like your sound.

F small venues CRANK IT UP, if its to loud your to old

Hell, giongi, if I did that, I'd have cut out over 1/2 the gigs
I've played in my life! I happen to like the small venues. I can interact with the audience in ways that are more personal, more intimate.

Man I don't know, we rocked the last coffiee house so hard they did not have to heat the coffiee
The place did not pack out untill we went into our heavy set.

Coincedence? Perhaps, but it was a blast either way!

THEN CUT OUT HALF YOUR GIGS AND MAKE MORE ON THE BIGGER ONES ,UNLESS YOUR TO OLD, INTIMATE IS FOR THE BEDROOM OR THE PUBLIC BEACH WHEN NO ONE IS LOOKIN'

Apples & oranges, gi.

I do what I like. I don't like music that's too loud to appreaciate. I like subtle nuances, harmonies, melodies that you can hear & relate to, good beats, etc. I've played the loud stuff, & had a good time dong it, for sure, but it ain't all that music is to me.

I like being able to hear everything that goes on on a stage. In those high volume situations, one often cannot differentiate the kick drum from the bass, the screaming guitar from the screaming singer. Yeah, it's fun for the band, but much gets lost to the audience, imho.

I like dynamics - the rise & fall of volume that mirrors changing emotions & situations. When a band does this, it can slip in little interesting sweeteners that would otherwise be missed - a little bell, or a strange back up voice you can barely hear, but adds so much to the mood of the piece, or a whisper that delivers a strong message.

Sometimes you can say so much more with a whisper than you can with a shout. One day you might learn that.

In the meanwhile, enjoy your high volume stuff to the max, & I'll continue to love what I do, & where I do it.