How many tracks?

Cirrus

paulmapp8306 said:

always sits there going "but how could you do that live...." - and if you cant it must be cheating 

Wow, I've never thought about it like that before. And I never will.

  

octatonic

thegummy

That is funny.

But I think it is also making a point, so just looking past the good joke for a second, there is one level it mentions that's different to the others and that's "using loops".

Sometimes loops are quite basic or generic and are slotted in alongside a lot of original ideas so are just like using a lick you learned from someone else for example.

But then there are the puffy and kanye West types who just cut a section of a song that someone else already made. Even if their ego lets them believe the copy and paste operation took genius, they just simply did not make that music they put their name to.

thegummy

paulmapp8306 said:

True.  As I said Im old, grumpy.   And nobody else has to think/feel how I do here.  And yes, Im probably being daft (PROBABLY you say). 

Ive never said you have to do it in one take mind.  Ive just said it should be something you can re-create live without relying on backing tracks.   60 tracks, no problem.   Could be 40 of them are a few seconds long, and CAN be recreated.  Couldnt be many drum track one drummer can play and such.

Im not against the creativity of an artist to use studio techniques to develop and record interesting stuff -  I just cant seem to separate "a recorded" piece thats not meant or designed for live reproduction - from a live piece that gets recorded so more people can enjoy it.  It always sits there going "but how could you do that live...." - and if you cant it must be cheating - though as Ive said thats probably too harsh, or the wrong term.  Maybe using technology to create something in one environment that cant be replicated in another is a better way of putting it.

Maybe I need to learn to ignore that particular thing sat on my shoulder.....

I'd almost never try to persuade someone to change the way they choose which music to listen to.

But since I strongly believe that we enjoy music on a level far deeper than the "rule following" part of the brain, if you're disallowing yourself to enjoy music that "your body" actually likes, maybe you would be better off ignoring it.

octatonic

IMHO it is how you use the loops.
I do a lot of sample based stuff, but often I am resampling my own original content, which I make with the Eurorack modular, various Electron boxes or via a computer running Max/MSP.

Actual loops from commercial loop libraries- almost never.

If people are vaguely interested in what that sounds like then I can post some examples.

thegummy

octatonic said:

IMHO it is how you use the loops.
I do a lot of sample based stuff, but often I am resampling my own original content, which I make with the Eurorack modular, various Electron boxes or via a computer running Max/MSP.

Actual loops from commercial loop libraries- almost never.

If people are vaguely interested in what that sounds like then I can post some examples.

Totally agree, there's some absolutely brilliant music that's been made using nothing but samples of other records but barely sounds like any of them.

Those loop libraries and "song making kits" just seem daft to me.

I mean, people who are musical enjoy making music, they wouldn't enjoy just loading a bunch of files in to a programme and rendering it together.

I think they exist to make money off people who want to pretend to their friends and some girls in their class that they're a music producer.

WiresDreamDisasters

I'll use an Apple loop if it makes me dack woit.

thegummy

WiresDreamDisasters said:

I'll use an Apple loop if it makes me dack woit.

Apple loops are alright but I'm more of a Weetabix man

LastMantra

@paulmapp8306
Just out of interest, what kind of music do you like listening to? 

PolarityMan

octatonic said:

I killed a man cos he killed my goat.

paulmapp8306

LastMantra said:

@paulmapp8306
Just out of interest, what kind of music do you like listening to? 

Wow - thats not an easy question.

I like classical/orchestral arrangements, I like big band jazz stuff, I like 60s stuff particularly the Kinks, The Beatles (early/mid rather than late) Stones etc.  I like 70s stuff from Bowie, Purple, Zeppelin, Thin Lizzy, Floyd - even into ABBA and such.  I like 80s stuff from Madness/Specials, Duran/Spandau/Tears for fears type stuff, Depeche Mode - Texas, Deacon Blue etc.  I like Iron Maiden, Bon Jovi and the like.  more 90s stuff I like Green Day, Nirvana, Pulp.  I like Blues from Muddy Waters, BB King and the like up to SRV and KW Shepherd. 

There  are bands in there that used multiple stuff in studios - most noticeably Floyd, Duran and Depeche Mode - but they did all recreate that sound live in one form or another.  Some brought in session players, others did run backing tracks - or at least samples and loops. 

But in general in not a fan of music and genres that rely heavily on those methods even if they use them to a lesser extend.

thegummy

paulmapp8306 said:

LastMantra said:

@paulmapp8306
Just out of interest, what kind of music do you like listening to? 

Wow - thats not an easy question.

I like classical/orchestral arrangements, I like big band jazz stuff, I like 60s stuff particularly the Kinks, The Beatles (early/mid rather than late) Stones etc.  I like 70s stuff from Bowie, Purple, Zeppelin, Thin Lizzy, Floyd - even into ABBA and such.  I like 80s stuff from Madness/Specials, Duran/Spandau/Tears for fears type stuff, Depeche Mode - Texas, Deacon Blue etc.  I like Iron Maiden, Bon Jovi and the like.  more 90s stuff I like Green Day, Nirvana, Pulp.  I like Blues from Muddy Waters, BB King and the like up to SRV and KW Shepherd. 

There  are bands in there that used multiple stuff in studios - most noticeably Floyd, Duran and Depeche Mode - but they did all recreate that sound live in one form or another.  Some brought in session players, others did run backing tracks - or at least samples and loops. 

But in general in not a fan of music and genres that rely heavily on those methods even if they use them to a lesser extend.

If you don't mind me asking out of curiosity - have you ever heard a record and really loved it then later found out there were only, say, one, two or three people behind it so then decided you didn't like it after all?

Or would it only be if you knew before hearing it how many people were involved?

paulmapp8306

I wouldnt decide I didnt like something after I found it (having liked it previously), that would be silly.  BUT the vast majority of stuff I like tends to be full bands (of course some of those add more track as well) rather than individuals or duos.

The only stuff I KNEW wernt full bands and liked anyway are probably Tears for Fears - who were a duo originally, though when they play live they have a full band behind them - so can reproduce it live.

Incidentally - I dont have problems with artists using session guys onstage to get the sound live - I feel thats a bit different because its still reproduced live.  Its the use (or having to use) of pre-recorded backing tracks I dont like.   Maybe thats the bit I havent got across right (or maybe I did but Im still wrong)

Loops are the grey area for me.  I kind of think thats ok live, because they used the same loops to record it as there triggering live.   Ite recording something LIVE then reproducing it from a recording/backing track that gets to me.