179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← archive index

(idm) Sampling et al...

5 messages · 3 participants · spans 2 days · search this subject
◇ merged from 2 subjects: (idm) how? · (idm) sampling et al...
1997-06-01 16:00(idm) How?
└─ 1997-06-02 19:23Random Junk Re: (idm) How?
└─ 1997-06-03 00:14Hess Hodge Re: (idm) How?
└─ 1997-06-03 00:31Random Junk Re: (idm) How?
1997-06-03 11:03(idm) Sampling et al...
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
1997-06-01 16:00chall@leonardo.netI could lurk and wait in the bushes for insight into this question, or just ask it. Being
From:
To:
Date:
Sun, 01 Jun 1997 17:00:13 +0100
Subject:
(idm) How?
permalink · <33919C8C.270A@leonardo.net>
I could lurk and wait in the bushes for insight into this question, or just ask it. Being a non-DJ type, but a big fan, I listen to the likes of FSOL, Ae, Soma, etc. These folks apparently use those DAT machines and samplers to distort(change) the sounds to create new music(noise). What is the procedure? Sample, change, create a melody, then replace with the new sound sample? I know, I'm confused too! I know there are a lot of musician artists on the list that could briefly help me out...What do you do? The dudes like DJ Shadow use records - that I understand.
1997-06-02 19:23Random Junkchall@leonardo.net writes: > I could lurk and wait in the bushes for insight into this que
From:
Random Junk
To:
Date:
Mon, 2 Jun 1997 12:23:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:
Re: (idm) How?
Reply to:
(idm) How?
permalink · <199706021923.MAA00638@hudsucker.gamespot.com>
chall@leonardo.net writes:
quoted 5 lines I could lurk and wait in the bushes for insight into this question,> I could lurk and wait in the bushes for insight into this question, > or just ask it. Being a non-DJ type, but a big fan, I listen to the > likes of FSOL, Ae, Soma, etc. These folks apparently use those DAT > machines and samplers to distort(change) the sounds to create new > music(noise).
just to clarify - a DAT machine is just a tape recorder. it doesn't do much more than a normal cassette deck. (although it sounds way better of course).
quoted 2 lines What is the procedure? Sample, change, create a melody, then replace> What is the procedure? Sample, change, create a melody, then replace > with the new sound sample? I know, I'm confused too!
i have a ton of tools at my disposal. each one is like a paint on the artist's palette... you can mildly alter the sound (flange, chorus) or completely weed-whack it into something else (waveshaper, wrap, time/pitch bend) my sampler has a huge range of possibilities... LFOs, envelopes, algorithms galore. i also have outboard effects boxes that can do interesting stuff to sound. less immediate but more "deep" are software packages like SonicWorx, HyperPrism and MetaSynth. these can do completely crazed things to sound but require a little more time invested up front. once you learn your tools and what they can do to sounds, you get to work creating music. the actual writing process varies (of course) from individual to individual. sometimes it starts with a concept (i want to write a pretty song that will have ethereal vocals on top) or a sound (wonder what it would sound like if i took that jazz break and slowed it way down) or an attitude (i can't believe talentless dorks like <insert favorite luser here> are so popular, think i'll do something in his style only much much better to show the world how misguided it is). or maybe it will be just plain sound exploration. "let's get a simple jungle break going and try complicating it with this piece of gear to see what happens." once you take the first step you just repeat with each additional layer. usually i just get like 20-30 tracks of stuff going until i find combinations that are interesting and go together well enough to make a song. that usually gets me through 1 or 2 minutes of music. then i either try adding more stuff or find that i really only like one little loop out of that 1 or 2 minutes, so i take the loop out and build an entirely new thing around that. 808 state had a great technique that i use from time to time called "the hidden sample." basically sample a beat or a bar or two off a record and start building stuff around it. then remove the original sample. hope that helped. -- Jon Drukman jsd@gamespot.com SpotMedia Communications ...I was an infinitely hot and dense dot...
1997-06-03 00:14Hess HodgeOn Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Random Junk wrote: > just to clarify - a DAT machine is just a tape re
From:
Hess Hodge
To:
Date:
Mon, 2 Jun 1997 18:14:45 -0600 (MDT)
Subject:
Re: (idm) How?
Reply to:
Re: (idm) How?
permalink · <Pine.GSO.3.95.970602180437.6160B-100000@rintintin.Colorado.EDU>
On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Random Junk wrote:
quoted 3 lines just to clarify - a DAT machine is just a tape recorder. it doesn't> just to clarify - a DAT machine is just a tape recorder. it doesn't > do much more than a normal cassette deck. (although it sounds way > better of course).
Not exactly... A DAT is Digital and a regular cassette is Analogue. For the cassette, the sound is recorded by encoding the analogue waveform into to magnetic field created by the magnetic particles in the cassette tape itself. For the DAT, the waveform is first converted into its digital representation then this digital data is recorded as '1's and '0's on the DAT tape (the same way information is recorded on a CD). The DAT sounds better because there is a lot of error-correcting going on in the digital to analogue conversion. Hess -/\= Hess M. Hodge ~/\ hess.hodge@colorado.edu (/\) http://stap.colorado.edu/~hodge
1997-06-03 00:31Random JunkHess Hodge writes: > DAT tape (the same way information is recorded on a CD). The DAT soun
From:
Random Junk
To:
Date:
Mon, 2 Jun 1997 17:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:
Re: (idm) How?
Reply to:
Re: (idm) How?
permalink · <199706030031.RAA02673@hudsucker.gamespot.com>
Hess Hodge writes:
quoted 3 lines DAT tape (the same way information is recorded on a CD). The DAT sounds> DAT tape (the same way information is recorded on a CD). The DAT sounds > better because there is a lot of error-correcting going on in the digital > to analogue conversion.
that is a pretty gross oversimplification. there's lots more than "error correction"... in fact, most of the time error correction doesn't even come into play at all (you can verify that by using a pro DAT which shows you error counts). wow and flutter - cassettes are mechanically pretty unstable. shake your walkman around (while it's playing) and see what happens. dats are threaded like tapes in your VCR and are much more immune to wow & flutter. noise - if the only difference between dat and cassette was the analog/digital thing, you'd be in good shape (after all, mulitrack work for years was done on big analog tapes and that sounded great - even today many people still prefer it to digital). unfortunately there are a combination of factors that make cassette really crappy. the thin width of the tape track and the slow speed of the tape drive are the two biggies. i'm not even sure where hiss comes from, but all that dolby noise reduction crap that just really makes things worse is supposed to cancel it out when in reality it just winds up lopping off your high end. digital is amazingly linear in response all the way from the bottom of its range to the top. if you hear hiss, that's because you put it there when you recorded the tape. there are a lot of reasons why DAT sounds good... "digital" is just one part. the bottom line with today's technology is that it is easier to build a really good sounding sound chain with digital technology at low prices. yes, you can do better than CD and DAT but you gotta spend tons of $$$ to do it. -- Jon Drukman jsd@gamespot.com SpotMedia Communications ...I was an infinitely hot and dense dot...
1997-06-03 11:03chall@leonardo.netI just wanted to quickly share this with others who may have the same lingering "How Do Th
From:
To:
Vance Pitman
Cc:
Date:
Tue, 03 Jun 1997 12:03:11 +0100
Subject:
(idm) Sampling et al...
permalink · <3393F9EE.455A@leonardo.net>
I just wanted to quickly share this with others who may have the same lingering "How Do They Do That?" question... (It's incredible stuff!) Vance Pitman wrote:
quoted 1 line>
(Refering to DATs and sound processing: A few examples:
quoted 55 lines 1) the >vast< majority of samplers are used by musicians, and most are> 1) the >vast< majority of samplers are used by musicians, and most are > used by keyboard/synthesizer players to play back reasonable emulations > of real instruments along with their synthesized sounds. The most common > sample you'll find in a musician's setup is a recording of a piano. You > record about every fifth note from the lowest to the highest notes on a > grand piano, use the sampler's software to map those notes and adjust > their pitch to respond by adjusting the samples so that the machine will > play back every note you ask it to, and Voila! You have the sound of a > grand piano, from the lowest to the highest notes tucked away in a box > that usually ways about fifteen to twenty pounds and can be tucked under > one arm. Try packing up a grand piano and rolling it out the front door > to go play a gig at a club! All you need to play the sampler is a > keyboard to connect and tell it which notes to play... > 2) most keyboard players have devices called sequencers (in fact, since > they're built in to a lot of synthesizers/keyboards, most of us have > three or four). I can play an entire performance, and the sequencer will > record all the button pushes and keys played. To play it back, I just > hit the play button. Most sequencers will do this anywhere from 8-16 > times for keyboard sequencers and up to several >hundred< times for > computer sequencers. Big deal, right? It is when they all play back > together. Imagine playing two piano parts that are completely different > (and impossible to play live, without four hands!), a string bass line, > a drum part, and a guitar part from your keyboard and sampler. Because > you have the right equipment, you just made your piano-playing skills > cover all the instruments in a band, but all you played was keyboards > with different sounds attached to the keys! Er, wait a minute. Where did > the drum, bass, and guitar sounds come from? The sampler! You bought the > sounds or recorded them yourself just like you did the grand piano! > OK, what is the synthesizer for? For all those bleepy, noisy, > non-traditional sounds that you hear in music these days. How do you > tell synthesizer and sample sounds apart? Sometimes you can't, since a > sampler can make normal sounds into synthesized ones, and really complex > synthesizers can accurately simulate many traditional acoustic > instruments. > But that's another can of worms entirely. If you want to hear a few > synthesizer sounds for yourself, buy a copy of _Future Music_ at a local > bookstore that specializes in music mags. It's an import from England, > and it runs about $10 (if you're in the US, even cheaper in the UK). The > killer thing is that it includes reviews and recordings of synths on the > included CD, as well as files of samples you can load into your sampler. > If you can't track it down or don't want to shell out the cash, try > www.keyboardmag.com This is the online site for the US mag _Keyboard_. > They don't include a CD with their mag, but they do keep sounds from the > monthly synth reviews online. You can easily download them (I recommend > the 8-bit 22kHz sounds files. They're smaller and they sound pretty much > the same as the 16-bit files.) > 3) getting rather windy, but this is the last example. A lot of > producers and dance remixers (as well as some musicians, notably > rappers) record entire segments of songs and stretch/speed up, and loop > them to create new versions of the song (virtually all the dance remixes > done these days are done that way, and Vanilla Ice's "Ice, Ice Baby", or > whatever it was, was the same type of thing done with the Queen/Bowie > song "Under Pressure". > > Vance