IDM Mailing Archive

<< Think: a CD of "Remixes" made entirely without the use of samplers. >> (rising to bait) Hey, this would be great because it would provide further support for the ongoing argument that SAMPLERS ARE EVIL and that the world would be a better place without them. After all, we all know that HOW a piece of music is made is more important than the actual sound of the music itself. For example, before even listening to a piece of music, it is best to verify that: - no samplers were used, or were even present in the room during recording - no DSP plug-ins were employed, since it is "too easy" to make cool-sounding effects with them In fact, any device that makes it easier (god forbid) for Joe RaveKid to make cool tracks on his own (without racks of equipment and years of practice tweaking oscillators and filters) should be banned. ****sarcasm detection meter blinking out of control**** Hi, Tom! - Fred Church bigkumquat@aol.com http://www.thelocus.com/kumquat

quoted 1 line Hey, this would be great because it would provide further support for the ongoing argument

> Hey, this would be great because it would provide further support for the ongoing argument that SAMPLERS ARE EVIL and that the world would be a better place without them.

Dr. Purist: Arrgh! The Kumquat has again uncovered my secret plans! Curses!

quoted 1 line After all, we all know that HOW a piece of music is made is more important than the actual

> After all, we all know that HOW a piece of music is made is more important than the actual sound of the music itself.

The Kumquat's fists on Dr. Purist's ideological foundation: THUD, POW, SMACK

quoted 3 lines For example, before even listening to a piece of music, it is best to verify that:

> For example, before even listening to a piece of music, it is best to verify that: > > - no samplers were used, or were even present in the room during recording

More of the same: BIFF, WHACK

quoted 1 line - no DSP plug-ins were employed, since it is "too easy" to make cool-sounding ef

> - no DSP plug-ins were employed, since it is "too easy" to make cool-sounding effects with them

Dr. Purist: Never said anything about that, not me, wait, Ow!

quoted 1 line In fact, any device that makes it easier (god forbid) for Joe RaveKid to make cool tracks

> In fact, any device that makes it easier (god forbid) for Joe RaveKid to make cool tracks on his own (without racks of equipment and years of practice tweaking oscillators and filters) should be banned.

Well, there is the whole idea that you should challenge yourself when creating art. And it's pretty easy to detect when someone is not challenging themselves. We call it "wanking." You can wank with any piece of equipment. But remixing or covering tunes without the use of any sampling methods is a challenge which should hopefully cause the folks involved to get creative in new and interesting ways, regardless of my personal artistic fear of the damn things.

quoted 1 line Hi, Tom!

> Hi, Tom!

Hi, Fred! Tom

<< Dr. Purist: Arrgh! The Kumquat has again uncovered my secret plans! Curses! >> I remember all too well that Dr. Purist has his (not so hidden) anti-sampling agenda...sometimes I wonder if the good Doctor has a personal vendetta against the Akai corporation. << The Kumquat's fists on Dr. Purist's ideological foundation: THUD, POW, SMACK >> Heh heh heh...and it feels good, doesn't it?

quoted 1 line - no DSP plug-ins were employed, since it is "too easy" to make cool-sounding ef

>> > - no DSP plug-ins were employed, since it is "too easy" to make cool-sounding effects with them <

Dr. Purist: Never said anything about that, not me, wait, Ow! << Sorry Doc, didn't mean to imply that you were anti-DSP "fuckery." Just trying to tie a couple of threads together, perhaps to make a string or a rope...with my point being: can't we just enjoy a piece of music for how it sounds, rather than bringing in any personal prejudices regarding the tools used to make the music? << Well, there is the whole idea that you should challenge yourself when creating art. >> Believe me, using a sampler can be plenty challenging...precise beat-matching of samples to rhythms is a painful yet rewarding art form. Have you ever seen the manual for an Akai S3000? That thing is thick enough to stun an ox. Plenty of challenging stuff in there. << And it's pretty easy to detect when someone is not challenging themselves. We call it "wanking." >> How is this detected? Can you provide some examples? And how does wanking compare to noodling? (sorry) << But remixing or covering tunes without the use of any sampling methods is a challenge which should hopefully cause the folks involved to get creative in new and interesting ways >> I'm willing to agree with that statement. Say, Tom, didn't you once say you were going to remix some Kumquat for me? I'd like to hear how *that* could be done without a sampler. You might need some voice synthesis software for all them little snippets. - Fred Church bigkumquat@aol.com http://www.thelocus.com/kumquat p.s. Rumor has it that if you take the midi file for ae's LP7 and change the patches to mini-moog and Hammond B3, it sounds like Emerson, Lake and Palmer.

I can't say I ever made any masterpieces, but when I did my elecronic music module at college we had little else other than samplers. So I brought crates of glass objects, building supplies, cardboard boxes and elestic bands and old musical instruments in, sampled them, timestretched them, layered on the effects and re-sampled them. I also borrowed a DAT machine and carried it around with me, recording any interesting sounds I heard as I went from place to place. Fuck it, I say, who needs anything other than samplers? Lack of original and interesting sounds was never my problem - I'm just not much of a musician and I found that putting them together into a interesting tune was the real challenge. d0ktor -----Original Message----- From: Tom Millar <tmillar@utkux.utcc.utk.edu> To: BigKumquat@aol.com <BigKumquat@aol.com> Cc: idm@hyperreal.org <idm@hyperreal.org> Date: Thursday, August 12, 1999 8:38 PM Subject: Re: (idm) samplers are evil, aren't they?

quoted 2 lines Hey, this would be great because it would provide further support for the

> >> Hey, this would be great because it would provide further support for the

ongoing argument that SAMPLERS ARE EVIL and that the world would be a better place without them.

quoted 4 lines Dr. Purist: Arrgh! The Kumquat has again uncovered my secret plans! Curses!

> >Dr. Purist: Arrgh! The Kumquat has again uncovered my secret plans! Curses! > >> After all, we all know that HOW a piece of music is made is more

important than the actual sound of the music itself.

quoted 2 lines The Kumquat's fists on Dr. Purist's ideological foundation: THUD, POW,

> >The Kumquat's fists on Dr. Purist's ideological foundation: THUD, POW,

SMACK

quoted 2 lines For example, before even listening to a piece of music, it is best to

> >> For example, before even listening to a piece of music, it is best to

verify that:

quoted 2 lines - no samplers were used, or were even present in the room during

>> >> - no samplers were used, or were even present in the room during

recording

quoted 4 lines More of the same: BIFF, WHACK

> >More of the same: BIFF, WHACK > >> - no DSP plug-ins were employed, since it is "too easy" to make

cool-sounding effects with them

quoted 4 lines Dr. Purist: Never said anything about that, not me, wait, Ow!

> >Dr. Purist: Never said anything about that, not me, wait, Ow! > >> In fact, any device that makes it easier (god forbid) for Joe RaveKid to

make cool tracks on his own (without racks of equipment and years of practice tweaking oscillators and filters) should be banned.

quoted 9 lines Well, there is the whole idea that you should challenge yourself when

> >Well, there is the whole idea that you should challenge yourself when >creating art. >And it's pretty easy to detect when someone is not challenging >themselves. We call it "wanking." >You can wank with any piece of equipment. But remixing or covering tunes >without the use of any sampling methods is a challenge which should >hopefully cause the folks involved to get creative in new and >interesting ways, regardless of my personal artistic fear of the damn

things.

quoted 6 lines Hi, Tom!

> >> Hi, Tom! >Hi, Fred! > >Tom >

quoted 4 lines Fuck it, I say, who needs anything other than samplers? Lack of original and

> Fuck it, I say, who needs anything other than samplers? Lack of original and > interesting sounds was never my problem - I'm just not much of a musician > and I found that putting them together into a interesting tune was the real > challenge.

just to clear up some misunderstanding i feel this conversation has fell into (not that i would know, i didn't start it), i think what tom meant by his 'no samplers' rule was that you wouldn't just sample the original song & do something new with it, but that instead you would have to reconstruct it using other means. i suppose using a sampler to create new, unrelated sounds would be okay. then again, it's just a rule to spark some creativity out of you. if it works, you take it. if you cherish your sampler too much, well, keep using it, there's no one pulling your arm. :) -- david

david writes: << just to clear up some misunderstanding i feel this conversation has fell into (not that i would know, i didn't start it), i think what tom meant by his 'no samplers' rule was that you wouldn't just sample the original song & do something new with it, but that instead you would have to reconstruct it using other means. >> Yes, it's true, and this misunderstanding is all my fault. I was infusing my fist-pounding upon Tom's ideology with references to a good sampling debate that we had on this list several months ago (yes, this goes out to you, IDM-list history buffs, and by "history" I mean stuff that happened more than one week ago). I actually like Tom's idea, in that it challenges the dominant paradigm in remixing. And I have heard some remixes where you think "Why bother?" - because the remixer did little more than sample extensive passages of the original and pass it off as "new product for sale." Of course, on the other side of the coin are the remixes where you wonder how the remix bears any resemblance whatsoever to the original track....the two are as different as a can of paint and an apple. - Fred