delete

[strat0124]

Lee's other comment said it all for me: "I feel just as "distanced" from the majority of today's pop music as I feel from people who are trying to sound "retro". That's the clue......trying to be retro. If it comes out as "you"....and retro at the same time, to me that's too cool. Some may be able to fake the retro scene, and pull it off. But I'd gander to say, that's rare. Passion and soul, though they seem to come from the same place, I'm sure they are not always one in the same. Listening to people you equate with having soul and passion, whether it is Bill Monroe, Aretha, Andreas Vollenweider, or whomever, tells me that it's a personal thing that stirs something inside an individual. So can the passionless and souless understand, comprehend, and embrace soul and passion? I think the answer to that is no. It's definitely a perception issue, and connects others with passion and soul. No wonder why certain groups of entertainers get hammered by their peers, regardless if said entertainers are shoveling in the cash and getting corporate awards out the ying yang. This message has been edited by strat0124 on 08-06-2001 at 03:51 PM This message has been edited by strat0124 on 08-06-2001 at 03:53 PM

[D. Gauss]

without naming band names cause that'll just get nasty: soul is leaving the brain at home and letting the heart do the rest. (for better or worse) clinical and well thought out may be correct musically, but it ain't always soulful. conversely an old blues guy might change chords on beat 3 1/2 cause that's where it was felt. might not make sense, but somehow its right. and soulful. -d. gauss

[Lee Flier]

Generally speaking, I think any style of music can be be soulful or passionate. There aren't any specific elements that make it so, that's what can drive the "scientists" nuts. [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] Even though I don't personally LIKE much of the "detached" sounding music, that doesn't mean I don't think it CAN have soul. A true scientist is passionate about the PROCESS of doing technically excellent work, and that comes through in the work. Unfortunately what often happens though, is that people begin to attribute certain genres to soulfulness and others not, so that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. In other words, people who are kind of emotionally devoid often become attracted to technically interesting music, music whose excellence can be quantified in terms of technical achievement, and because they are more technically than emotionally developed in the first place the music they create often IS cold. Someone who is more emotionally than technically developed is probably more apt to go for three chord blues, something the "clinician" will never be able to value or understand. Keep in mind these are stereotypes - not something that applies to everybody or is inherently true, but rather just the way things end up a lot of the time. We all know there's plenty of three chord blues that is totally boring and devoid of soul, and there's plenty of more technically challenging stuff that is obviously born of extreme passion and attentiveness to detail. The bottom line though is that there IS no quantifying soul and passion. I would define it as the degree to which you can express your own humanity, which of course is different for everybody. If you love something enough, no matter what it is, you will figure out how to put it across and make it work. I have a motto, "Love means you're paying attention", which could be applied to anything. I think if you're really doing something with love and really paying attention, no matter what the task, you will make it look to others as if you're the first person to ever do it, and as if there couldn't be anything more fun or expressive than whatever it is you're doing. The real trouble is that most people spend a lot of time and energy trying to distract their attention or dull it. Doing what you love is kind of scary because it's baring yourself in front of people, there's an intimacy there that seems to really frighten most of us. So most people never do it, or do it to a very slight degree. There are also a lot of people who have a great talent for making elaborate masks, which might be very beautiful in a way, and very legitimate "art" for what it is, but it's not soulful, if you follow. Well I have no idea whether that answers your question, but that's how I feel about it! --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 08-06-2001 at 03:57 PM

[strat0124]

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: "Love means you're paying attention", which could be applied to anything. --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 08-06-2001 at 03:57 PM [/B][/quote] Lee......you and my wife been talkin?????? : )

[Botch.]

Popmusic, to answer one small part of your question, can something extremely quiet be soulful? Listen to Rickie Lee Jone's "Last Chance Texaco". I can't define "soul", but like art, I know it when I feel it! [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img]

[Steve LeBlanc]

I think a lot of the "Who's Soulful, who's not?" stuff is very subjective...I know people are very touched by music that was recorded in a very methodical (detached) way and vice-versa. My definition of where that "Soul" in music comes from though is pretty accurate in my experience. [b]To me, when a musician has complete commitment to every sound that comes from his/her instrument, no matter how sloppy, tight, whatever...when the absolute love and respect for the music is there...you can hear and feel it.[/b] I'm pretty sure I always can tell if a song was recorded with that kinda commitment but then again I don't know really because some music that I think is really sterile might just have trouble reaching me.

[Lee Flier]

Yeah, what Steve said! --Lee

[WFTurner]

>>what is "passionate" or "soulful<< The hardest dang stuff to get on tape. ------------------ William F. Turner Songwriter [url=http://www.csonline.net/wfturner/index.html]turnermusic[/url]

[Curve Dominant]

Passion = fuzzbox. Soul = wah pedal. Any questions? Eric

[surfjunkie]

hmm... yeah. and i guess you [b]can[/b] make soulful, passionate music with a drum machine.

[Lee Flier]

[quote]Originally posted by wager47: [b] and i guess you [i]can[/i] make soulful, passionate music with a drum machine.[/b][/quote] NOW HANG ON Wager - I wouldn't go THAT far!! [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/eek.gif[/img] [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] Anyhow that's a machine, not a human, so it has no soul. [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 08-06-2001 at 09:34 PM

[Curve Dominant]

[quote][b]and i guess you can make soulful, passionate music with a drum machine.[/b][/quote] Yes, definitely, although a generous amount of kung fu with the beatbox is required. And not just any old drum machine, but preferably an Akai MPC2000, or Korg ES•1. Either that, or just extremely good taste in simple beats. But, definitely, yes. Refer to my submission for the FAT Company CD as an example. Eric

[Curve Dominant]

[quote][b]Anyhow that's a machine, not a human, so it has no soul.[/b][/quote] Lee, Remember, a guitar is also a machine. And a beatbox is also a musical instrument. Play either one, with passion and soul, at your discretion. And be sure and buy a copy of the Compilation CD from Roger Norman. What I do with a drum machine may surprise you, but don't take [i]my[/i] word for it... E

[gtrmac]

Sly Stone made very suolful music with a Rythym Ace thingy which sounds like it was one of those things built into an electric organ. I think if you are playing from the heart, or gut or whatever it doesn't matter what tool you use. ------------------ Mac Bowne G-Clef Acoustics Ltd. Osaka, Japan My Music: [url=http://www.javamusic.com/freedomland]www.javamusic.com/freedomland[/url]

[Hippie]

John Lennon used to say that talking about music is like talking about having sex. I don't think that when, say, Aretha Franklin sang those soulful hits, she wasn't thinking in her head ":::now, how can I make this sound as soulful as I can?:::" She just did it! and the thing that came out was an extension of herself. The talent she conveyed is the thing that not everyone is able to do, hence it's value. I don't think you can set out and *try* and be soulful, either you are or your not. Its like if you go up to the mic and be "intentionally" soulful, you might come off as not the real deal, negating any soulfulness. know what I mean? -The minute music seems contrived, especially soulful music, is where you'll lose me. Its all in the delivery as they say. Someone once compared performing to farting, "you decide to let it go and its either met with humor, entertainment, or just plain disgust, that's the gamble you take when performing." [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] -Hippie

[surfjunkie]

[quote][b]and i guess you can make soulful, passionate music with a drum machine.[/quote][/b] (can i quote myself?) [quote][b]Careful there, wager47 -- Those are fightin' words around Lee! [/quote][/b] yeah, i know. truth is, Lee's longer post above impressed me- definitely helps me understand many of his previous posts. Lee waxed: [quote][b]Generally speaking, I think any style of music can be be soulful or passionate.... A true scientist is passionate about the PROCESS of doing technically excellent work, and that comes through in the work... The bottom line though is that there IS no quantifying soul and passion. I would define it as the degree to which you can express your own humanity, which of course is different for everybody...[/quote][/b] sure, out of context those quotes [b]can[/b] support mine, but really they show that Lee isn't as closed-minded (in regards to programmed music) as he lets on. Rock on, Lee. then let me sample it.

[-]

[quote]Originally posted by wager47: [b] [QUOTE]yeah, i know. truth is, Lee's longer post above impressed me- definitely helps me understand many of his previous posts. ... but really they show that Lee isn't as closed-minded (in regards to programmed music) as he lets on. [/b][/quote] I'm sure others will let you know, but... Lee... is... a... [b][i]WOMAN![/i][/b] [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img]

[Lee Flier]

[quote]Originally posted by wager47: [b] sure, out of context those quotes [i]can[/i] support mine, but really they show that Lee isn't as closed-minded (in regards to programmed music) as he lets on.[/b][/quote] Yeah I am. [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] I have heard a few records that use drum machines, that I would consider soulful. But DAMN few. And most of the time I still don't understand why they don't want to use a real drummer. And yes a guitar is a machine, but in that case it's the human playing the machine and not the machine playing the beat. But if you search the archives of this forum I'm sure you can find quite enough of my ranting about THAT subject. [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] [quote][b] Rock on, Lee. then let me sample it. [/b][/quote] NO F%&*CKING WAY!!! [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] --Lee P.S. I am actually a she, not a he. I realize that my name can be confusing on the Internet! This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 08-06-2001 at 11:55 PM

[alphajerk]

i agree with steve, he said it better than i could.

[Curve Dominant]

[quote]posted by Señora Lee: [b]And yes a guitar is a machine, but in that case it's the human playing the machine and not the machine playing the beat.[/b][/quote] I won't speak for anyone else, but in [i]my[/i] case, Miss Flier, please rest assured that it is [i]me[/i] playing the machine when it comes to groove boxes, and NOT the other way around. On the other hand, I have seen peeps with guitars slung on their shoulders who seemed to not be in control of that instrument. I suspect that it's because I'm German, that I have this attitude towards machines: that they are things to be built and utilized as one wishes, rather than as things that have minds of their own. Kraftwerk was big in my household when I was growing up. Florian Schneider and Ralf Hutter and the gang built their own synthesisers and electronic percussion modules that equipped the Kling Klang Studio. Think about that: all of those Kraftwerk songs you ever heard were created with instruments [i]that were built by the musicians who played them![/i] Talk about an organic approach to making music! How many of you folks track with instruments that you built, besides Craig, George, or Roger? I think the idea of that influenced my attitude towards electronic music at a very early age - that it is indeed an organic type of music. Once one begins to think of electronic music as organic, one can create soulful, passionate music that is fluid, in the electronic realm. Electricity is, after all, one of the basic elements of our existence. Our neurons fire on electrical impulses, and our body clocks are not different at all from the tempo maps of beatboxes. We are all carbon-based beatboxes, if you look at it that way. I think it's wonderful, and if there's anything I luv about life, it's being a carbon-based groovebox. BOING - BOOM CHA! BOING - BOOM CHA! BOING - BOOM CHA! DUM-DA DUM DUM DUM! BLING! I think what I'm trying to say is: take that drum machine, and jam on it like it's a Les Paul. Take it apart, and put it back together. Do things with it that the manufacturer didn't think of. That's what Hendrix did with his Strat, and that's what y'all should be doing with your drum machines. My $0.02US. Eric Vincent Curve Dominant Sound&Vision Philadelphia USA

[surfjunkie]

ouch [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/redface.gif[/img] pronouns = danger wager47 is glad to see that Lee doesn't appear to be insulted. he's also glad that he didn't assume Curve was French. This message has been edited by wager47 on 08-07-2001 at 01:36 AM

[D. Gauss]

ummm a weird little guy with a symbol for a name who likes purple uses a drum machine and makes some of the most soulful music around... and i ain't talking about barney! -d. gauss

[rold]

I agree you can make a machine [i]sound[/i] soulfull but only to a certain degree. I can't see a drum machine or sequencer smaller than the size of a building being able to store and process EVERY tiny little nuance a human being exhibits in his/her playing, microtechnology or not.

[Tedster]

[quote]Originally posted by d gauss: [b]ummm a weird little guy with a symbol for a name who likes purple uses a drum machine and makes some of the most soulful music around... and i ain't talking about barney! -d. gauss[/b][/quote] The dinosaur FORMERLY known as Barney?

[gtrmac]

I think that if a piece of music elicits an emotional response in the listener it can be said to have passion or soul. Certainly the element of personal taste comes into play. For instance it must be admitted that Yngwie Malmstein plays with passion but I do not personally respond to his music. Many people do obviously and I would not want to criticise their taste for that, it's just not my thing. I would criticise anyone who found Barney the Purple Dinosaur's music soulful though.

[sign]

Hi all A guitar is a machine?? [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] Well, then a grand piano must be a machine also I suppose. I happen to have a nice grand but the problem is I can't play a decent piece of music on it which really bothers me. So I play on a digital piano and Cubase is always helpful. I can even play Fantaisie impromptu op 66, (which is an extremely beautiful piece of music) in Cubase. But when I hit the play button and listen to it, it even doesn't ring a tiny little bell. A couple of years ago I was somewhere and a 12 or 13 year old girl was sitting behind a big Steinway and she played the same opus 66 (Chopin) and I stood there listening with tears in my eyes, I never have heard it played so nicely again. It must be very difficult to explain what makes music art. I guess one just can't and for those who do understand you don't have to. Peace. This message has been edited by sign on 08-07-2001 at 04:47 AM

[Master Zap]

[i](ARGH - I wrote a small novel and UBB ate it, here goes again)[/i] [quote]I prefer the sound of a real drummer playing acoustic drums instead of a drum machine[/quote] I dunno, am I the only one (no offense to Lee) who actually do not like the sound of real drums, or a real drummer? Real drums is okay, if I can sample them, slice 'em up, compress and distor to hell, resonantly filter and smack in a nice loop. [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] And real drummers? Hmmm. Let me put it this way. I [i]like[/i] machine music. I simply love it. Kraftwerk, Vince Clarke's really bleepy stuff (Depeche Mode only went downhill after he left), Front 242, Yello.... house, hard house, drum'n'bass, techno, acid.... I'm at the point where I need to use softsynths because I think [i]MIDI timing is too sloppy[/i]. I'm at the point where I must re-sample the drumloop I mad myself in my sampler because the [i]sampler can't repeat it exactly enough[/i]. (Hows THAT for anal - the machine isn't machine like enough, lets sample it!) Could this be a US vs. Europe thing? Because as I hear it, euro music scene if much more electronically sounding than the US. Or is it because of this: When I started doing electronic music, I did those things "not because they were easy, but because they were HARD"! I started in electronic music coz every other "band" in town was a bunch of long haired dweebs with guitars (no offense to long haired folks, only dweebs *grin*) and I wanted to go above and beyond all that. (That I am a technology geek might have something to do with it too). I was the first person in my hometown to use sampling because I [i]built my own sampler[/i] (Based on old Swedish 1979 vintage ABC80 computer, [url=http://www.master-zap.com/presskit/oldies.swf]see pictures of what I did to it here[/url] ) and my brother had BUILT his own synth. I built my own mixers and effect boxes. Me and my soldering iron. ([b]Curve, I guess that adds me to the list huh[/b] although I hardly use any of that stuff any more [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] ) But now, kids get loop-slapping software in their bleeding PlayStation. Softsynths in their breakfast cereal package. It's not "hard" anymore. In fact its "stupidly easy". Is this the reason people nowdays only talk about valve amps, mic'ing tequniques, pre's and whatnot? Coz that is the only thing we have left that is still "hard to do"? It used to be more complex (and way more expensive) to grab a synth and make an techno-ordchstral recording of Bach's toccata and fugue than it was to take a guitar and strum out "Stairway to heaven". But nowdays this is no longer so. The synth/sampler comes built into your computer, the studio too (no more casette tape-to-tape overdubbing as I did when I was a kid). And the Bach track you can download the .mid off the net. Now it's suddenly HARDER to do the "Stairway to heaven" bit. ARGH! So to stay in the camp of "we do hard things, not easy", does that force "us" (the "serious" producers) to move away from drumloops just coz "the kids got 'em"? Although the "kids" use the loops they got on a CD in their cereal package, and I build my own? Although the "kids" do no processing to the loops other than volume, and I do enough processing to a single loop to make Sir George Martin's anno 1964 hair stand on his head? Am I crazy to still have a deep love for the "machine music"? Am I oldschool that way? Should I throw away all my synths and get a drumkit? (Fat chance [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] ) Y'know... life was simpler when I was a kid. This is how I thought back then: There were only two kinds of music. Synth and Hard Rock. Synth was good. It was music that used synthesizers. Thats it. No other requirements, and it was by definition, by virtue of using synths, good. Hard Rock was long haired dweebs with electric guitars, and it was trash, by virtue of using electric guitars, no matter how the actual music sounded. Pretty pragmatic huh? *grin*. (And yes, I had an existential crisis if I heard a track with both an electric guitar and a synth in it) Life aint that easy any more [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] /Z

[-]

[quote]Originally posted by sign: [b]A guitar is a machine?? [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] Well, then a grand piano must be a machine also I suppose. [/b][/quote] Technically, a player piano would be closer to a drum machine than a grand piano... The whole point Lee is getting at is that a drum machine is an instrument (yeah, I'll call it that [img]http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img] ) which performs the actual notes by itself, much like a player piano.

[WFTurner]

Would seem that if this thread turns into just another real drums vs drum machine, electronic vs contemporary, loops vs real playing type of debate that the chance for a true worthwhile discussion kinda just got flushed down the toilet. My original thought on this thread which I posted was: >>The hardest dang stuff to get on tape.<< Which to me personally meant that the moment you hit the record button it can seem as though for the sake of getting that perfect recording it's all contrived and arranged, somewhat doomed concerning passion and soul. Of course there have been great works that prove that ain't so in all areas and genres of music using every type of instrument, real, electronic, sampled and looped so I would have hoped it would be more of a discussion on technique and philosophy rather than the tired and beat to death debate on the use or misuse of technology. ------------------ William F. Turner Songwriter [url=http://www.csonline.net/wfturner/index.html]turnermusic[/url]

[-]

[quote]Originally posted by WFTurner: [b]Would seem that if this thread turns into just another real drums vs drum machine, electronic vs contemporary, loops vs real playing type of debate that the chance for a true worthwhile discussion kinda just got flushed down the toilet. [/b][/quote] Good point. I'll try to get back on topic... [quote]Originally posted by WFTurner: [b]Which to me personally meant that the moment you hit the record button it can seem as though for the sake of getting that perfect recording it's all contrived and arranged, somewhat doomed concerning passion and soul.[/b][/quote] I'm reading a great book right now called [url=http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=1798QHTVE4&mscssid=VPUW3DXNUL8L9L3T3RVPBJLGD9449VT9&salesurl=Rwww.bn.com/&isbn=068483877X]Zen Guitar[/url] (which I recommend to anyone who enjoys the philosophical side of these forums, whether you play guitar or not). One of the points the book makes over and over again is to move beyond the technical issues of playing so your mind is focused on the bigger picture. I have a feeling that, with as many things as a typical musician/home recordist has to deal with just to get things up and running, being able to think *beyond* your equipment is a really tough thing to do.