Music Player Network
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Olhsson:

Has anybody else tried singing along with or dancing to many contemporary pop recordings?
Yeah, and I can't do it - it gives me the willies. Generally, stuff that's perfectly in time makes my nervous system go haywire and I can't dance to it worth a damn.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
I wonder how much the overdubbing process has made music so predictable and regimented- Robert Johnson or some old time fiddlers and cowboy songs, that stuff doesn't alway come out even in any known meter, but lots of people danced to it and sang along- but try and overdub something, and you're gonna want to establish some definite metric scheme and the rest of it.

What I found, very early in my crudest stage of 4-tracking it to cassette- if you recorded two people playing together for basic tracks, you could do overdubs a whole lot easier- there was a mutual understanding and groove to get into come a-dubbin' time.


A WOP BOP A LU BOP, A LOP BAM BOOM!

"There is nothing I regret so much as my good behavior. What demon possessed me that I behaved so well?" -Henry David Thoreau
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,184
gm Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,184
Quote:
Originally posted by DSykes:
Quote:
Originally posted by dtobocman:
Whassup with delays in prime numbers?
Hmmm...Can the lack divisibility in the amount of time delayed affect the sound in some special way??

I believe divisibility (primeness) depends on the choice of scale, which is arbitrary, right? ...somebody's kidding around.
I do use prime numbers for short, multiple delays, and am certainly not being sarcastic. I do this because 1> individual delays when looped invariably result in "pseudo-modes" that are inharmonic & 2> multiple delays (again, when looped) are somewhat less likely to have flutter.

Thanks for publishing the prime number list, somebody...

2 3 5 7 11 13 17 19 23 29
31 37 41 43 47 53 59 61 67 71
73 79 83 89 97 101 103 107 109 113
127 131 137 139 149 151 157 163 167 173
179 181 191 193 197 199 211 223 227 229
233 239 241 251 257 263 269 271 277 281
283 293 307 311 313 317 331 337 347 349
353 359 367 373 379 383 389 397 401 409 ...

George


George Massenburg

http://www.massenburg.com
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 426
B
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
B
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 426
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee Flier:
...it gives me the willies. ... stuff that's perfectly in time makes my nervous system go haywire...
Exactly, but guess what?
The fact that it makes one's nervous system go haywire means it's NOT in perfect time no matter what the computer screen says. One of the biggest lies of the past 20 years is the idea that time can be too perfect. Sure you can cover up the fact that a lens is out of focus by putting a diffusion screen over it but that still doesn't pull it into focus. The same thing applies to equal tempered tunings, they are all by definition OUT of tune as a matter of convenience.

Pitch and time are the utterly basic principles of music and of how pleasurable it is (or is not.) This cuts right across all cultures and is not a matter of style but rather one of function. Too many people are composing and mixing with their eyes and minds today rather than with their ears, breath, nervous system and heartbeat.


Bob's workroom (615) 385-8051
http://hyperback.com
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
M
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Olhsson:
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee Flier:
...it gives me the willies. ... stuff that's perfectly in time makes my nervous system go haywire...
Exactly, but guess what?
The fact that it makes one's nervous system go haywire means it's NOT in perfect time no matter what the computer screen says. One of the biggest lies of the past 20 years is the idea that time can be too perfect. Sure you can cover up the fact that a lens is out of focus by putting a diffusion screen over it but that still doesn't pull it into focus. The same thing applies to equal tempered tunings, they are all by definition OUT of tune as a matter of convenience.

Pitch and time are the utterly basic principles of music and of how pleasurable it is (or is not.) This cuts right across all cultures and is not a matter of style but rather one of function. Too many people are composing and mixing with their eyes and minds today rather than with their ears, breath, nervous system and heartbeat.
Yep.

Lee, the reason your nervous system is going haywaire likely has more to do with the overall repetitive, monotonous (meaning predictable rather than "of single tone") nature of the music. Inspired players/recordings of interesting music (whatever that means to you) will engage you regardless of whether it's in perfect time or not. There is nothing wrong with perfect time - it's when it lacks interesting musical progression and emotional investment from the players that it becomes hard to listen or dance to.

Just a thought.

Jeff

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
I've heard Lee say more than once that perfect time is not metronome time- I noticed the anomaly right away when she said "perfect time". I hope she's not losing her nerve!

I'm sure breathing must have something to do with the ebb and flow of what I like to call "human time". And how often do I get to call a recording by my favorite epithet- "that sounds downright human!"


A WOP BOP A LU BOP, A LOP BAM BOOM!

"There is nothing I regret so much as my good behavior. What demon possessed me that I behaved so well?" -Henry David Thoreau
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
Yes you're right Ted, my use of "perfect time" here was unintentional. Thanks for getting my back. \:\)

Jeff, I think you're right, up to a point, about the problem being the monotony and repetitiveness of the arrangement. But it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg syndrome because I think playing to a click really results in less inspired playing. I think the inspiration comes from the musicians playing with EACH OTHER and allowing the music to breathe in a human way, as I've said before and as Ted repeated here.

Being on pitch and in time is vitally important, but so is having the ability to deviate from that in response to what's happening between the musicians and the emotion of the song. Playing to a click inherently limits one's ability to do that.

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,559
D
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
D
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,559
Quote:
Originally posted by Ted Nightshade:
I'm sure breathing must have something to do with the ebb and flow of what I like to call "human time". And how often do I get to call a recording by my favorite epithet- "that sounds downright human!"
Mine is -- "it sounds so ... lifelike!"

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
M
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee Flier:
Yes you're right Ted, my use of "perfect time" here was unintentional. Thanks for getting my back. \:\)

Jeff, I think you're right, up to a point, about the problem being the monotony and repetitiveness of the arrangement. But it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg syndrome because I think playing to a click really results in less inspired playing. I think the inspiration comes from the musicians playing with EACH OTHER and allowing the music to breathe in a human way, as I've said before and as Ted repeated here.

Being on pitch and in time is vitally important, but so is having the ability to deviate from that in response to what's happening between the musicians and the emotion of the song. Playing to a click inherently limits one's ability to do that.
Hi Lee,

I agree that most music needs to breathe in order to have "feel". Where I disagree (mildly) is that I believe that a click doesn't have to be a problem in getting the feel. Music can still breathe and deviate slightly while recording to a click. A good drummer, for example, can use the click as a reference and expand and compress their time within the confines of the click by playing slightly behind, right on, or just ahead of the beat.

A click doesn't have to impede on the feel of the music as long as the musicians are comfortable working with it (I believe that only the drummer should hear the click, by the way, if the whole band is playing). If the players (drummer) aren't comfortable playing to a click then one shouldn't be used, because then it will mess with the feel of the music.

Ted made an interesting point about the overdubbing process and how it can limit feel (Hi Ted ). This, to me, is more of a problem than whether a band can ebb and flow with the tune - click or not.

All that said, we did some research about 6 years ago on whether metronomically perfect rhythm effects the nervous system differenty than rhythm with "feel". In this study we compared sequenced drum samples to the same rhythms and drums played by a human (we were trying to develop a computer program that assembles the best rhythms for a person based on their answers to a questionnaire).

Our results showed no difference in the listener's responses (as far as the brain was concerned). Of course, this has no impact on whether someone prefers one approach to the other - In this study there was a big difference in this regard (I'm sure you can guess what those results were \:\) - which is why we don't have this program available).

Jeff

Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
Quote:
Originally posted by MusicMedicine:

I agree that most music needs to breathe in order to have "feel". Where I disagree (mildly) is that I believe that a click doesn't have to be a problem in getting the feel. Music can still breathe and deviate slightly while recording to a click. A good drummer, for example, can use the click as a reference and expand and compress their time within the confines of the click by playing slightly behind, right on, or just ahead of the beat.
Sigh... yes, everyone says this in response to my opinion about clicks. And it's true of course, but only up to a point. One can mess around with different subdivisions around the click but the musicians are still not free to get out of sync with the click at any point during the song, unless you program a tempo change into the click. This sucks because many of the coolest tempo variations or breaks happen by accident, in response to the music, and it wouldn't have occurred to anybody to program them in beforehand. Such variations are vital to the music "breathing" in my not so humble opinion. Telling musicians they're not free to vary in tempo throughout the song as they see fit, is to me like telling a singer or horn player not to bend the pitch. Imagine if say, a very talented and expressive blues singer or jazz horn player was expected to sing or play along with a guide sine wave that was perfectly in pitch throughout the song, except perhaps in a few places where they'd thought beforehand that they might slur a note or slide up to a pitch. It would be like a straitjacket, and I feel that playing to a click is similarly a straitjacket for a great drummer.

Sorry, when it comes to music I believe it should always be the humans driving the bus, not a machine. There are some individual songs where metronomic time just happens to fit the bill, but often it's used simply to make things easier on the engineer/producer to edit stuff later, and not commit to an arrangement during tracking (which also sucks IMO).

I think if the musicians don't have good time to begin with, playing to a click doesn't really help because they usually can't play to a click either, and the feel goes to hell because you can hear them trying to stay with the click. And if the musicians DO have good time, they don't NEED the click, and will probably come up with some very cool, inspired variations in tempo that wouldn't have happened with a click. Try lining up a James Brown recording to a grid. It won't happen. There are variations by as much as 5 bpm. THAT'S perfect time!

The thing is too that nowadays even if you're going to add sequenced parts to a recording or whatever, you don't need to play to a click or line everything up to a grid. If you have Pro Tools you can use Beat Detective to add a click later and create a grid based on what the musicians actually played. Use the technology to serve the humans and not the other way around.

Quote:

All that said, we did some research about 6 years ago on whether metronomically perfect rhythm effects the nervous system differenty than rhythm with "feel". In this study we compared sequenced drum samples to the same rhythms and drums played by a human (we were trying to develop a computer program that assembles the best rhythms for a person based on their answers to a questionnaire).

Our results showed no difference in the listener's responses (as far as the brain was concerned).
Obviously I wasn't one of your test subjects. \:D ;\)

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
M
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee Flier:
Quote:
Originally posted by MusicMedicine:

I agree that most music needs to breathe in order to have "feel". Where I disagree (mildly) is that I believe that a click doesn't have to be a problem in getting the feel. Music can still breathe and deviate slightly while recording to a click. A good drummer, for example, can use the click as a reference and expand and compress their time within the confines of the click by playing slightly behind, right on, or just ahead of the beat.
Sigh... yes, everyone says this in response to my opinion about clicks. And it's true of course, but only up to a point. One can mess around with different subdivisions around the click but the musicians are still not free to get out of sync with the click at any point during the song, unless you program a tempo change into the click. This sucks because many of the coolest tempo variations or breaks happen by accident, in response to the music, and it wouldn't have occurred to anybody to program them in beforehand. Such variations are vital to the music "breathing" in my not so humble opinion. Telling musicians they're not free to vary in tempo throughout the song as they see fit, is to me like telling a singer or horn player not to bend the pitch. Imagine if say, a very talented and expressive blues singer or jazz horn player was expected to sing or play along with a guide sine wave that was perfectly in pitch throughout the song, except perhaps in a few places where they'd thought beforehand that they might slur a note or slide up to a pitch. It would be like a straitjacket, and I feel that playing to a click is similarly a straitjacket for a great drummer.

Sorry, when it comes to music I believe it should always be the humans driving the bus, not a machine. There are some individual songs where metronomic time just happens to fit the bill, but often it's used simply to make things easier on the engineer/producer to edit stuff later, and not commit to an arrangement during tracking (which also sucks IMO).

I think if the musicians don't have good time to begin with, playing to a click doesn't really help because they usually can't play to a click either, and the feel goes to hell because you can hear them trying to stay with the click. And if the musicians DO have good time, they don't NEED the click, and will probably come up with some very cool, inspired variations in tempo that wouldn't have happened with a click. Try lining up a James Brown recording to a grid. It won't happen. There are variations by as much as 5 bpm. THAT'S perfect time!

The thing is too that nowadays even if you're going to add sequenced parts to a recording or whatever, you don't need to play to a click or line everything up to a grid. If you have Pro Tools you can use Beat Detective to add a click later and create a grid based on what the musicians actually played. Use the technology to serve the humans and not the other way around.
Well, that's a compelling argument and well said. However, I guess what rankles me about this viewpoint is that many people (I'm not saying you, Lee) use it as an excuse for having shitty time. Like you said, a good musician should have solid time and be able to keep it steady (within the bounds of the song). I just don't subscribe to the belief that a click track sucks the feel out of a performance.

Personally, I like click tracks. In fact, I prefer to record to them. And I have never felt "straightjacketed" by using one. Besides, whoever said that you need to play the downbeat of a bar on time? Sometimes you can fall off the click for several measures and fall back in.

But I understand your point.

Quote:

All that said, we did some research about 6 years ago on whether metronomically perfect rhythm effects the nervous system differenty than rhythm with "feel". In this study we compared sequenced drum samples to the same rhythms and drums played by a human (we were trying to develop a computer program that assembles the best rhythms for a person based on their answers to a questionnaire).

[QUOTE][QB]Obviously I wasn't one of your test subjects. \:D ;\)
I know you're just razzing me, but perhaps re-read the last two sentences in my post again:

Quote: "Of course, this has no impact on whether someone prefers one approach to the other - In this study there was a big difference in this regard (I'm sure you can guess what those results were - which is why we don't have this program available)."

I'll bet ya if we hooked you up to our q-EEG device, your nervous system will show the same response as everyone else (minor variation allowed). You may not like what you hear but your physiological response will be very similar between the two approaches.

Everyone in our study, regardless of their neurological status (we tested "normal" people as well as those with autism, ADD, schizophrenia, and clinical depression) showed very similar physiological responses to the rhythms. This has nothing to do with their
psychological/emotional responses which varied considerably.

Jeff

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
Wow, great discussion!

I will say this about the click- it rules out any possibility (or at least most cases) of doing a little rubato or accelerando, or a little fermata- to get back with the click after that would require an equal and opposite deviation from metronome time- which I don't see as necessary or desirable. Maybe a click track that listens back? Is that the ultimate in oxymoron, or am I missing something? :p

seriously, when the possibility of a fermata, accelerando, or ritardando, even, and especially, for a moment here or there is impossible without making a big production out of it, we're in serious trouble musically.

I see a metronome as a great practice tool- and there's that cool jazz trick where you turn your head around so the click is on the offbeat, that helps a lot with anything that swings. And would it be cool for stick control practice to have a metronome that does ritardandos and accelerandos, to get a frame of reference for those slippery situations!

But I refuse to play with any person or thing who doesn't listen right back! :rolleyes:


A WOP BOP A LU BOP, A LOP BAM BOOM!

"There is nothing I regret so much as my good behavior. What demon possessed me that I behaved so well?" -Henry David Thoreau
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 3,443
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 3,443
Rigid tempo is just one musical style - to be locked into it (no pun intended) is rarely good for the music unless that is the style you are after.

I was listening to a wonderful Chopin Waltz the other day - the tempo was all over the map up and down with the arpeggios - it may have actually made it too challenging to waltz to - I have no idea since I can't dance for shit no matter what, but it surely sounded fabulous.


Steve Powell - Bull Moon Digital
http://www.bullmoondigital.com
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
Quote:
Originally posted by MusicMedicine:
Well, that's a compelling argument and well said. However, I guess what rankles me about this viewpoint is that many people (I'm not saying you, Lee) use it as an excuse for having shitty time.
Well, that's their problem and the result will speak for itself. We shouldn't be stifling the good musicians for the sake of the bad ones. I am completely gaga nutso for the drummer in my band, as is pretty much everybody who hears him, and I wouldn't let anybody near him with a click track. He considers time to be HIS responsibility and he takes that responsibility quite seriously!

Quote:
I just don't subscribe to the belief that a click track sucks the feel out of a performance.
It doesn't necessarily, in a way that you'd notice, but then again you don't know what WOULD HAVE happened if the click hadn't been there, and how much better it might have been.

Quote:

I'll bet ya if we hooked you up to our q-EEG device, your nervous system will show the same response as everyone else (minor variation allowed). You may not like what you hear but your physiological response will be very similar between the two approaches.
That could well be, like you said I was just razzing you. However, I definitely have a physical response to certain music for better or worse. Whether it can be measured on an EEG, I don't know, but I don't think it much matters, cuz either way I'm going to turn it off. \:D

Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,100
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,100
Well, the composer might want the feel that is made by a constant tempo. Maybe they don't. That is why it is possible to do it either way!

Actually, there is nothing that says one cannot make a tempo map, in which there are actual tempo variations in the song.

I think both styles are totally valid. There are James Brown tracks that are extremely tight, yet the tempo varies considerably from section to section. Try mapping out the tempo changes of "I Feel Good," for example.

By the same token, the effect created by an unchanging tempo can be desirable. The rythm section can create an unchanging "sonic backdrop" over which the melodic elements take center stage, ala disco and rap. It can be like a sonic mandala.


Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"-
http://www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php

The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project"
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,100
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,100
Quote:
Originally posted by Ted Nightshade:
Maybe a click track that listens back? Is that the ultimate in oxymoron, or am I missing something? :p
Ted, there are devices made which attach to the hihat or snare, that can interpret the bpm being played by the drummer, and give a readout of bpm on led, along with a flashing light. I have met a few drummers that really love playing with these, and some that hate them.


Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"-
http://www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php

The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project"
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
Quote:
Originally posted by Ted Nightshade:

I will say this about the click- it rules out any possibility (or at least most cases) of doing a little rubato or accelerando, or a little fermata- to get back with the click after that would require an equal and opposite deviation from metronome time- which I don't see as necessary or desirable. Maybe a click track that listens back? Is that the ultimate in oxymoron, or am I missing something? :p

seriously, when the possibility of a fermata, accelerando, or ritardando, even, and especially, for a moment here or there is impossible without making a big production out of it, we're in serious trouble musically.

I see a metronome as a great practice tool- and there's that cool jazz trick where you turn your head around so the click is on the offbeat, that helps a lot with anything that swings. And would it be cool for stick control practice to have a metronome that does ritardandos and accelerandos, to get a frame of reference for those slippery situations!

But I refuse to play with any person or thing who doesn't listen right back! :rolleyes:
Absolutely right on. That's what I'm talkin' about!

By the way, there IS a device that "listens right back" - formerly it was called the Beat Bug, now there's an updated version called the
Tempo Ref . It simply listens to what YOU play and gives you a readout of your tempo. Unlike a metronome, you can ignore it as much as you like and refer back to it whenever you like just to see if you're still where you want to be time-wise. Pretty handy little thing.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
That sounds interesting, the metronome that listens back. I could learn something from that I bet.

I'm gonna have to think about this statement I made, that I won't play with anything that doesn't listen to me too? That would rule out overdubs too! It's been a while since I recorded anything that wasn't all live at once, but I better hedge a little just in case....

BTW, I did some experiments playing with pre-recorded tracks, and what I noticed was- it's damn hard to play along when there's nobody there! But even if I can barely hear my usual partner, we can play quite well together... it's not about listening with ears, sound travels through air far too slowly for that to result in a tight performance.


A WOP BOP A LU BOP, A LOP BAM BOOM!

"There is nothing I regret so much as my good behavior. What demon possessed me that I behaved so well?" -Henry David Thoreau
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,398
Quote:
Originally posted by Ted Nightshade:

I'm gonna have to think about this statement I made, that I won't play with anything that doesn't listen to me too? That would rule out overdubs too!
Heh... yeah, sort of. For some reason, overdubs don't bother me much. Well, I should amend that: they bother me greatly if I'm only overdubbing over myself! A few years ago when I didn't have a band and was trying to do everything myself, it was ridiculously uninspiring. Overdubbing guitar parts on top of my bandmates' rhythm tracks though... nooo problem. It's weird, I can still feel their presence in the room VERY strongly when I'm overdubbing, and have no trouble locking into them.

I think the larger issue for me personally, besides playing with someone that'll listen back, is control. I think music is in large part about being able to give up control a bit, kind of like when you're making love. You have to acknowledge that there's something in the room bigger than yourself, bigger than the tempo map that YOU programmed and the machine dutifully plays back exactly what you told it to play. You have to acknowledge that "something else" might happen that you hadn't counted on.

Even gear can foster that giving up of control. I have a fuzz box and an Echoplex neither of which might sound very consistent from day to day or even minute to minute. The machines are part of a "dialog" with me when I plug them in, they have their own character which may or may not be agreeable with what I'm doing at that moment. This is the kind of thing that drives a lot of engineers crazy, but I like it.

So, overdubs can be all right in that sense. I see live playing vs. overdubbing as being something like a face to face conversation vs. letter writing - they're different approaches to communication but both very rewarding and both offering the potential to learn something about each other. Both still allow for the other side to have their say, and acknowledge that this may cause you to respond in a way you couldn't have predicted. When my bandmates put their parts down I like to listen to them over and over and groove on all the subtlties that you can't necessarily take in in the heat of a live performance. That definitely affects what happens with my overdubs. Then in turn the guys may hear what I do with the guitar and put down a vocal part that plays off it somehow. And at our next gig they may do something new instrumentally to accentuate what I'm doing on the guitar. There's a ton of value there, a ton of opportunities to find fresh reasons to love each other. \:\)

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
Quote:
I think the larger issue for me personally, besides playing with someone that'll listen back, is control. I think music is in large part about being able to give up control a bit, kind of like when you're making love. You have to acknowledge that there's something in the room bigger than yourself, bigger than the tempo map that YOU programmed and the machine dutifully plays back exactly what you told it to play. You have to acknowledge that "something else" might happen that you hadn't counted on.
Yeah! You said it!

The best luck I've had with overdubs was doing everything in a big frenzy, doing the whole thing in just a few consecutive days,and often not knowing where it was going and what might happen next- improvising the arrangements as we went, on material we did not do often or ever live. Some really magical things happened. I'd like to spend some more time with that at some point.


A WOP BOP A LU BOP, A LOP BAM BOOM!

"There is nothing I regret so much as my good behavior. What demon possessed me that I behaved so well?" -Henry David Thoreau
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
M
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee Flier:
[QUOTE]However, I definitely have a physical response to certain music for better or worse. Whether it can be measured on an EEG, I don't know, but I don't think it much matters, cuz either way I'm going to turn it off. \:D
LOL. I understand what you're saying. Yesterday a friend brought over some CDs of live banjo "music" (actually I think "wanking" is a better term) and I lasted about 10 seconds before I had to leave the room - not my cup o' tea. But he loves the stuff.

Thing is, if you take rhythm by itself (no melody, no harmony) it's easy to predict how a person will respond physiologically (hence my ascertion that you'd fit with the rest of the people in our study). It's when you add all the other parts of music that things become messy because all of a sudden there is a psychological component involved and, with it, all of people's preferences and biases (as my disdain for this particular banjo music illustrates).

Jeff

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
M
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally posted by Gtoledo3:
Well, the composer might want the feel that is made by a constant tempo. Maybe they don't. That is why it is possible to do it either way!

Actually, there is nothing that says one cannot make a tempo map, in which there are actual tempo variations in the song.

I think both styles are totally valid.
I totally agree.

Jeff

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
M
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally posted by Ted Nightshade:

BTW, I did some experiments playing with pre-recorded tracks, and what I noticed was- it's damn hard to play along when there's nobody there! But even if I can barely hear my usual partner, we can play quite well together... it's not about listening with ears, sound travels through air far too slowly for that to result in a tight performance.
I hear ya Ted. There is something going on when a group of (good) musicians play together live. Unfortunately, when I record I have to overdub over my own tracks because I haven't found anyone else (yet) who can groove to the bizarre rhythms that I use - maybe someday. In this instance a click track and tempo map are life-savers for me.

Oh, and Lee, before you jump on me about using a tempo map, I agree with your sentiment that being able to relinquish control while playing is important - to be open to inspiration and the unknown. I just believe that it can still be done even with a click track and tempo map. A tempo map, to me, is like a chart of the song - the A section is X number of bars at X tempo, B section Y at Y, and so on. And this doesn't necessarily have to be "machine" accurate.

Now, go ahead, call me a soulless robot who has forgtten the magic of playing with other people. I can take it \:D .

Jeff

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
Quote:
Originally posted by MusicMedicine:
Quote:
Originally posted by Ted Nightshade:

BTW, I did some experiments playing with pre-recorded tracks, and what I noticed was- it's damn hard to play along when there's nobody there! But even if I can barely hear my usual partner, we can play quite well together... it's not about listening with ears, sound travels through air far too slowly for that to result in a tight performance.
I hear ya Ted. There is something going on when a group of (good) musicians play together live. Unfortunately, when I record I have to overdub over my own tracks because I haven't found anyone else (yet) who can groove to the bizarre rhythms that I use - maybe someday. In this instance a click track and tempo map are life-savers for me.

Oh, and Lee, before you jump on me about using a tempo map, I agree with your sentiment that being able to relinquish control while playing is important - to be open to inspiration and the unknown. I just believe that it can still be done even with a click track and tempo map. A tempo map, to me, is like a chart of the song - the A section is X number of bars at X tempo, B section Y at Y, and so on. And this doesn't necessarily have to be "machine" accurate.

Now, go ahead, call me a soulless robot who has forgtten the magic of playing with other people. I can take it \:D .

Jeff
Having heard and used a bit of your music medicine, I don't give a damn how you did it.
\:\)

Whatever works! And it *does* work.

And I wouldn't have a clue in the world how to play along- oh, actually, on second thought, I'd do something really floaty and legato unfolding slowly in the background!


A WOP BOP A LU BOP, A LOP BAM BOOM!

"There is nothing I regret so much as my good behavior. What demon possessed me that I behaved so well?" -Henry David Thoreau
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 426
B
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
B
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 426
A constant tempo is the background that music is played relative to or maybe the term should be played against. Musical grooves don't have a constant tempo but they almost always imply one and are all about tension and release against a central tempo. It's a common denominator that makes things work together and encourages others to join in.

Some of the finest percussionists and drummers play their best to a click but nothing they play sounds right on the click. One told me he always knows when he's really in the groove by the fact that he can no longer hear the click.


Bob's workroom (615) 385-8051
http://hyperback.com
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,649
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Olhsson:
A constant tempo is the background that music is played relative to or maybe the term should be played against. Musical grooves don't have a constant tempo but they almost always imply one and are all about tension and release against a central tempo. It's a common denominator that makes things work together and encourages others to join in.
!!

And of course that implied tempo changes sometimes- those shifts from one frame of reference to the next really fascinate me- like the new tempo has been going all along, and we just jumped onto a moving train. At least that's what it ought to be like!


A WOP BOP A LU BOP, A LOP BAM BOOM!

"There is nothing I regret so much as my good behavior. What demon possessed me that I behaved so well?" -Henry David Thoreau
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 9
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally posted by gm:I do use prime numbers for short, multiple delays, and am certainly not being sarcastic. I do this because 1> individual delays when looped invariably result in "pseudo-modes" that are inharmonic & 2> multiple delays (again, when looped) are somewhat less likely to have flutter.

ahh..so it a matter of harmonics rather than timing per se?

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
M
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally posted by Ted Nightshade:
Jeff Having heard and used a bit of your music medicine, I don't give a damn how you did it.
\:\)

Whatever works! And it *does* work.
Thanks Ted. I have to admit that I was a little nervous sending the CD to you seeing as how it was recorded digitally and with a click track \:D . Not to mention the fact that I'm still learning a lot about engineering (thanks to everybody on this forum).

I'll be following up soon to see what's happening.

Quote:
And I wouldn't have a clue in the world how to play along- oh, actually, on second thought, I'd do something really floaty and legato unfolding slowly in the background!
You know, my next CD is going to need something like that. Maybe we should talk .

Jeff

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
M
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 232
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Olhsson:
Some of the finest percussionists and drummers play their best to a click but nothing they play sounds right on the click. One told me he always knows when he's really in the groove by the fact that he can no longer hear the click.
I won't put myself in the category of the "finest" but I will say that this is my experience as well. When I'm in the groove the click disappears. Whereas when I can hear the click, I'm not grooving and I'll usually mess up.

Jeff

Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,184
gm Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,184
Quote:
Originally posted by DSykes:
Quote:
Originally posted by gm:I do use prime numbers for short, multiple delays, and am certainly not being sarcastic. I do this because 1> individual delays when looped invariably result in "pseudo-modes" that are inharmonic & 2> multiple delays (again, when looped) are somewhat less likely to have flutter.

ahh..so it a matter of harmonics rather than timing per se?
Well, more the "ringing" tones that you get when you increase the feedback around one or more delays.

George


George Massenburg

http://www.massenburg.com
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  gm 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5