DRUM MACHINES

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by DBENNVA@hotmail.com:

Lee,

 

I agree with you "in theory" about not "needing" drums to be replaced. But in the real world of budgets, & deadlines sometimes the drum replacements become mandatory to "get it done" on time, & under budget.

 

Hmmm... gee I wonder what people did before "drum replacement" was an option... oh yeah, I remember. They re-cut the drums.

 

Of course if your client requests drum replacement and that's the only thing they will pay for, you have little choice. However, you can, errrrhhh, STRONGLY recommend they re-cut the drums instead, with emphasis on how much better the track would be if you did. I have "recommended" that clients do this quite a few times, even to the point of giving them a few hours for free if possible.

 

I will concede that if it's for an ad jingle or a soap opera soundtrack, or the latest N'Sync clone, I probably would not go that far out on a limb. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

 

--Lee

[Guest]

Hey, I gotta tell ya.. in no way would I ever consider releasing anything with 'digital drummer' as a chosen option. I'd hope that the producer would strongly side against it. Yes I am a 'Weekend Warrior', but one however that is blessed with a decent day job, one that affords me this option. No compromises..............

[Lee Flier]

Good on ya Morigeau... in that case my only caveat would be to remember that music "breathes"... it's good to practice to a drum machine, click, or metronome just to have a base to start with... but in "real life" nothing will be in perfect time and that's a good thing.

 

One thing I noticed the times that I tried to cut song demos or practice songs to a click, was that at certain points in the song I would always feel like I wanted to lag behind the click, and at other points I'd feel like the click was lagging behind ME. I don't have this problem if I'm practicing say, different drum grooves or guitar riffs over and over to work on my time; I only notice it in the context of a song. Once I get together with "real" musicians and we play without a click, those instinctive time variations become part of the song and what makes the song exciting. Playing with a click too much can make you get used to playing the song in perfect time and take away potentially cool elements of the song.

 

So, I just never practice whole songs at one time to a click or drum machine. I just practice grooves. When doing whole songs I play to a record or with other musicians, or just bust on through it by myself.

 

--Lee

[DBENNVAhotmail.com]

Peeps,

 

Just let me tell you this. You can take an ordinary hit done by a drummer, sample it, &

then tweak it till it sounds so tight after the fact that it's unreal. This is something that you can't do real time because real drummers are so inconsistent. Don't believe me ask cat's like Bob Clearmountain, Dave Reitzas, Etc. Etc. Etc.. I'm very much a purist until I wind up seeing that what can be done after the fact way out does what can be done on the original takes. A drum, a mic., and a pre-amp only can do so much to an original sound. What a DAW can do after the fact is unreal. One of youse gave one of the best examples. NIN. Do you think they could

have tweaked those loops with a real drummer.

I don't think so. Once again too much incosistency comes into play trying to get a human to play it right exactly right each time.

 

Quantum! C/O

DBENNVA@hotmail.com

[Lee Flier]

Quantum: Huh???

 

What exactly is the problem with drums in real time being "inconsistent"? Of course if it's TOO inconsistent, it can be a problem, but even the greatest drummers have what you call "inconsistencies" and this is part of what makes them great.

 

I also think this can get into a question of who is more important to the sound, the drummer or the engineer (or producer)? If your goal is to sit there and process drum parts or do edits in your DAW from now till the next century, then yeah, you gotta have a click track or use a drum machine. But if the drummer (and therefore the whole performance)is stifled in the process, then it hardly matters what you can do with a DAW.

 

I still believe the engineer and producer are there to serve the performers, not the other way around. So, to compromise the performance for the sake of "more control" after the fact can be very counterproductive. 'Course there are some producers and engineers who are famous for leaving their personal thumbprint on recordings, rather than transparently trying to capture the best performance. If that's what you wanna do, have at it, but just be aware that's what you're doing: you're making the performance secondary to more control in the studio. Personally, I rarely ever like the results of that.

 

--Lee

[Curve Dominant]

<>

 

Lee Flier consistently omits an essential element in this equation: the audience. People who buy, dance to, listen to, f*ck to and work to music do not care what any musician wants to do, say or think. Lee has stated on another thread that she bailed on the biz in the 80s when drum machines came into play, and that was a smart move on her part. Like it or not, drum machines, sequencers and samplers have touched on an undeveloped aspect of what musicians habitually provide, and audiences have responded to the effect of rewarding consistency of quality in a groove over the "nuances" of a live drummer. Music lovers around the globe have demonstrated their love of music produced by artists who effectively utilize the technology to achieve this. Serve the performers? Try serving an audience, and if you cannot find one, perhaps it is time to move on to another line of work. Beatboxes, grooveboxes and sampler/sequencers are the rule now, not some novelty. I tried to explain this point to Lee more politely on my Soul Factory thread, but I got bombarded by a blizzard of denial. Simply put: purists have no place in today's musical horizon - all bets are off.

 

"Art never expresses anything but itself. It has an independeant life...and developes purely on its own lines." - Oscar Wilde

[Lee Flier]

Gee Curve, I'm not sure where this is coming from. I think you have been consistently misinterpreting my point of view.

 

First of all, you keep characterizing me as a "purist" when I have consistently said that IF you like the sounds of drum machines or samples, and that is what you are going for as an artist, then I have no beef. IF on the other hand, you are using drum machines or samples because it's more convenient, or less expensive, or less of a headache, or more of an ego boost in the sense that you have more "control" than working with a live drummer, then it's just an artistic copout and one should go ahead and invest the time and effort to work with a drummer.

 

Second, there is no "competition for audience" involved (?!?!!). There is a large audience for electronic music, and there is a large audience for "live" music. Also, we all know that audiences often get infatuated with sounds that are popular, and those same sounds may fall out of favor a few years later. So it's no use pandering to an imaginary "audience" (all of whom will have different tastes anyway) - you have to do what you love and if you've done a good job, you'll find an audience, no matter what recording techniques you do or don't use. If your main concern is finding the largest audience or determining what "the rule" is now, congratulations, you've just joined the ranks of the Backstreet Boys.

 

I'm perfectly aware that there's a large audience for electronic music, but that doesn't make it good (or bad). I'm also perfectly aware that electronic music isn't going to go away any time soon. But it is still artists who drive the car. Now more than ever, we can put out almost anything, and there's an audience for anyone who's good. Unfortunately there is also always an audience for dishonest, contrived fluff. I'm NOT saying that all electronic music is that, just that audiences shouldn't dictate art, ANY art, so I don't understand your point.

 

My only point in all this ranting about drum machines is just to hopefully raise some awareness among ARTISTS (including engineers and producers) of what is being lost when you use them, and/or suggesting that some uses for them may be better than others.

It's better to make an artistic decision with your eyes open, than make it because you think you don't have any choice or because "that's how things are done these days". And I see a lot of that going on. OK? So chill. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/cool.gif

 

--Lee

 

[This message has been edited by Lee Flier (edited 11-14-2000).]

[Curve Dominant]

<>

 

It's not about what has been lost, it's about what's been gained: empowerment. I know what's been lost: Drummers who are late to rehearsals and gigs; whose drug use prohibits the short-term memory it takes to learn & memorize a tune; who cannot even find the means to transport his equipment, let alone properly maintain it; who sweat me for $$$ when there's none to be shared because nothing's been taken to market yet; who will miss a key breakdown, and blame it on the bassist; who won't play the rim of his snare because he "doesn't do rimshots," who slows his tempo half-way through a song because he doesn't stay in shape; who wants me to blow another $2K in studio fees because he thinks that one cymble crash wasn't quite right; this has all been lost. Thank you very much.

 

I compose music, and the tools I choose are contemporary choices. WHEN my next CD is released, and the ensuring tour commences, I will have a top-flight drummer at the helm. In the meantime, I am at the mercy of MY limitations, and not anyone else's. This is the CHOICE that my sampler/sequencer gives me. It is my choice - I MAKE that choice - it is not made for me. So chill? I did not get into this to chill. I get into this to burn like a gazillion watts of passion. Drummer or beatbox, I'm confident that that will come through. How about you?

 

[This message has been edited by Curve Dominant (edited 11-14-2000).]

[alphajerk]

"Never have liked King Crimson at all. And I haven't heard the particular Bela Fleck you're referring to, so I can't comment on it. Which CD is it?"

 

its every cd they have ever done. they dont have a "drummer", future man plays midi triggers. and not like king crimson?!? damn, i find that hard to believe... some of the best musicians around right now. apparently their current tour is unfuckinbelievable.

 

the new sound on sound mag [oct 2000] ha a great article on the very last page dealing with this subject. it talks about the advent of wordprocessors opposed to calligraphic writing, neither way makes one a good writer. it goes on to say "technology doesnt create music on its own, it must be constructed skillfully. it is not in other words simply a case of 'pressing a button'.... However, they [traditional musicians] should not delude themselves into thinking that they are somehow acting as the gaurdians of 'real' music when in reality they are simply seeking to preserve the customs and traditions of a bygone age. 'Real' music, surely, is about innovation, experimentation and the discovery of new possibilities; about looking into the future, rather than clinging to the past."

[Anderton]

>>Any precautions with using drum/rhythm machines, such as picking up bad habits that may present problems when playing others?<<

 

Lots of good comments in here...

 

I think people refer to the SR-16 as an "industry standard" because it has been phenomenally successful. The fact that it still sells almost 10 years after its introduction is amazing.

 

I did the manual for it, so I have more than a passing acquaintance. The timing accuracy on it is phenomenal -- far better than any sequencer running on any computer. There is less than 100 microseconds of jitter and the MIDI delay in responding to notes is under 1.6 ms, which is close to the theoretical minimum. In fact, I've had situations where the SR-16 sounded out of time in a MIDI rig, because everything else hit later. Sliding the SR-16 track a few milliseconds later helped put things in the pocket.

 

One other cool thing about the SR-16 for "live" use is the ability to create variations and transitions...keeps things from getting too boring.

 

The main thing to watch out for with drum machines is overplaying, or creating parts that are physically impossible to play. Of course, some things like 32nd note kick drum rolls are fun to do for techno tunes and such, but there's something that doesn't ring true about hitting two toms, a snare, and hi-hat all at the same time.

[Anderton]

>>Now the downside: the sounds on the SR16 have become quite dated. If you want to record something up-to-date in the dance or urban mode, fughettaboutit.<<

 

This is mostly true, and the Korg Electribe R is indeed a great box for contemporary drumming around. However, I run the SR-16 through distortion and ring modulation from time to time, as well as the Electrix Filter Factory and Warp Factory. This lets me make sounds that go beyond contemporary...good stuff.

 

My only beef with the Electribe gear (as noted in a recent review in EQ) is you can't move seamlessly from one song to another, if you want to do a "continuous dance mix" while playing live.

[Lee Flier]

Curve:

 

I'm very sorry you've had such rotten experiences with drummers. It so happens that I have not. I've worked with many, many wonderful drummers and the majority of them are nice people and we get along great. Maybe I'm just lucky, but I tend to think not. I think I've had this experience because drummers recognize that I am in their corner and will work very hard to make sure they are able to do their best because it's important to me. For that reason, I think really good drummers like me, and many have even worked with me for free when they didn't have to. So if I get stuck with a drummer who sucks I can always find someone who doesn't. THAT to me is empowering, working with other people. Working with machines to me is restrictive and limiting. So we have a difference in philosophy here.

 

On the other hand, how many times have I said that I agree drum machines can be useful as a compositional tool? If you're planning to use a drummer on your CD, I don't even see what this argument is about cause you pretty much agree with me. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif And that is why I said "chill" before - I didn't mean "chill" in general (I don't mind arguing passionately about things we believe in), I meant that I think you're arguing with me about things I'm not even saying or thinking.

 

--Lee

 

[This message has been edited by Lee Flier (edited 11-14-2000).]

[alphajerk]

well you are very lucky then lee. reality is that there are not that many GOOD drummers out there so if you know them, then that is power.

 

drummers IMO are beginning to replace the lead singer as the ultimate search [which used to be held by finding a good bassist, now those are a dime a dozen]

[alphajerk]

"The main thing to watch out for with drum machines is overplaying, or creating parts that are physically impossible to play. Of course, some things like 32nd note kick drum rolls are fun to do for techno tunes and such, but there's something that doesn't ring true about hitting two toms, a snare, and hi-hat all at the same time."

 

that i totally disagree with. in fact i find that to be more of the reason to use one over a real drummer. especially when you are talking about something like Aphex Twin. THAT is mastery of the drum machine.

 

 

i feel that sometimes, using a drum machine to sound like a real drummer is the first mistake in using them.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by alphajerk:

drummers IMO are beginning to replace the lead singer as the ultimate search...

 

I can see why. Who would want to be a drummer in today's hostile climate?

 

--Lee

[Anderton]

>>It was written by a drummer and reflects his opinion of what the general reverence for click tracks and drum machines and "perfect time" really does to drumming<<

 

Okay, now we're talking! The "perfect time" thing really, really bothers me. My biggest problem with synthesized rhythm parts is that parts seldom breathe--a lot of people just set the tempo, and go. If you look at a tempo graph of any "real" music, the drummer will consciously vary tempo (NOT in a random way--I don't like the "random groove" functions) to "push" or "pull" the music. In fact, one thing I really like about sequenced is you can edit the tempo track so you can hone those variations to exactly what you want (I suppose a "real" drummer would just do this automatically, of course, which is one of the points in favor of Lee's "get a real drummer" concept. However, I again don't see a difference between a drummer adding these variations based on years of musical experience and the physical coordination necessary to add these minute variations, and a non-drummer adding these variations based on years of musical experience and having the ability to add these minute variations using the tools available in today's sequencers. Both are the product of conscious thought, talent, and produce the same general results from the listener's standpoint.)

 

>>Morigeau, if you're playing bass and want to use a drum machine for practice, what I would do if I were you is get the cheesiest drum machine you can find, dial up the cheesiest sounds you can find, and use that. <<

 

I don't find cheesy sounds particularly inspirational for practicing with...

 

The biggest limitation I see of drum machines is actually not that different from Lee's, although I'd state it differently: they can fool you into creating the "look and feel" of real drums. But without someone skilled in the art of rhythm working with it, the parts will never flow or feel right in the context of a tune.

 

Bottom line is a drum machine is a DIFFERENT INSTRUMENT from trap drums. It does different things, and like anything else, can be used well or badly. Remember, machines don't kill music, people kill music! I've heard some SP-12 and MPC work on hip-hop and rap tunes that could never be done with real drums. The people creating these parts have therefore taken the concept of the drum machine into a realm different from traditional drums...sometimes with satisfying results, sometimes with unsatisfying results. It depends on the drummer.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by alphajerk:

i feel that sometimes, using a drum machine to sound like a real drummer is the first mistake in using them.

 

TOTALLY agree (and Craig, you seemed to say the same thing when you said "drum machines are a DIFFERENT INSTRUMENT from trap drums"). Of the electronic music that I have liked, none of it has been stuff that "sounds like a real drummer". It's been sounds that a real drummer would or could never do.

 

--Lee

[Guest]

WOW!!! I got my bucks worth!! I'm sure there are more angles here. I personally do not find genres such as rap, hip hop, techno and boy/girl synchronized dance pop stuff appealing. Not sayin there is not talent there., but '32nd kick drum rolls' that is just cheesy. As my original question stated in part, 'looking for any precautions when using a drum machine'.

 

Craig, my search for a quality, reasonably price product has lead me to the Boss DR770. Any thoughts on this unit? I've received insight that has lead to various articles, but more input the better.

 

Looking to use it as a tool... not a replacement for my beloved Marty Hill.... whom is a kick ass rock steady 'Weekend Warrior' drummer (manages a Les Swab by day.. ya gotta love his versatility). I know and have stuff tracked that can use but still there are times...

 

 

[This message has been edited by MORIGEAU (edited 11-14-2000).]

[Anderton]

>>Of course if it's TOO inconsistent, it can be a problem, but even the greatest drummers have what you call "inconsistencies" and this is part of what makes them great.<<

 

I would argue that these are not, by and large, inconsistencies, but conscious alterations of the beat. Ernest Cholakis and Ray Williams analyzed various drummers, and found that the best ones could, predictably, hit a drum just a few milliseconds ahead of or behind the beat. What no one has said in the whole "human vs. machine" is that when sequencing with computers, the human will often exhibit more accurate timing than the machine! This is less true with drum computers, but still, despite my affection for drum machines and my belief that they are useful tools that present exciting new possibilities, they supplement the human element, not replace it.

[Anderton]

>>i feel that sometimes, using a drum machine to sound like a real drummer is the first mistake in using them.<<

 

I have no problems with using drum machines in an innovative manner. But I do hear a lot of newbies overplay parts. I don't mean overplay as in "do something creative you can't do on drums," but more like the guitar players who play a zillion notes a second but have nothing to say from an emotional standpoint.

 

Clutter is a problem with any instrument. I just hear a lot more of it with amateur drum machine players, and Morigeau wanted to know about things to look out for, so....

[Lee Flier]

Alpha:

 

Sorry, I was getting Bela Fleck confused with someone else entirely. I have not heard them. Have to take a listen because I've been wanting to for awhile, it's one of those artists that have slipped through the cracks.

 

And no I never liked King Crimson. Yes I agree they are technically great musicians, I just don't like what they do. I do know the difference between something that isn't to my taste and something that just sucks. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif King Crimson doesn't suck, I just don't like them. The Backstreet Boys suck!

 

Now, about your quote from the Sound On Sound article: ".... However, they [traditional musicians] should not delude themselves into thinking that they are somehow acting as the gaurdians of 'real' music when in reality they are simply seeking to preserve the customs and traditions of a bygone age. 'Real' music, surely, is about innovation, experimentation and the discovery of new possibilities; about looking into the future, rather than clinging to the past."

 

I read this article (for those who haven't, you can read it at http://www.sospubs.co.uk/sos/oct00/articles/soundingoff.htm ), and the fact that you quoted it just goes to show that you still don't understand where my head is at. In fact, I agreed with the entire article, up until that last paragraph that you quoted.

 

I haven't ever, EVER said that anyone who makes electronic music does so because they don't have the talent to play a "real instrument". I have never said that sequencers aren't a great compositional tool. I have never said that it doesn't take real talent to create electronic music well, or that electronic music isn't "real music".

 

I am absolutely, positively all for experimentation and the discovery of new possibilities in sound. I don't sit around defending any "old guard". There is just as much old music that sucks as new. However, I think my own experimentation goes in a different direction from what I am hearing around me. There is certainly no law that says all experimenters must use the same tools, or (maybe more importantly) that I am obliged to like the results of an experiment simply because it's innovative. I have experimented with drum machines and sequencers, and I can see using them for very limited purposes in my own work, but beyond that I didn't like the results and decided my time was personally better invested in learning other techniques whose results interest me more.

 

Also, the idea that traditional instruments and/or recording techniques represent a "bygone age" is stupid. I also think our culture's rabid fascination with all things new and different is very arbitrary. There are lots of other cultures who don't place such a premium on the novel, who recognize that when you gain something new you lose something, and they are willing to have a certain amount of public debate about it before embracing new technology. Our culture's constant mantra (driven by economic forces) that you just can't live without the newest latest thing grows tiresome. The idea that you aren't "with it" if you don't heedlessly trample all over thousands of years of human experience is just completely mindless and limiting.

 

I say embrace the past AND embrace the present. You need both to create the future, and you can pick from the best of both. Everything adds to the soundscape and there is no use completely abandoning one thing for another. I guarantee when I make my CD next year, I will be using a DAW right next to an Ampex 350 tape deck from the early 60's. I'll be using electronic percussion alongside traditional drums, and the traditional drums are not always going to be in the configurations you're used to hearing, either. I'll also use other things that are not normally even used as instruments.

 

So don't tell me I'm not willing to embrace the future because I don't follow the same path of experimentation as what everyone else is doing right now. In fact, the very fact that so many people are using sequencers and drum machines now means that it's already become "passe" by the definition of this guy in the article. Heck, these tools have been around for almost 20 years already. Time for something REALLY new, dammit. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

 

--Lee

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Anderton:

I would argue that these are not, by and large, inconsistencies, but conscious alterations of the beat. Ernest Cholakis and Ray Williams analyzed various drummers, and found that the best ones could, predictably, hit a drum just a few milliseconds ahead of or behind the beat.

 

Yes. Whether they think about it consciously is another story. I think part of the ongoing impasse between drummers and engineers/producers/composers is that engineering, producing and composing are more analytical fields, whereas drumming is a more intuitive and physical art. Sure there are always the Neil Pearts of the world (and mind you I can't stand Neil Peart), but by and large, most great drummers have an unconscious element of their playing that engineers and producers and composers Just Don't Get. The latter tend to believe that notes are just notes and that any variations in notes or timing can be analyzed and reproduced. Drummers tend to believe that grooves are like sex - you COULD analyze what makes it feel good but that in itself would take away much of the good feeling. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif Physical spontaneity is a big factor in music and dance, and the results of playing from a spontaneous physical place WILL be different from one that is conceived and performed entirely in the cerebral realm.

 

Not to say that you might not prefer more cerebral music or at least not mind that idea. But just trying to explain why a lot of drummers feel alienated, and also why you can't fool yourself into thinking that you could reproduce what a drummer does with a machine. As you say, machines are there to do something DIFFERENT from what a drummer does, not replace what a drummer does.

 

--Lee

[alphajerk]

i didnt mean to seem that the quote was directed AT you, i meant it to be more open ended to everyone here for discussion. but i thought he had a good view of this whole discussion, especially comparing the word processor to handwriting for authors.

 

personally i use anything and everything. and sometimes i will even get behind the drums [although i suck pretty bad in professional comparison] when a drum machine just wont cut it and i cant get a drummer to sit in when i want it [okay, so im impatient sometimes. when youre rolling on a song, worse thing to do is stop to find a player]. i have yet to hear a roll or a tom fill that sounded "real" coming out of a drum machine [which is why im partial to stuff aphex twin does, totally non realistic but convincing]. there are many shortcomings to both avenues of travel.

 

 

what was the orignal quest of this thread anyways? i think we got way off. i guess ANY drum machine would be good for practice purposes that has a sequencer [you wouldnt want a DM5 if you dont have a computer to sequence on, or a sampler for that matter, which i happen to prefer over a company's choice of sounds for me in their drum module] and unless you are keen on the drum machine sound, then it doesnt make much sense other than for comping until you get a real drummer to get a drum machine.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Anderton:

I don't find cheesy sounds particularly inspirational for practicing with...

 

The biggest limitation I see of drum machines is actually not that different from Lee's, although I'd state it differently: they can fool you into creating the "look and feel" of real drums. But without someone skilled in the art of rhythm working with it, the parts will never flow or feel right in the context of a tune.

 

I agree. I was trying to answer to Morigeau's specific situation though. Most "traditional" musicians such as bass or guitar players, who are simply looking for a practice or compositional aid, are not going to invest the time to become skilled drum programmers. Contrary to what some people think I think http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif, I think takes as much time and effort to become a skilled programmer as a skilled musician. And Morigeau says point blank that he's going to work with a live drummer on his final product. If that's the case, I'd just as soon use cheesy sounds as a "reminder" that this is a machine, so you don't feel too bad about your own shortcomings as a programmer and can just get on with your playing and writing.

 

--Lee

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by alphajerk:

i didnt mean to seem that the quote was directed AT you, i meant it to be more open ended to everyone here for discussion. but i thought he had a good view of this whole discussion, especially comparing the word processor to handwriting for authors.

 

Oh yeah, that was the other important point I disagreed with him on. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif I think his point is true in terms of composition. I also think it applies to things like DAW's where you can cut and paste stuff easily instead of having to cut a piece of tape to do editing. But I think he (and lots of people) miss the point that there is still a fundamental difference between music (and dance) and other arts (like writing or painting). I think I've said this before, but the difference is that with most arts, the composition of the work is the whole thing. Music, though, is not only composed but performed, and the performance is a physical act. See my post to Craig about this.

 

That's where the calligraphy-vs.-word processor analogy doesn't work. I think a more accurate analogy would be: what if you didn't read books silently, but it was more common to listen to someone give an oral reading of a book? At that point, not only the author but the reader would become important factors in whether the work was done well.

 

Now, what if someone then decided to have a text-to-speech synthesizer read the book instead of a person? This might be interesting, but would it really serve the book better than a human reading it? Maybe, in SOME casees. And sure, a whole different art of text-to-speech programming might develop which would add more nuances, and might end up being a new creative outlet in its own right. But I think we can all agree that this would represent a fundamental shift in the way books were experienced by their audience (and by the author), whereas a word processor does not.

 

Again notice I'm not saying this would be "good" or "bad"; only that I'm sick of people saying things like "it's not the technology, it's the people who use it." That saying doesn't hold water in all situations. Some technologies are merely extensions of existing tools while others represent a fundamental change in the art. You might like that change, but at least don't pretend it isn't there.

 

what was the orignal quest of this thread anyways? i think we got way off. i guess ANY drum machine would be good for practice purposes that has a sequencer [you wouldnt want a DM5 if you dont have a computer to sequence on, or a sampler for that matter, which i happen to prefer over a company's choice of sounds for me in their drum module] and unless you are keen on the drum machine sound, then it doesnt make much sense other than for comping until you get a real drummer to get a drum machine.

 

Yah, totally in agreement here!

 

--Lee

[alphajerk]

how is painting not a physical activity. i know for a fact there is a HUGE similarity between making muusic and making paintings having done both for the majority of my life. they are actually the exact same thing aside from one being aural and one being visual. and i have acutally seen performance painters so you cant claim that the performance is different between the two. i cant tell you how exciting watching a vision come to life right before your eyes. its amazing.

 

oddly enough, graffiti is much like a drum machine. a mechanical device [the paint can] loaded up with colored paint [sampled drums] but in order to create a work of art, it requires skill to create that work. and ironically, its an original basis of the hip hop culture which based its sound on the drum machine. hmmm.

[DBENNVAhotmail.com]

Lee,

 

In reference to what you said on page one.

"The engineer,& producer are there to serve the artist". Yeah in some respects. But if you're trying to sell records then the artist/player, engineer, & producer are there to serve the buying public with what it likes in musical tastes. And a whole lot of stuff thats on the Billboard 200 is sequenced with drum machine/modules. Just giving you a realty check from the producers point of view.

 

Quantum! C/O

DBENNVA@hotmail.com

 

[This message has been edited by DBENNVA@hotmail.com (edited 11-14-2000).]

[Guest]

Hey just had a chance to diddle with the Dr770 and the SR-16 side by side. The differences are about 150 bucks in cost. The DR770 is an out right better machine as far as function and tone quality... course ya'll probably knew that though.... Right? my opinion is... if'n ya gotta listen to er for any length of time it might as well sound good!!

 

Hey I think I justified spend'n the cash.......

 

I know.. I know..... just another damn weekend warrior justify'n his damn addiction again.

 

Mo Thumper

[DBENNVAhotmail.com]

Morigeau,

 

So did you get the 770. I hope you did.

Peace,

 

Quantum! C/O

DBENNVA@hotmail.com

[Guest]

Hey thanks for the encouragement!! I haven't picked one up yet, but am searching for the best buy....... I feel like a little kid about to get a new toy!!

 

Morigeau