 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 97 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2618643 Today 2 Topics 127849 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
everything..? your mother on the phone, for example..? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yessir, everything. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"You cant do this with someone like Autechre. Even if you did play the melody on some other instrument, it isnt what the original track was totally about." is this so? I you were to use a different instrumentation, wouldn't that mean a new version? for example, Icct Hedral (Philip Glass version).. not the same, but a version. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well it could be music |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
mm.. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thats one example that proves your point, but I read that when RDJ wrote it, he acctually envisioned it with a full orchestra, but it just wasnt possible at the time. That song was meant to focus on the melodies. So, what I said wasnt a 100%, but nothing is ever 100%. Im making generalizations. And while generalizations dont cover everthing, it does give a GENERAL idea... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, I agree.. when applied.. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
mm.. yes.. but I still think you'll get a different version. btw, me and a friend want to record an accapella version of gantz graf.. we'll record it live in bits and paste them in line.. if we ever finish it, we'll post it.. :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
why tell a person something you don't believe to be true? there are a lot better ways to express an idea or opinion than to say something flat-out untrue. if you think they'll find the music strange just say so. THAT is at least true. saying it's "experimental" is misleading and just not correst, IMO. you can say the music is really different but they probably would like it, or they probably wouldn't. use your discretion. yes i agree that "hmmm, what would happen if I ran this synthesizer into this effect?" is experimenting, but that's just the nature of writing and recording music. "what if i transposed this to A minor" would be how a composer hundreds of years ago would experiment. similarly, rock music is based on discovery (different amps, pedals, instruments, chords, etc.). so are lots of musical genres. by this loose definition, all music is "experimental." in my previous messages i tried to draw a line between (perfectly enjoyable and skilful) NON-experimental IDM and IDM that is particularly experimental in approach. i wouldn't be so quick to judge Ae like that. just cos you haven't heard "drane2" played on a banjo or "melve" played on a piano doesn't mean it couldn't be done. listen to sine707's piano interpretation of "vordhosbn" from drukqs. you wouldn't expect it to work so well but it does. sure, to get the full range of Ae's tracks you'd need more than one musician, but so what? to claim that Ae can't be played w/o very special electronic gear is to deny their musicality. i think it's naive and arrogant to suggest that an IDM track isn't even the same track unless it's played synthetically. surely if moog cookbook can do a version of "blackhole sun" and call it a soundgarden cover, dillinger escape plan can cover "come to daddy" by aphex twin. this goes back to my main point, that IDM isn't by nature "experimental" nor necessarily dependent on certain sounds. it's just instrumental music made with electronic instruments. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you want other versions of IDM songs? listen to the nimoys' a capella covers of "flim" and "iz-us" in the custom remixes section of aphextwin.nu. not only do they do a brilliant job singing the melodies, they nail the rhythm as well. your generalization is flawed. IDM is no more difficult to replicate by other people on other instruments than death metal. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i was saying that consecutive generations are different enough that they would probably not produce the exact same music, and even if they did produce similar music to oneanother they would do it in different ways according to their differences. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"experimental" lies in the actual creative process, so it's kind of inappropriate for anyone but the creator of the music to call it that. I mean, you don't know how the track was made. if you want to say it's different from anything else you've heard in this or that way, that's a different story. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
exactly! tho i would add that if you've read about or can obviously determine the experimental process than you can label it so. if it just sounds complex and original it's not necessarily experimental. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well, i do believe it to be true to some extent. Im not saying i think its completly true, but I do think it is somewhat experimental, as ive said in my past post. just so i can understand, please list some artists you think are nonexperimental IDM. In my mind, IDM is kind of defined by being experimental, finding new ways to do things/sounds. And sure, you CAN play AE on a banjo... but i truely truely doubt the implied emotion of the original song would be present. It would be like playing an inner voice in a 4 part harmony, all alone. Sure, its musical, it might sound good... but where there REAL emotions and details of the song are... are the melody and bass, or the entire peice as a whole, not fragmented. As for sines piano piece, (which i havnt heard, but it sounds cool...). I doubt that it could capture the franticness that is in the drums. The drums and effects are the standout feature. Sure, when you listen to it, it may work, and it may be very pretty... but its not the full range of the song. Also, you enjoy it, because you are relating back to the original. its cool that he did a piano interpretation of it. But if aphex twin just released piano peices (talking about his none piano peices... but his oldies and classics) ( btw the piano peics on drukqs ARE NOT experimental, they are merely little diversions from aphex style. they dont do anything that hasnt been done.) aphex twin would NOT be considered in this style (ie IDM, Braindance etc). The stand out characteristic is the sounds used. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
an obvious example that applies to my arguement is: hip-hop was not around in 74. hip-hop is an obvious influence in autechre's work. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
where do you hear hip-hop in confield, though..? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
pen expers, eidetic casein, the beginning of lentic catachresis |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"an obvious example that applies to my arguement is: hip-hop was not around in 74. hip-hop is an obvious influence in autechre's work. " hip hop's source is 70's music |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and even then, J-Hok named those names to say they made music that was similar to confield. he doesn't say they sound exactly the same. "and even if they did produce similar music to oneanother they would do it in different ways according to their differences." this has nothing to do with the idea whether or not confield is completely original. don't get me wrong, I haven't heard any of the music he mentions. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
all those breaks? all those samples? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
duh hip-hop and 70's music are different |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
mm.. maybe, but those influences are light, they are not prevalent. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
confield and hip-hop music are different. whats your point? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"and even then, J-Hok named those names to say they made music that was similar to confield. he doesn't say they sound exactly the same." what he said was that everything in the past decade had been done before. he never said the word similar. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hip hop breaks are taken from 70's funk tracks |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it doesn't matter if they're light or prevelant. they are still there, which is my point. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"i truely truely doubt the implied emotion of the original song would be present." oh dear.. this is dangerous territory.. who is to say what emotion if any ae want to "imply" with their music..? who would say a differently orchestrated version implied the wrong emotion? or just a different emotion? all these emotions are projected by the listener. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
so what. they are still different aesthetics. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
wahoooo! i like it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
tits: ok so those songs work with different instrumentation. BUT both of those songs are pretty standard in themselves. A melody with drums.And lets say for a minuite, that flim was originally written and released for accapella. It would not longer fit into the catagory of "IDM, or Braindance" or whatever. Thus, the defining characteristic in this music is the sounds used. something like Bucaphalous Bouncing Ball... that wouldnt work on real instruments. And why do these songs have to be played back in a new medium? Whats wrong with the original versions? To say that Autechres music would be just as good being played with different instruments, isnt that insulting thier musicianship and skill? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oh come on.. you think he meant it had been done exactly the same..? thats taking things a bit too literal, imo. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and '70s music is an influence in hip-hop music, however light or however prevalent doesn't matter either. its still there. so hip-hop is not something completely new, so someone in the sixties could've made something that sounds like ae. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oh come on.. you think he meant it had been done exactly the same..? thats taking things a bit too literal, imo. perhaps i took it too literally, but it was unclear to me exaclty what he meant to say. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
qrter: example.... Vordhosbn on Drukqs. there is the pretty melody over crazy drums. The crazy drums are an emotion inthemselves. To do just a song with the pretty melody, your are neglecting that fact that the song was MEANT to have this crazy, tense drums. Thats an important characteristic to the "mood" of the song. (btw. Sine, this isnt directed at you at all... just using it as an example) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"so hip-hop is not something completely new" that's where you're wrong. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"To say that Autechres music would be just as good being played with different instruments, isnt that insulting thier musicianship and skill? " how would that be insulting? composition and musicianship are two different things. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
who cares if it has the same emotion? why does a cover version have to be done in the same style or same feel? also, i think you glossed over where i said that it's true you'd need more than 1 musician (and instrument) to replicate the extent of an autechre track. but as for listening to interpretations, such as on a solo instrument, i disagree that the enjoyment derived is soley from relating the cover back to the original. haven't you ever heard a cover song before the original? ("i love rock n' roll" by joan jett, "tainted love" by soft cell.. famous covers that many don't realize aren't written by the bands who popularized the song). i think sine707's and the nimoys' covers of AFX definitely stand on their own two feet. the dillinger escape plan cover doesn't, but that's just my opinion. i'm not going to name IDM artists who are nonexperimental for two reasons. first, it would undermine my definition of what experimental music is (it's NOT an arbitrary label haphazardly applied to "difficult" or "easy" to listen to music). second, i already said that most idm is nonexperimental. i named 2 artists (matmos and radio boy) who make mostly if not entirely experimental music. i could name others but those are solid examples. you and i just disagree on the term of "experimental." you certainly have a right to your opinion but even by your definition i think it's misleading to tell people that idm is synonymous with "experimental electronic music." i'll agree that the idea of experimentation IS a lot more prevalent in IDM than in rock or pop but experimentation not necessary for making the music. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
in what way? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
they are not an emotion in themselves. they are percussion. the emotion is projected by you. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Bucaphalous Bouncing Ball wouldn't work on real instruments?! haven't you seen STOMP? :) also, are "flim" and "funny little man" (i don't think they did "iz-us" come to think of it) NOT idm because they can be replicated by two voices? i mean, you're falling into the trap of your own argument that IDM = Experimental Electronic Music here. when did i say anything is wrong with idm music or that idm tracks are better played with live instruments or in a different style...? i just said it was possible. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no they arent literally an emotion, but they communicate emotion |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hmm. true it's not absolutely new, like it was created out of a vacuum, not what i'm saying, but it's essence is different enough from everything else to be considered a "new" one, having formed under completely unique american urban situation. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
nope. they are sounds. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hip-hop is an extention of disco really, but i agree it's a lot different from most other types of music. like everything, it still has its influences as a foundation (often in a literal sense too, with samples from 70s funk and rock breaks). as nas said, "no idea's original, there's nothing new under the sun." too true. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i saw stomp. it was great. but i dont think humans could accuarally reproduce the song rythmecilly. they might come close, but they wouldnt capture the preciesness of it, which is one of its defining qualities. and also, I said IDM= experimental electronic SOUNDS. The sounds are the key factor here. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes. jamaican disc jockeys were rapping over dub tracks in the early 70's |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"music is meant to inspire." -lauryn hill. the music itself doesn't convey a single emotion, whether it's the whole track or a single instrument or element of it. a single emotion might have fueled its CREATION, but i promise you there's no way an artist can create something that will convey the exact same emotion to everyone. music, simply put, is open to interpretation. what may sound like a bunch of trashy old noise to one person may sound like pure bliss to someone else. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and sounds communicate emotion |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
why couldn't humanS (you even pluralized it) replicate the rhythm? out of all the billions of people in the world... so IDM isn't even music by the definition you just gave?! explain this "SOUNDS" bit please.. i know you said that specific sounds are key to the music but surely they take a back seat to the melody, rhythm, and tone? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sure its open to perception... but generally, you play something in minor key, its gonna have a darker/ sadder feel to it. there is implied emotion |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
