|Posted on Sunday, June 10, 2001 - 11:18 pm: |
HAVE YOU HEARD ABOUT LOOPWISE.COM!?
they are selling a complete dub reggae production kit that inlcudes 400 royalty midi loops to produce a dub album with, also included are piano education files, dub tips and a customized reggae soundfont...check it out at www.loopwise.com
|Posted on Monday, June 11, 2001 - 06:33 am: |
I don't think, that a 'Dub Construction Set' would work.
It may be nice to have some MIDI patterns as a base for own productions, but especially for Dub it won't help much. In my opinion, most important is how you apply the effects to your raw material. And I don't see how you should handle that with this product.
Perhaps the reggae soundfont has some good sounds, but I'm quite sure you can also get weird samples anywhere else out there.
|Posted on Monday, June 11, 2001 - 03:11 pm: |
I think most Dub producers aren't into loops. They're original, using existing loops is not very
|Posted on Monday, June 11, 2001 - 06:40 pm: |
Good midi files might make sense for reggae/ dub newbies. They might help to study some riddim basics. Audio newbies may study "how do they make that sound/ rhythm, etc.", since everything is source code.
Weird samples are easy to find (and to make yourself). But really good basic samples (for bass, brass, etc.) are rather hard to find. I would be glad about a good(!) cheap dub sample cd.
Loops are widely used in dub. Riddim based dub DOES CONTAIN loops, well some kind of flexible, morphing loops. That one principle of riddim. I suppose midi loops are not breakbeat/drum-loops.
Originality in dub does not base on selfmade rhythms/ melodies/ etc. Dub songs often are remixes. Old dub often does "rob" other songs, changing/ destroying/ anythingelse them, and (hopefully) brings them into another level.
|Posted on Tuesday, June 12, 2001 - 06:41 am: |
Get Midi examples at the Dubroom: http://www.dubroom.com/
|Posted on Thursday, June 14, 2001 - 10:33 am: |
>> Loops are widely used in dub
I don´t agree, but they should´nt be baned :-)
Socaled construction-kits might be used for
better variation, but it is all a pain to
work with, and it reminds Me of a puzzle vs.
a real painting-procces.
At the other hand We dont all have a multi-
tracker, or a T-Dat :-), and musicians in
our studio frequently, loop´s might be a
starting point, or special moods might be
in reach known from top-pro Hip Hop.
one thing that came to My mind is these
socaled Rex-files from steinberg, basic
it is "loops" that You import but You
can change tempo in a split-seccond.
Most important: in rex-format You can
pull out every single drum and put it on
an solo-track, and this is where it
starts making sense to Me !!!!!!
|Posted on Thursday, June 14, 2001 - 05:53 pm: |
Loops in Dub:
I mean it in that sense:
=> Riddim = a special kind of loops
(mixed into each other)
=> Roots Reggae = (often) constructed of loops
=> Dub = (originally, often) remix of reggae songs
=> Dub = (often) made of loops:
"Loops are widely used in dub"
In midi files you can pull out every single track (or more) with midi sequencers (and even some trackers) and further treatment (load them into other applications, for example). Since an instrument normally is played in a special track(s) you can pull out the instrument you like. (or you adapt the midi instruments/ tracks in the midi file to do it).
|Posted on Thursday, June 14, 2001 - 07:01 pm: |
As most of us use native proccesing Midi
loops leaves back the midi to audio thing.
Rex-files are high Quality wave material
down to the bone, every single hit being
a separate wave, therefor native proccesing
or ASIO assign for your external Space-echo
etc. etc. is only one click away.
I miss to know if rex-files can be made and
modified be recykle or something else also I
dont know if you can quantisize, or use DNA
groove-templates, but in principle I think
they seem´s far superior to anything else, if
one should work with pre-made things at all :-)
A midi-drummer might even be able to generate
a rex-file, simply by hitting hes pads, but
then there is this damm hi-hat left ;-))))
|Posted on Friday, June 15, 2001 - 03:16 pm: |
And still the serious Dubs made today are mixied on a traditional desk and not within a computer.
You absolutely will hear the difference between a "handmixed dub" and a compudub. I never heard a compu dub on the top soundsystems and thats where you here serious Dubwise.
|Posted on Friday, June 15, 2001 - 05:28 pm: |
YES! and taking that one step further-groove and flow is in the spaces between the hits-when you use loops (and I do when I start shaping things, but then I try to replace them with players) you are locked into a pattern where all those spaces/patterns repeat every 2, 4, 8 whatever bars..In my way of thinking, groove is the push-pull between bass, perc, and drums and chop guitar/organ. When you play live..even though you are locked in, there is always that space, that minute timimg difference between 2,3,or however many people..that is what makes music flow and groove and pulse.
We now have a generation of people who don't know this however, because they were brought up to make grooves on machines that can quantize the beauty of human interaction (read: timing "inaccuracy" if you are a technical person) so that it's "perfect". Sometimes when i work with people who were raised on computers and don't play an instrument (ok i know, a computer is an instrument too..but you know what i am saying) they don't seem to grasp the concept of the ebb and flow of a real human "imperfect" groove..they let a loop play and play and do build ups and breakdowns and have dynamic changes..but it's missing the heart of the matter. When i play my bass, i do the dynamic thing too..but I am aware of the interaction of the other people I play with..are they pushing, are they back in the pocket..what's going on?? I can even tell most times where people are from. Try that with your PC! I live in Chicago, musicians play a certain way here..on top of the beat..a little push. people from other parts of the country play in different styles..people from JA have a VERY different approach..It's all part of the beauty and power of playing music with other humans.
I think that maybe people who play and create music solely on computers should learn an instrument..pick up a hand drum, a shaker..whatever- and get a feel for what i am talking about.
sorry for the long post, but it's a serious point with me,
|Posted on Friday, June 15, 2001 - 07:41 pm: |
I would like to add my comments to this thread, especially since I am the one that will provide Loopwise.com with the loops everyone here is now talking about.
First I would likle to stress that this loop packet will be used also as a tutorial for making Dub with computers and thing. The loops will consist of a combination of quantized tracks and loosely tracks. There will also be a set of loops played by Sure Dread and tommorow we will record some handplayed conga.
I tend to disagree with some of you :-)and I know also the majority of you so I'm confident you'll see the following in a context of respect because that is what I have for all of you.
DC: What is the difference between using automated desk like you have and computers like I do? We both have the possibility to make our dubs in many takes. I think that when some stuff is programmed there is nothing wrong with that. I do not know which sound systems you refer to, but I know that my music is being played on nuff sound systems throughout the world. And about playing: I play good bass guitar, reasonable drums, conga, I sing, so I know what you are saying. But I also happen to like quantized beats. I agree that a human factor should definitly be there, but it is there, because no computer can make dubwise, just the same with mixing tables. It is the operator that makes the dub and if you know your computer well I think it is possible to creat Dubs that will be played in a sound-system.
I hope that with this packet that will be sold by Loopwise.com I can help some people out who are starting out some stuff. I also can help people in need for beats and rhythms, they can put DNA quantization on it, or basically get some ideas.
Anyway, all loops should be finished in two weeks time.
|Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2001 - 09:41 am: |
Greets MD, 1st have to note, yes i have midi mute automation feature on my desk but it's not connected, i don't use it. All is done by the hands.No automation, if i would start using that, the tunes aren't gonna be with the "feel"
And 2nd i don't want to offend you, you know me :-) but i never heard your tunes on sounds i'm refering to like Iration Steppas, Disciples, InI Oneness, King Shiloh, Jah Shaka, Aba Shanti I etc.
I absolutely respect your tunes. But i consider you as best Dub producer based on computers. But i also would be very curious on what you do when working a desk and dub it like that. I think your tunes will become more alive.
But still to me it's the interaction that is there when doing a hand mix that is the key to the "feel" the Dubs come out itself not preprogrammed. Every mix is different.
|Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2001 - 03:11 pm: |
Greetings and nuff respect to each in the Forum,
You got me there DC, I thought you used the automation. But you do not record moves on the mixing table and then rewind and record other knob moves? The result be like you have ten or twenty hands? BTW: the only midi I use for the creation of my music is when I record the playing, like the skanks and thing. The Dub is created using the philosophy that my computer is a simulator of the studio's.
I think that many computer dubs sound so static not so much because quantized midi and loops are used, because I hear many many loops in the Sound Systems. Take for example The Rootsman. I think the difference lies in the way the computer is used. You can make a midifile, add some controller data and voila, there is the compudub. I have made two or three tracks that way (labeled as Midi edition) but it is not satisfying at all. So I do not work that way. Some tracks I hear consisting of maybe four or five different effects, copied and pasted. That is kind of boring.
My music is being played on sound systems, but I should really do more work on off-line promotion which is a thing I am currently exploring. I do think that some of my music could be played on sound systems you mention, but maybe they've not heard it. Maybe it is also because I do not use that much synthesizer sounds.
I have a mixing desk which I use, and also I sometimes use stuff I mixed by hand. I've also released a couple of experiments but they're not more than that, like a challenge: create a very very boring midifile and try to spice it up using dub technique. Plus some work I do with Jah Roots.
I personally would not like all my tracks to be mixed in one take, it would leave out so much possibilities as I only have two hands. So my music will always contain elements created in the computer. But it is not like click-and-go what I do.
|Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2001 - 03:29 pm: |
Hey MD, it's even not possible to record knob moves. The only feature on my desk is mute automation wich is not very handy.
I know your way of working. But really the mixing desk is where the art lies in DUB. You say you'll be limited when only using the desk to mix. But i have to disagree. All dubs heard on top sounds are mixed on a desk, yes true, pieces are looped. Compu is only used as a cheap alternative for multitrackers but if man could choose, they'll choose a 24track hardware machine and throw out the computer. See i think the only convienence of a computer is the plugin compressors and things and the fact that you can see and edit the recorded waveform. But still all channels routed seperatly to the heart in the studio and that is... the mixingdesk.
Like Russ D even don't have a compu in his studio.
PS. you should give some DAT with your tunes to known sounds
|Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2001 - 01:25 pm: |
DC and MD,
If you start with loops, you are still going to end up with loops, no matter how they are processed. Maybe the roots dub sounds so good because the Black Ark and Randy's riddims that were the raw materials were not loops. (not to mention played by some of the most brilliant players who ever picked up an instrument) So, as i was trying to say DC, take the concept of using your two hands on a board without automation further, and have real musicians replace the loops. This is what i try to do..sketch it out with loops, or make a loop (even better) with samples as the outline, then have a real drummer play it for the recording.
otoh, you could say it's just one way of working..and like someone once said..who cares what kind of paint brush Picasso used? (or for that matter what kind of space echo LSP uses.) The massive don't care. But it just may be up to the people who create the music to ensure that people aren't dancing to a quantizied machine beat..because the human heart doesn't beat...exactly...the...same...bpm...every ...second...
respect to you all,
|Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2001 - 02:29 pm: |
Yes JP, that's also what i try to do. But i just don't have the space to put up a drum kit as well as my neighbours probably won't like it. If i had the space for it, i absolutely would record real drums.and of course the fact that a 24 track recorder is for most people not affordable. But most instruments on my latest tunes are actually played by musicians, real horns, percussion, melodica etc.
|Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 11:31 am: |
Respect to all, disgreement is just words, so...
I see this same kind of idea battle on many music sites: loops/sequencing/any automation vs live; computers vs tape, etc. Let me speak my mind as someone who grew up with tape and now uses a computer to produce.
First of all every kind of music and every kind of production technique has its place. I've known 4 track wizzards who just could not understand how to use a computer and the other way around as well. Neither the best studio with the most tracks and channels nor the highest end computer will produce a good sound in the hands of a fool. We all know many examples both ways.
Personally I prefer to use a rig that simulates the feel of a traditional mixing desk/tape sytem in the computer. It is entirely possible to have a computer based setup where the mixing is done by hand with faders and the effects tweaked with knobs. I personally dont have the money yet to do all that but I'm partway there.
As for using loops or MIDI, I dont see a whole lot of difference between a good production using those tools and a good tape production using pre-existing tracks and a razorblade to build a new track. I've done both and still have scars on my fingers to prove it. If you go through any known producers works you will hear that tracks get re-used and edited in and out of new works.
Of course when you produce with a group of musicians in the studio there can be more spontenaity and communication during the recording process and sometimes you get "blessed mistakes" which lead you to a new direction. I admit that I cant do that with loops and MIDI. But with a computer based studio I can record live performaces and get the same thing. My point is there is no one right way as spoken to every producer from on high. Do what works for you and follow the spirit.
|Posted on Saturday, July 08, 2006 - 06:07 am: |
Kansst du mir ein Speisekarte zeigen ?asj