wow; i was getting all kinds of noise from all kinds of places. yes, the sound font is noisy. i'm almost wondering if it's meant to emulate a mellotron, because it sounds like tape noise. but it's not at all the real core of the problem
i was actually getting a steady, but inaudible, hum coming from the cd player. muting everything except the midi out cleared up a ton of it - and, again, i do explicitly recall always doing that, back in the day. not something i've had to do recently. you don't really notice it in general, but it was badly exaggerating the hiss under certain high notes...
the eq on the card was weird, too; just turning it down a little cut a bit of the edge off.
so, i'm rerendering yet again. all of it. this is going to be the last render, though - it's silly to be neurotic about the midi mix, when it's the vst mix that is the final version.
what i really need to do is just get the 8 renders into cubase, and play with the eq from there, rather than try and remember what i did in cool edit 14 years ago....
i don't remember when i deleted the old render. i think it was like '08, and by accident. don't do that...
Monday, September 29, 2014
caulking gun
hi.
i got a third coat in today, then ran out of caulk. it *looks* like it could use another coat, but, putting my hand up against it, i no longer feel a draft. so i'm content to leave it like that, but the truth is that i don't really know if it's enough. i'll check again tonight when the temperature comes down a bit, but it really seems tight. clearly, the gap was pretty deep to need three coats and still look like it needs more. but i think you can take your caulking gun back when you want.
j
i got a third coat in today, then ran out of caulk. it *looks* like it could use another coat, but, putting my hand up against it, i no longer feel a draft. so i'm content to leave it like that, but the truth is that i don't really know if it's enough. i'll check again tonight when the temperature comes down a bit, but it really seems tight. clearly, the gap was pretty deep to need three coats and still look like it needs more. but i think you can take your caulking gun back when you want.
j
i was on track to beat august most of september, but it's dipped the last few days and it's now very unlikely that i'm going to get there. it'll be off by about 100 hits.
i therefore don't care about the curve any more....
it's actually probably for the best. i think i was wasting too much time trolling to beat the curve, with little concrete return. i simply wasn't generating much of an audience out of it. just empty metrics.
i'm not going to stop trolling altogether, but the recent trolls i've been posting on viral videos are going to stop. the audience is too broad for the music i'm making, so it's just a waste of time.
in a broader scheme, i guess i have a bit of an internet addiction, and that's how it's been working itself out. it's worked itself out in a lot of ways for a long time - usenet, mailing lists, forums, facebook, now youtube....i jump...i should really stop just for that reason. i get lost in it and it eats away time i should be spending doing something else. i pried myself away from facebook about a year ago by deleting almost everybody, and a few months later i'm basically glued to youtube wasting my time the same way...
so, yes: the internet addiction has been restricting my progress in completing these pieces. i'm aware of it. i have been the whole time, but i was rationalizing it with the curve. i'm increasing views! it's productive! but the curve is gone. i've gained some perspective on it. i'm going to show more restraint..
i think the key for now is just avoiding the "youtube trends" page altogether and retreating back to the habits i had a few months ago, which weren't destructive.
so, i'm going to have to expect a bit of a dip for october. but the reality is that getting less hits from better traffic sources is better than getting more hits from weaker traffic sources.
the other thing is i've started smoking again. some people connect smoking to coffee. i connect it to internet debates. post a reply, go for a smoke, check for replies, repeat. i need to stop that, too.
so, i'm rebooting yet again - no youtube trolling, no smoking, more focus on the tunes. hopefully this one sticks....
there's a lot of addiction in my family, but i really don't have any problems with alcohol or drugs - although i should clarify that i haven't done any serious drugs for the precise reason that there's addiction in my family. i've turned down every opportunity i've had to try cocaine because i *know* it's going to get me. the idea of staying up for days at a time is something i'd get very attached to, so attached i'd be dead within a year. i'll just drink two pots of coffee a day instead, thanks.
the only thing that's ever really gotten me hard is the internet. i'm not in denial when i say i don't have much of a problem quitting smoking (i do it all the time...for weeks...but then go back to it...), but more of a problem in *wanting* to quit smoking.
with the internet, it's really more the classic problem of wanting to spend less time ranting and having difficulty controlling myself with it.
i therefore don't care about the curve any more....
it's actually probably for the best. i think i was wasting too much time trolling to beat the curve, with little concrete return. i simply wasn't generating much of an audience out of it. just empty metrics.
i'm not going to stop trolling altogether, but the recent trolls i've been posting on viral videos are going to stop. the audience is too broad for the music i'm making, so it's just a waste of time.
in a broader scheme, i guess i have a bit of an internet addiction, and that's how it's been working itself out. it's worked itself out in a lot of ways for a long time - usenet, mailing lists, forums, facebook, now youtube....i jump...i should really stop just for that reason. i get lost in it and it eats away time i should be spending doing something else. i pried myself away from facebook about a year ago by deleting almost everybody, and a few months later i'm basically glued to youtube wasting my time the same way...
so, yes: the internet addiction has been restricting my progress in completing these pieces. i'm aware of it. i have been the whole time, but i was rationalizing it with the curve. i'm increasing views! it's productive! but the curve is gone. i've gained some perspective on it. i'm going to show more restraint..
i think the key for now is just avoiding the "youtube trends" page altogether and retreating back to the habits i had a few months ago, which weren't destructive.
so, i'm going to have to expect a bit of a dip for october. but the reality is that getting less hits from better traffic sources is better than getting more hits from weaker traffic sources.
the other thing is i've started smoking again. some people connect smoking to coffee. i connect it to internet debates. post a reply, go for a smoke, check for replies, repeat. i need to stop that, too.
so, i'm rebooting yet again - no youtube trolling, no smoking, more focus on the tunes. hopefully this one sticks....
there's a lot of addiction in my family, but i really don't have any problems with alcohol or drugs - although i should clarify that i haven't done any serious drugs for the precise reason that there's addiction in my family. i've turned down every opportunity i've had to try cocaine because i *know* it's going to get me. the idea of staying up for days at a time is something i'd get very attached to, so attached i'd be dead within a year. i'll just drink two pots of coffee a day instead, thanks.
the only thing that's ever really gotten me hard is the internet. i'm not in denial when i say i don't have much of a problem quitting smoking (i do it all the time...for weeks...but then go back to it...), but more of a problem in *wanting* to quit smoking.
with the internet, it's really more the classic problem of wanting to spend less time ranting and having difficulty controlling myself with it.
Sunday, September 28, 2014
ok, i think i got it...
i had to remap the default midi mapper out to the soundblaster because the m-audio card just sounded weird - it's accenting different notes and stuff. most of what i've been dumping has been through the soundblaster's wavetable directly, so this wasn't necessary before. i do remember that i had the file playing through the windows out. so i've now got the raw components as i remember hearing them back in '01, it's just a process of cutting them up and mixing them a bit.
i think i may have actually had this through the soundblaster's pre-amp, as well. i'm not sure where to find that software, or if it's even compatible with xp. i would have been running 16-bit 98 or me up until about 2004, when i finally upgraded to install matlab. i'm still running xp on this box...
i wouldn't remember the patch, anyways.
so, i don't think i can get this as close as the others. i think i've got it as close as it's going to get for the morning...
i'd actually kind of like to get that "environmental audio" reinstalled. i think i ended up uninstalling it because it was eating too many resources and pissing me off, but it's not going to be a problem on this machine. i've lost the disc, and this is so old and who knows if it's compatible with the image...
i have lots of other pre-amps. but these ones were actually very heavy, and very clear. in general i'd rather do processing on a clean signal on the way in, and if i really want to use that kind of dsp i have lots of options in the mixer, but it's still kind of silly to not have the option, when it's sitting there.
there was a soundfont app in there, too, which i think i only used once.
next reinstall, i'll experiment with it. somebody remind me...
in the end, with this, *you* don't know what it sounded like 14 years ago, and i need to remember that. i want to get it as close as i can, but it's not like anybody's going to call me on it, either.
i had to remap the default midi mapper out to the soundblaster because the m-audio card just sounded weird - it's accenting different notes and stuff. most of what i've been dumping has been through the soundblaster's wavetable directly, so this wasn't necessary before. i do remember that i had the file playing through the windows out. so i've now got the raw components as i remember hearing them back in '01, it's just a process of cutting them up and mixing them a bit.
i think i may have actually had this through the soundblaster's pre-amp, as well. i'm not sure where to find that software, or if it's even compatible with xp. i would have been running 16-bit 98 or me up until about 2004, when i finally upgraded to install matlab. i'm still running xp on this box...
i wouldn't remember the patch, anyways.
so, i don't think i can get this as close as the others. i think i've got it as close as it's going to get for the morning...
i'd actually kind of like to get that "environmental audio" reinstalled. i think i ended up uninstalling it because it was eating too many resources and pissing me off, but it's not going to be a problem on this machine. i've lost the disc, and this is so old and who knows if it's compatible with the image...
i have lots of other pre-amps. but these ones were actually very heavy, and very clear. in general i'd rather do processing on a clean signal on the way in, and if i really want to use that kind of dsp i have lots of options in the mixer, but it's still kind of silly to not have the option, when it's sitting there.
there was a soundfont app in there, too, which i think i only used once.
next reinstall, i'll experiment with it. somebody remind me...
in the end, with this, *you* don't know what it sounded like 14 years ago, and i need to remember that. i want to get it as close as i can, but it's not like anybody's going to call me on it, either.
i've been aware for a while that people seem to be subscribing to the wrong feed. putting a like up on this page or subscribing to me on youtube indicates you're interested in the music - and i've certainly had a few people interested in the music, but not nearly that many, from what i can tell. my channel is an artist channel. if you want to follow my comments, you should be following me on google+, because that's where they get sent from.
so, what i think is happening is that people are liking my comments and subscribing to my artist feed, then interacting with the "wrong" content.
the reason it can be a tad offsetting for me is that it builds up false expectations. i'd like to think that uploading a video with 200 subscribers might mean at least 50 will watch it. but that number seems to be more like 10. i'm getting far more hits from random surfing...
so, i said i don't "get it". i do "get it". i perhaps should have said "i don't see the use of this subscribers thing, but...".
from my perspective, i'd probably argue they should consolidate the feed so that "subscribing" to deathtokoalas is a one-click operation that sends both comments and uploads to the feed. the user should then have the option to subscribe to comments, uploads or both - and i should get the metrics, so i can measure how much interest is tied into what.
as it is right now, i don't really have a clear understanding of how many of the 200 people are interested in reading my comments, are interested in listening to my music or are just subbing out of a sense of solidarity.
i do realize that it's weighted very heavily towards the comments, though, and that the result in most cases is just a dead feed, creating a dead sub.
it's especially confusing, considering that i comment on a lot of social issues. i'm not really that close to either, but i'm closer to deadmau5 than la dispute; most of my stuff is instrumental, so deadmau5 is a better comparison just on that basis alone. there's some possibility that a deadmau5 fan may get something in the feed and dig it. but, there's really little reason to think that the subs that come out of solidarity for a feminist statement or a geo-political analysis or an anarchist rant are going to translate into any kind of interest in the music - that solidarity could be coming from the world's biggest folk fan, or a hip-hop purist, or an older person that listens exclusively to "classical" music. having that all mixed up into a confused user base that doesn't seem to know what they want to subscribe to just creates a number that doesn't really have much meaning, in the context of what i'm creating and what i'm doing to promote it.
so, what i think is happening is that people are liking my comments and subscribing to my artist feed, then interacting with the "wrong" content.
the reason it can be a tad offsetting for me is that it builds up false expectations. i'd like to think that uploading a video with 200 subscribers might mean at least 50 will watch it. but that number seems to be more like 10. i'm getting far more hits from random surfing...
so, i said i don't "get it". i do "get it". i perhaps should have said "i don't see the use of this subscribers thing, but...".
from my perspective, i'd probably argue they should consolidate the feed so that "subscribing" to deathtokoalas is a one-click operation that sends both comments and uploads to the feed. the user should then have the option to subscribe to comments, uploads or both - and i should get the metrics, so i can measure how much interest is tied into what.
as it is right now, i don't really have a clear understanding of how many of the 200 people are interested in reading my comments, are interested in listening to my music or are just subbing out of a sense of solidarity.
i do realize that it's weighted very heavily towards the comments, though, and that the result in most cases is just a dead feed, creating a dead sub.
it's especially confusing, considering that i comment on a lot of social issues. i'm not really that close to either, but i'm closer to deadmau5 than la dispute; most of my stuff is instrumental, so deadmau5 is a better comparison just on that basis alone. there's some possibility that a deadmau5 fan may get something in the feed and dig it. but, there's really little reason to think that the subs that come out of solidarity for a feminist statement or a geo-political analysis or an anarchist rant are going to translate into any kind of interest in the music - that solidarity could be coming from the world's biggest folk fan, or a hip-hop purist, or an older person that listens exclusively to "classical" music. having that all mixed up into a confused user base that doesn't seem to know what they want to subscribe to just creates a number that doesn't really have much meaning, in the context of what i'm creating and what i'm doing to promote it.
Saturday, September 27, 2014
i spent most of the day yesterday rendering through different cards. i have a rough memory of rendering the file twice through separate outs and then pasting it together near the end. i've been trying to jog my memory in reconstructing that with mild success...
as this track is very long (14 minutes), i'm going to have to be careful in restricting what i upload until the listing is final. the single may end up being non-comprehensive due to time restraints. i'm currently thinking of the following.
1) raw midi choir
2) raw midi arranged
3) 1 + 2 merged
4) 3 sped up
5) vst choir
6) vst arranged
7) vst strings
8) 4 + 5 + 6
9) 8 sped up
currently, (8) is the most likely candidate for final version.
as this track is very long (14 minutes), i'm going to have to be careful in restricting what i upload until the listing is final. the single may end up being non-comprehensive due to time restraints. i'm currently thinking of the following.
1) raw midi choir
2) raw midi arranged
3) 1 + 2 merged
4) 3 sped up
5) vst choir
6) vst arranged
7) vst strings
8) 4 + 5 + 6
9) 8 sped up
currently, (8) is the most likely candidate for final version.
roach update - good news
hi.
i just want to give an update on the roach situation because it's the end of the summer and proper communication on the subject is a lease obligation on my behalf.
i guess it would have been the end of may or the beginning of june that i blocked the holes up and did a significant amount of spraying around areas that i thought they might be considering nesting. as mentioned, i didn't ever get the impression the nest was in the apartment, but that they were coming through holes in the wall from somewhere else. the concern was to stop them from nesting. i have not seen an adult roach in the apartment since the beginning of june, so this has been mostly successful.
i think what i did eliminated everything except any possible egg populations, which i couldn't get at (there may have been some deep under the sink) and which the spray would not be effective against. so, the concern was that they would repopulate as they hatch,
however, that doesn't seem to have happened. i've seen a handful of baby roaches in odd places that probably were hatched in the apartment, but they've mostly been found dead.
i also noticed a spike in the centipede population after i sprayed, but this is probably a function of them coming out looking for food. when you see a lot of centipedes, it means you probably have roaches near by; certainly, there is a source of insects for them to eat. that also indicates that the roach population was dwindling or gone. note that the centipedes will also eat the egg sacs. based on what i can observe, it seems like they may have gotten almost all of them.
the next thing i noticed was that the spiders started disappearing. i'd rather have a few spiders near the windows than flies floating around, so i prefer not to kill them, but the centipedes must have been eating the spiders. now i've got more flies than i'd like, but hopefully the spiders come back...
the centipedes then mostly disappeared altogether, indicating the food source had been exhausted.
it's still too early to declare them gone. i think they must be around somewhere, not too far from here, but they don't seem to be present in the apartment right now.
we'll find out in the next few weeks if they have another entry point, as the temperature begins to fall and they seek refuge indoors for the winter.
j
i just want to give an update on the roach situation because it's the end of the summer and proper communication on the subject is a lease obligation on my behalf.
i guess it would have been the end of may or the beginning of june that i blocked the holes up and did a significant amount of spraying around areas that i thought they might be considering nesting. as mentioned, i didn't ever get the impression the nest was in the apartment, but that they were coming through holes in the wall from somewhere else. the concern was to stop them from nesting. i have not seen an adult roach in the apartment since the beginning of june, so this has been mostly successful.
i think what i did eliminated everything except any possible egg populations, which i couldn't get at (there may have been some deep under the sink) and which the spray would not be effective against. so, the concern was that they would repopulate as they hatch,
however, that doesn't seem to have happened. i've seen a handful of baby roaches in odd places that probably were hatched in the apartment, but they've mostly been found dead.
i also noticed a spike in the centipede population after i sprayed, but this is probably a function of them coming out looking for food. when you see a lot of centipedes, it means you probably have roaches near by; certainly, there is a source of insects for them to eat. that also indicates that the roach population was dwindling or gone. note that the centipedes will also eat the egg sacs. based on what i can observe, it seems like they may have gotten almost all of them.
the next thing i noticed was that the spiders started disappearing. i'd rather have a few spiders near the windows than flies floating around, so i prefer not to kill them, but the centipedes must have been eating the spiders. now i've got more flies than i'd like, but hopefully the spiders come back...
the centipedes then mostly disappeared altogether, indicating the food source had been exhausted.
it's still too early to declare them gone. i think they must be around somewhere, not too far from here, but they don't seem to be present in the apartment right now.
we'll find out in the next few weeks if they have another entry point, as the temperature begins to fall and they seek refuge indoors for the winter.
j
got an interesting question today.
"would you turn on ads if one of your videos went viral?"
i would, but i'd have to be sure of it and it would be temporary.
am i being a fool? am i getting ripped off? given that i have a little less than 15,000 views, if i had ads on i'd have generated around $15 since december, 2013 - and i'd have to give half to the government. for that amount, it's not worth alienating possible listeners. as i've stated before: the video *is* an ad. the product is at bandcamp. youtube is an advertising portal to try and generate bandcamp traffic. it's worked about as well as i could hope it might, but hasn't generated any actual income. you have to be realistic in this market - an independent, abstract artist that manages to sell even one album in this climate of entitlement to free downloads is extremely lucky. that's reality. there's some talent involved in herding the horses, but it's just bullshit luck underlying any decision to or not to drink.
so, i slap an ad for some movie or something on the video that is itself an ad, and i'm just redirecting traffic away from bandcamp. that's a far worse proposal than the $7.50 i might have in my pocket right now could justify offsetting for.
if i ever see anything start to pick up at over a few hundred hits a day then the whole calculus changes and i have to be rational about accepting revenue. but that's not realistic, given the nature of the music. there's really little reason to think i'm ever going to be in a position where generating ad revenue from youtube becomes more attractive to me than directing traffic to bandcamp and consequently little reason to think there'll ever be ads on anything.
but, would i, if it made sense? sure. there's no principle underlying the decision other than rejecting putting somebody else's ad on my ad.
and, i mean, i used a movie as an example. even worse would be google using it's algorithms to place another music video in front of mine that is specifically tailored to the individual's tastes. that is just about the *worst* thing i could possibly do.
it's like, "great, i've got your attention. now, listen to this other person's music instead.". derp?
i really only need to sell a handful of records to make up that $15 in "lost" revenue. it hasn't happened yet, but i think it's better to place my hopes in that than to think i'm ever going to generate anything worthwhile from ads.
"would you turn on ads if one of your videos went viral?"
i would, but i'd have to be sure of it and it would be temporary.
am i being a fool? am i getting ripped off? given that i have a little less than 15,000 views, if i had ads on i'd have generated around $15 since december, 2013 - and i'd have to give half to the government. for that amount, it's not worth alienating possible listeners. as i've stated before: the video *is* an ad. the product is at bandcamp. youtube is an advertising portal to try and generate bandcamp traffic. it's worked about as well as i could hope it might, but hasn't generated any actual income. you have to be realistic in this market - an independent, abstract artist that manages to sell even one album in this climate of entitlement to free downloads is extremely lucky. that's reality. there's some talent involved in herding the horses, but it's just bullshit luck underlying any decision to or not to drink.
so, i slap an ad for some movie or something on the video that is itself an ad, and i'm just redirecting traffic away from bandcamp. that's a far worse proposal than the $7.50 i might have in my pocket right now could justify offsetting for.
if i ever see anything start to pick up at over a few hundred hits a day then the whole calculus changes and i have to be rational about accepting revenue. but that's not realistic, given the nature of the music. there's really little reason to think i'm ever going to be in a position where generating ad revenue from youtube becomes more attractive to me than directing traffic to bandcamp and consequently little reason to think there'll ever be ads on anything.
but, would i, if it made sense? sure. there's no principle underlying the decision other than rejecting putting somebody else's ad on my ad.
and, i mean, i used a movie as an example. even worse would be google using it's algorithms to place another music video in front of mine that is specifically tailored to the individual's tastes. that is just about the *worst* thing i could possibly do.
it's like, "great, i've got your attention. now, listen to this other person's music instead.". derp?
i really only need to sell a handful of records to make up that $15 in "lost" revenue. it hasn't happened yet, but i think it's better to place my hopes in that than to think i'm ever going to generate anything worthwhile from ads.
Friday, September 26, 2014
the choir should be relatively quick to render and mix, but it actually existed in two formats, both written in 2001. one is entirely voice and the other splits the vocal parts into different instruments. both versions are going to end up uploaded in some way or other to the following places, but i'm not sure how, yet.
1) midi version to thru
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/thru
2) updated version to jjjjjjjjjjjjj. this will complete the record.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
3) multiple versions to the choir single, as with other singles for the period:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/unnamed-choral-piece
so, inri031-034 will be up in a day or two, and i'll jump to inri035 (which will take a bit longer) from there.
1) midi version to thru
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/thru
2) updated version to jjjjjjjjjjjjj. this will complete the record.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
3) multiple versions to the choir single, as with other singles for the period:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/unnamed-choral-piece
so, inri031-034 will be up in a day or two, and i'll jump to inri035 (which will take a bit longer) from there.
yeah, no. this is a rabit song. it's not that i can't get the bass out (i'm half done), it's more that i don't really want to anymore....
it was really orchestrated very strongly around the vocals. the reason i wanted to deconstruct it is that i consider the synth build to be one of my more surreal moments and wanted it to have it's own space on the second side of the double i'm working on, but separating all that noise out from the guide vocal is just going to leave a sloppy mess. i like sloppy messes and everything, but this isn't the best sloppy mess by itself - because it was written around the vocals. sometimes, you can't really separate a thing into parts. in this case, it would be separating an effect from a cause.
the record isn't really about sloppy messes, either, it's more about structured writing. as a contrast? it's not good enough, without the vocals to drag it along. and the vocals do drag it along, that's the best way to understand it - through a haze of mud and filth. like linus pulling his blankie through an unkempt garden....
further, there is a structural guitar part that i added in februray, 2001 and is not in any inri029 version but would need to be in a final instrumental mix. without the vocals, that guitar part becomes the structural focus, and it's simply too repetitive to become the main motif of the song.
so, that's done. the final version will for sure be on the rabit demo, and something or other will appear on the clarity single. there will also be a live, acoustic mix of it that i'll probably redo from scratch in the next few months.
clarity, however, will appear as an instrumental single and will be my focus after the choir, which is what i'm moving to for the rest of the day. clarity is a different story altogether. it's something i wrote the core of before rabit started jamming with the intent of it being the opening of "trinri" and that sean really had minimal influence into. i never really got the impression that sean was that impressed by the tune, but i consider it to be one of my more substantial pieces. it became rabit sort of by accident; it never really was, though, and it needs it's own space. the vocal version is not going to be incinerated - it will appear on the rabit demo - but it's going to be as an instrumental piece that i will be presenting it, moving forward.
so, yeah.
1) choir. (oct-nov, 2001). inri031.
(inri032 released - nov 11)
2) clarity (nov, 2001.). for inri035, jjjjjjjjjjjjjj^2.
move date: dec 1, 2001. inri033 complete.
3) the wave (dec-jan, 2001/2002). inri034.
4) #9 (dec-jan, 2001/2002). for inri035.
5) clarity (completed), me myself (completed), other rabit demos (jan-may, 2002). inri035-37.
6) trepanation (may-july, 2002). inri038.
7) untitled, atoms (july-aug, 2002). not yet clear.
life changed quite a bit in aug/sept, 2002. i think i'm going to focus on getting to that point. it's mostly unfinished demos over the fall of 2002, with the first real trivial group release in early 2003.
it was really orchestrated very strongly around the vocals. the reason i wanted to deconstruct it is that i consider the synth build to be one of my more surreal moments and wanted it to have it's own space on the second side of the double i'm working on, but separating all that noise out from the guide vocal is just going to leave a sloppy mess. i like sloppy messes and everything, but this isn't the best sloppy mess by itself - because it was written around the vocals. sometimes, you can't really separate a thing into parts. in this case, it would be separating an effect from a cause.
the record isn't really about sloppy messes, either, it's more about structured writing. as a contrast? it's not good enough, without the vocals to drag it along. and the vocals do drag it along, that's the best way to understand it - through a haze of mud and filth. like linus pulling his blankie through an unkempt garden....
further, there is a structural guitar part that i added in februray, 2001 and is not in any inri029 version but would need to be in a final instrumental mix. without the vocals, that guitar part becomes the structural focus, and it's simply too repetitive to become the main motif of the song.
so, that's done. the final version will for sure be on the rabit demo, and something or other will appear on the clarity single. there will also be a live, acoustic mix of it that i'll probably redo from scratch in the next few months.
clarity, however, will appear as an instrumental single and will be my focus after the choir, which is what i'm moving to for the rest of the day. clarity is a different story altogether. it's something i wrote the core of before rabit started jamming with the intent of it being the opening of "trinri" and that sean really had minimal influence into. i never really got the impression that sean was that impressed by the tune, but i consider it to be one of my more substantial pieces. it became rabit sort of by accident; it never really was, though, and it needs it's own space. the vocal version is not going to be incinerated - it will appear on the rabit demo - but it's going to be as an instrumental piece that i will be presenting it, moving forward.
so, yeah.
1) choir. (oct-nov, 2001). inri031.
(inri032 released - nov 11)
2) clarity (nov, 2001.). for inri035, jjjjjjjjjjjjjj^2.
move date: dec 1, 2001. inri033 complete.
3) the wave (dec-jan, 2001/2002). inri034.
4) #9 (dec-jan, 2001/2002). for inri035.
5) clarity (completed), me myself (completed), other rabit demos (jan-may, 2002). inri035-37.
6) trepanation (may-july, 2002). inri038.
7) untitled, atoms (july-aug, 2002). not yet clear.
life changed quite a bit in aug/sept, 2002. i think i'm going to focus on getting to that point. it's mostly unfinished demos over the fall of 2002, with the first real trivial group release in early 2003.
i've figured out the way i'd like to suggest (forcefully.) my cult organizes itself.
the basic mystery of the cult needs to be my musical releases. only the listener doth familiar with the music of deathtokoalas shalt truly understand the words of deathtokoalas. so, the way the cult needs to work is to begin in my discography and work it's way forward. the amount of time required to jump to the next level in the cult (i.e. buy the next record in sequence) will vary, but will roughly be about once per week. suggested donations are published on the level instruction pages. the maximum level in the cult is reached when all of the music is purchased.
this is the only way to truly discover my greatness.
there should also be spontaneously organized discussion groups in a central, easily accessible location so that people can get together and discuss how the level they're going through is changing their lives and whether they're ready to move to the next.
i, deathtokoalas, am on the same journey as all of you in my path to discovering myself. i'm just a few steps ahead of you. the music is the truth, the way and the light! all who wish to be righteous must understand it!
the basic mystery of the cult needs to be my musical releases. only the listener doth familiar with the music of deathtokoalas shalt truly understand the words of deathtokoalas. so, the way the cult needs to work is to begin in my discography and work it's way forward. the amount of time required to jump to the next level in the cult (i.e. buy the next record in sequence) will vary, but will roughly be about once per week. suggested donations are published on the level instruction pages. the maximum level in the cult is reached when all of the music is purchased.
this is the only way to truly discover my greatness.
there should also be spontaneously organized discussion groups in a central, easily accessible location so that people can get together and discuss how the level they're going through is changing their lives and whether they're ready to move to the next.
i, deathtokoalas, am on the same journey as all of you in my path to discovering myself. i'm just a few steps ahead of you. the music is the truth, the way and the light! all who wish to be righteous must understand it!
Thursday, September 25, 2014
200 subscribers
deathtokoalas
i don't really get this subscribers thing, but the number seems to be increasing steadily.
i don't really get this subscribers thing, but the number seems to be increasing steadily.
Faust Skelter Noize
You post really musically informative comments on videos. Lol. I was listening to la dispute and deadMau5's new record. You had the top comment on both vids.
deathtokoalas
i've been aware for a while that people seem to be subscribing to the wrong feed. putting a like up on this page or subscribing to me on youtube indicates you're interested in the music - and i've certainly had a few people interested in the music, but not nearly that many, from what i can tell. my channel is an artist channel. if you want to follow my comments, you should be following me on google+, because that's where they get sent from.
so, what i think is happening is that people are liking my comments and subscribing to my artist feed, then interacting with the "wrong" content.
the reason it can be a tad offsetting for me is that it builds up false expectations. i'd like to think that uploading a video with 200 subscribers might mean at least 50 will watch it. but that number seems to be more like 10. i'm getting far more hits from random surfing...
so, i said i don't "get it". i do "get it". i perhaps should have said "i don't see the use of this subscribers thing, but...".
from my perspective, i'd probably argue they should consolidate the feed so that "subscribing" to deathtokoalas is a one-click operation that sends both comments and uploads to the feed. the user should then have the option to subscribe to comments, uploads or both - and i should get the metrics, so i can measure how much interest is tied into what.
as it is right now, i don't really have a clear understanding of how many of the 200 people are interested in reading my comments, are interested in listening to my music or are just subbing out of a sense of solidarity.
i do realize that it's weighted very heavily towards the comments, though, and that the result in most cases is just a dead feed, creating a dead sub.
it's especially confusing, considering that i comment on a lot of social issues. i'm not really that close to either, but i'm closer to deadmau5 than la dispute; most of my stuff is instrumental, so deadmau5 is a better comparison just on that basis alone. there's some possibility that a deadmau5 fan may get something in the feed and dig it. but, there's really little reason to think that the subs that come out of solidarity for a feminist statement or a geo-political analysis or an anarchist rant are going to translate into any kind of interest in the music - that solidarity could be coming from the world's biggest folk fan, or a hip-hop purist, or an older person that listens exclusively to "classical" music. having that all mixed up into a confused user base that doesn't seem to know what they want to subscribe to just creates a number that doesn't really have much meaning, in the context of what i'm creating and what i'm doing to promote it.
i have a new top track...
'boogeyman' and 'mom' have been bouncing back and forth for a few months, but it's actually balancing off two aspects connected to usability of the site rather than an implication of popularity. i've stated this before: youtube hits measure marketing reach, not audience size. i mean, i'm a hair under 200 subscribers and it seems like less than ten of them have bothered checking out the song i uploaded yesterday morning. i've been through this before and it's just a function of the site: i don't read my feed often, either. it's just daunting to get twenty minute videos thrown at you every few seconds. you want to sit down and watch youtube content; it's not a feed that you can really check on the bus, like facebook.
'mom' has in truth generated far more interest, but that's because it's placed second in sequence and has an outlandish name, causing people to jump over the first track to it. boogeyman is fourth in sequence, meaning it's rarely the first point of engagement.
but, this file has three tracks in it - 9,10,11 - so it's been up on the front of the page for the longest. that's why it has the most hits.
it'll cycle out on monday morning, and 'mom' will no doubt catch up within a few weeks. the first demo cycles out at the end of october. i'd have to guess that 'mom' will catch up before then and will be most likely to hit 2000 first, depending on any spikes or lack of spikes i get as i'm entering the promotion cycle for the second demo. i would expect that a newer track will be the first to hit 3000 and start climbing higher.
i'll have a better statistical breakdown of my first demo promotion period at the end of october.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gTfycvt1VU&list=PL3JSjmqp0cbslW9qCBKT_nEcwUt1DY0aN
'boogeyman' and 'mom' have been bouncing back and forth for a few months, but it's actually balancing off two aspects connected to usability of the site rather than an implication of popularity. i've stated this before: youtube hits measure marketing reach, not audience size. i mean, i'm a hair under 200 subscribers and it seems like less than ten of them have bothered checking out the song i uploaded yesterday morning. i've been through this before and it's just a function of the site: i don't read my feed often, either. it's just daunting to get twenty minute videos thrown at you every few seconds. you want to sit down and watch youtube content; it's not a feed that you can really check on the bus, like facebook.
'mom' has in truth generated far more interest, but that's because it's placed second in sequence and has an outlandish name, causing people to jump over the first track to it. boogeyman is fourth in sequence, meaning it's rarely the first point of engagement.
but, this file has three tracks in it - 9,10,11 - so it's been up on the front of the page for the longest. that's why it has the most hits.
it'll cycle out on monday morning, and 'mom' will no doubt catch up within a few weeks. the first demo cycles out at the end of october. i'd have to guess that 'mom' will catch up before then and will be most likely to hit 2000 first, depending on any spikes or lack of spikes i get as i'm entering the promotion cycle for the second demo. i would expect that a newer track will be the first to hit 3000 and start climbing higher.
i'll have a better statistical breakdown of my first demo promotion period at the end of october.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gTfycvt1VU&list=PL3JSjmqp0cbslW9qCBKT_nEcwUt1DY0aN
after inri029 is inri030, which i uploaded a few weeks ago.
that is indeed a different person singing, and that voice will define a handful of things in the next couple of inri-numbered releases. the 'rabit is wolf' material includes the vocals of this other person.
what i'm actually going to be focusing on for a bit tonight is trying to reconstruct the bass part in this track. it's actually a very simple tune - there's really only 6 parts in it. but, i initially recorded the vocals and bass to a single file. basement recording in 2001 didn't include fancy things like mixer interfaces and digital audio workstations; i had one 1/4 inch jack in, and at most two tracks to record in with, by splitting the single into left and right with a 4-track tape recorder. so, the initial file had the bass on the left and the vocals on the right (or vice versa). unfortunately, the only thing i have to work with at this point is a single stereo file with the bass and vocals together.
i can't really redo this. the synthesizer parts are mostly improvised, around a melodic theme. further, everything is just a little bit out of time - which i fully realized and exploited fully to make it sound unusual.
the vocals and bass are mostly separated, though, enough that i may be able to salvage most of the bass part with a wave editor and very carefully overdub what i can't. the key thing is making sure the timing is identical to what exists in the recording.
i'm not going to kill myself over this, though. if i run into problems, i'm likely to quickly abort. if not, expect a mix up in the next day or two.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/me-myself-and-the-time-i-thought-this-was-a-good-idea
that is indeed a different person singing, and that voice will define a handful of things in the next couple of inri-numbered releases. the 'rabit is wolf' material includes the vocals of this other person.
what i'm actually going to be focusing on for a bit tonight is trying to reconstruct the bass part in this track. it's actually a very simple tune - there's really only 6 parts in it. but, i initially recorded the vocals and bass to a single file. basement recording in 2001 didn't include fancy things like mixer interfaces and digital audio workstations; i had one 1/4 inch jack in, and at most two tracks to record in with, by splitting the single into left and right with a 4-track tape recorder. so, the initial file had the bass on the left and the vocals on the right (or vice versa). unfortunately, the only thing i have to work with at this point is a single stereo file with the bass and vocals together.
i can't really redo this. the synthesizer parts are mostly improvised, around a melodic theme. further, everything is just a little bit out of time - which i fully realized and exploited fully to make it sound unusual.
the vocals and bass are mostly separated, though, enough that i may be able to salvage most of the bass part with a wave editor and very carefully overdub what i can't. the key thing is making sure the timing is identical to what exists in the recording.
i'm not going to kill myself over this, though. if i run into problems, i'm likely to quickly abort. if not, expect a mix up in the next day or two.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/me-myself-and-the-time-i-thought-this-was-a-good-idea
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
updating inrijected (inri022) & inrimixed (inri023)
i've also converted two tracks on this record (3,4) from mono to stereo.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrijected
as well as tracks 1 and 2 here.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrimixed
that's all of them.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrijected
as well as tracks 1 and 2 here.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrimixed
that's all of them.
updating inrisampled (inri003)
today is a listening day and i heard something i didn't like.
these songs were created in mono, and i didn't see any reason to convert them to stereo; i actually thought the mono sound added a bit of a charm to it. they played through both channels in cool edit, on youtube and on bandcamp, but i just got the annoying left-ear thing through the downloaded flac, so i converted them to stereo for the upload.
it won't sound any different through the streaming. maybe there's a slight loss of character in moving from the original to the mono, but i think the ability to play it on modern equipment is more important.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrisampled
these songs were created in mono, and i didn't see any reason to convert them to stereo; i actually thought the mono sound added a bit of a charm to it. they played through both channels in cool edit, on youtube and on bandcamp, but i just got the annoying left-ear thing through the downloaded flac, so i converted them to stereo for the upload.
it won't sound any different through the streaming. maybe there's a slight loss of character in moving from the original to the mono, but i think the ability to play it on modern equipment is more important.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrisampled
to spin inside dull aberrations (final album mix)
written in the summer of 2001. remembered over july, 2014. completed august-september, 2014.
publishing to spin inside dull aberrations (inri048)
that completes inri029.
i want to see how much of the main track of inri030 that i can salvage for the j-squared part, but i believe the vocals are inseparable from the bass, permanently placing the track in rabit. i may have a trick or two.
the next project is that choir.
i don't expect a track to cost me as much time as this did for quit a ways, looking forward. the pace of uploads is going to increase quite a bit.
--
credits
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/to-spin-inside-dull-aberrations
i want to see how much of the main track of inri030 that i can salvage for the j-squared part, but i believe the vocals are inseparable from the bass, permanently placing the track in rabit. i may have a trick or two.
the next project is that choir.
i don't expect a track to cost me as much time as this did for quit a ways, looking forward. the pace of uploads is going to increase quite a bit.
--
this track represents somewhat of a refocus, but it never found itself to fruition in the way it was meant to.
over the summer of 2001, a friend of a friend decided he wanted to start a band and asked me to play bass. now, we didn't really have a lot in common besides both being musicians. i was spiralling out into obscure independent music, and he was into all the mainstream rock bands. 2001 was the point where grunge was losing it's last bit of mainstream potential, and giving way to nu metal and various watered down, corporatized offshoots of hardcore. so, i was sitting around listening to tortoise and writing jazz compositions and he was sitting around listening to limp bizkit and writing mtv/radio rock. how could this legitimately work?
there was a small amount of overlap, centred mostly around tool. it so happened to be that tool had just released a new record, we were both listening to it and neither of us really had anybody else to talk to about it. so, something formed out of that.
now, when you're an isolated twenty year old that's never been lucky enough to meet another musician you can start a band with, you take what you can get. it seemed implausible that it was going anywhere, but wasn't that the case for every other band that ever went anywhere when they first started off? i don't think either of us thought we were natural creative partners, but we had a set of common goals and if we could put aside our differences...
see, the thing is i knew that the only way anything was going to happen is if i sat down and recorded a bunch of stuff. but, i also knew that this is a guy that defines himself in terms of his oversized ego and that the whole purpose of it from his perspective was to give himself a way to explore it. that's not the worst trait to have if you want to start a band, either. my overwhelmingly shy introversion hasn't exactly got me filling stadiums, has it? nor is it ever going to, and i realized it even at that stage. so, a natural role would be for me to play the producer (along with the bass guitar) while he throws some stuff at me. if that meant i'd be doing 90% of the actual recording, that would be ok, but i realized i had to let him provide the actual song structures or he'd storm off and pout about it.
so, i waited for him to provide some material. and waited. eventually it became clear that he didn't actually have any serious songs. we did a few demos, but he could barely play what he was trying to demo and the tracks were not of a gigging quality level.
in the mean time, he'd recruited a guitarist. he kept saying he was talking to a drummer (no drummer ever appeared), and he also recruited another friend of a friend as a singer. so, we had what seemed like a full band, if you include the imaginary drummer. what i saw was an opportunity. if he wasn't going to write some songs, i guess i'd have to...
the other guitarist almost immediately dropped out, and the whole project really fell apart rather quickly when the guy that initiated the whole thing stopped showing up to practice. it was several weeks in a row that only the singer and i showed up. i had a few songs i had written, so we started working on those instead and that became rabit is wolf. predictably, there was much pouting.
that leaves this particular song in an isolated limbo. when it was reworked for rabit is wolf (jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/the-day-i-saw-you-cry ), it took on the epic and experimental nature i was exploring at the time and lost the crux of itself as a stadium rock song. i feel something valuable was lost in this process, if for no other reason that this is so dramatically different than anything else i was doing at the time.
thankfully, i still have the original drum files, and i remember how to play the guitar part, so it's simply a process of recreating it. the raw mix sounds exactly as the track did in 2001. the complete mix takes it to it's final conclusion.
written in the summer of 2001. remembered over july, 2014. completed august-september, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
over the summer of 2001, a friend of a friend decided he wanted to start a band and asked me to play bass. now, we didn't really have a lot in common besides both being musicians. i was spiralling out into obscure independent music, and he was into all the mainstream rock bands. 2001 was the point where grunge was losing it's last bit of mainstream potential, and giving way to nu metal and various watered down, corporatized offshoots of hardcore. so, i was sitting around listening to tortoise and writing jazz compositions and he was sitting around listening to limp bizkit and writing mtv/radio rock. how could this legitimately work?
there was a small amount of overlap, centred mostly around tool. it so happened to be that tool had just released a new record, we were both listening to it and neither of us really had anybody else to talk to about it. so, something formed out of that.
now, when you're an isolated twenty year old that's never been lucky enough to meet another musician you can start a band with, you take what you can get. it seemed implausible that it was going anywhere, but wasn't that the case for every other band that ever went anywhere when they first started off? i don't think either of us thought we were natural creative partners, but we had a set of common goals and if we could put aside our differences...
see, the thing is i knew that the only way anything was going to happen is if i sat down and recorded a bunch of stuff. but, i also knew that this is a guy that defines himself in terms of his oversized ego and that the whole purpose of it from his perspective was to give himself a way to explore it. that's not the worst trait to have if you want to start a band, either. my overwhelmingly shy introversion hasn't exactly got me filling stadiums, has it? nor is it ever going to, and i realized it even at that stage. so, a natural role would be for me to play the producer (along with the bass guitar) while he throws some stuff at me. if that meant i'd be doing 90% of the actual recording, that would be ok, but i realized i had to let him provide the actual song structures or he'd storm off and pout about it.
so, i waited for him to provide some material. and waited. eventually it became clear that he didn't actually have any serious songs. we did a few demos, but he could barely play what he was trying to demo and the tracks were not of a gigging quality level.
in the mean time, he'd recruited a guitarist. he kept saying he was talking to a drummer (no drummer ever appeared), and he also recruited another friend of a friend as a singer. so, we had what seemed like a full band, if you include the imaginary drummer. what i saw was an opportunity. if he wasn't going to write some songs, i guess i'd have to...
the other guitarist almost immediately dropped out, and the whole project really fell apart rather quickly when the guy that initiated the whole thing stopped showing up to practice. it was several weeks in a row that only the singer and i showed up. i had a few songs i had written, so we started working on those instead and that became rabit is wolf. predictably, there was much pouting.
that leaves this particular song in an isolated limbo. when it was reworked for rabit is wolf (jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/the-day-i-saw-you-cry ), it took on the epic and experimental nature i was exploring at the time and lost the crux of itself as a stadium rock song. i feel something valuable was lost in this process, if for no other reason that this is so dramatically different than anything else i was doing at the time.
thankfully, i still have the original drum files, and i remember how to play the guitar part, so it's simply a process of recreating it. the raw mix sounds exactly as the track did in 2001. the complete mix takes it to it's final conclusion.
written in the summer of 2001. remembered over july, 2014. completed august-september, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
credits
j - drum programming, orchestral sequencing,
guitars, effects, synths, electric bass guitar, digital wave editing,
sampling, loops, equalization, vocals (5), production
the rendered electronic orchestra includes tuba, saxophone, flute, clarinet, orchestra hit, piano, violin, viola, cello, contrabass and various full string sections.
sean - vocals (track 6)
jon - guitar (track 6)
released september 16, 2001
the rendered electronic orchestra includes tuba, saxophone, flute, clarinet, orchestra hit, piano, violin, viola, cello, contrabass and various full string sections.
sean - vocals (track 6)
jon - guitar (track 6)
released september 16, 2001
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/to-spin-inside-dull-aberrations
to spin inside dull aberrations (reprise)
the second half, split off, to make the first more attractive to certain people, but still allow for full listening pleasure.
created over a few days near the end of september, 2014.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/reprise-2
created over a few days near the end of september, 2014.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/reprise-2
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
uploading to spin inside dull aberrations (reprise) to the scratchpad
pretty rough, but this is the idea of the end of the track. i spent the morning "mastering" it to sound a little bassier. i need to add some noise, but it's not going to be very structured.
i also spent last night enjoying my track in the state it's meant to be enjoyed, and i have to say i'm very, very happy with how it came out...
http://googledrive.com/host/0B5JfVE9XTZikMS1zek9ER0xSU1E/scratchpad/
i also spent last night enjoying my track in the state it's meant to be enjoyed, and i have to say i'm very, very happy with how it came out...
http://googledrive.com/host/0B5JfVE9XTZikMS1zek9ER0xSU1E/scratchpad/
Monday, September 22, 2014
to spin inside dull aberrations (final single mix)
so, part 2 ended up being a bit more minimalist than i was initially thinking, but i think it's the better way to get the idea across. the busier piano part didn't really segue well, it just sounded kind of hokey. maybe it's 'cause i'm sick right now, but this really feels like the right way to end it.
the reprise is quite large and may take a few days, but it's actually very much rooted in a monotonous sort of minimalism so it's not going to be nearly as ridiculous to build up. i spent two months on this. if you take a flip through the page, you'll see it was actually quite a struggle: broken guitars, fighting with headphones, sequencing strings, etc. but it's done...
bandcamp offers high quality downloads (not yet for this track, after the reprise - i don't do single tracks, full album dls only) but compresses a little on playback. try to boost the bass just a tad to compensate.
written in the summer of 2001. remembered over july, 2014. completed august-september, 2014.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/to-spin-inside-dull-aberrations
the reprise is quite large and may take a few days, but it's actually very much rooted in a monotonous sort of minimalism so it's not going to be nearly as ridiculous to build up. i spent two months on this. if you take a flip through the page, you'll see it was actually quite a struggle: broken guitars, fighting with headphones, sequencing strings, etc. but it's done...
bandcamp offers high quality downloads (not yet for this track, after the reprise - i don't do single tracks, full album dls only) but compresses a little on playback. try to boost the bass just a tad to compensate.
written in the summer of 2001. remembered over july, 2014. completed august-september, 2014.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/to-spin-inside-dull-aberrations
ok, got it, think i can refocus...
also, the coughing has started. i'm going to need some cough syrup.
there's a song for that.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/01-jesus-gets-fucked-on-robitussin
also, the coughing has started. i'm going to need some cough syrup.
there's a song for that.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/01-jesus-gets-fucked-on-robitussin
Sunday, September 21, 2014
must have picked up a virus. it's weird though because it's only three symptoms: sore throat, sore muscles and tiredness. no coughing, fever, stuffinesss, anything like that. but it means i've been sleeping quite heavily since thursday. i wasn't sure at first that it was a virus, but i'm sure now...
so, it's going to get put back another day or two.
there's a yearly event in detroit tonight called the noise camp that i was going to check out, but the virus/rain/sunday combination is going to keep me in. the hope was that it would be done completely before i left; it's not even close. i may actually even crash (again) within minutes...
i'm at least more awake than i've been in a few days and think i can get some work done tonight....
so, it's going to get put back another day or two.
there's a yearly event in detroit tonight called the noise camp that i was going to check out, but the virus/rain/sunday combination is going to keep me in. the hope was that it would be done completely before i left; it's not even close. i may actually even crash (again) within minutes...
i'm at least more awake than i've been in a few days and think i can get some work done tonight....
Saturday, September 20, 2014
of course, now i'm having trouble with figuring out that segue point.
i don't want it to sound too similar to the time machine, but my brain is producing a similar sort of collapse and fade. i know what i want the third part to sound like, and the framework is constructed, i just need to fill it in. but how i'm going to get from a to c is currently eluding me...
i don't want to skip tracks, but i might have to. i'm going to give it a few more hours.
i don't want it to sound too similar to the time machine, but my brain is producing a similar sort of collapse and fade. i know what i want the third part to sound like, and the framework is constructed, i just need to fill it in. but how i'm going to get from a to c is currently eluding me...
i don't want to skip tracks, but i might have to. i'm going to give it a few more hours.
Friday, September 19, 2014
to spin inside dull aberrations (overdub mix)
i've included the raw mix to document what the track sounded like in 2001. so, i've included an overdub only mix as a counter to it to document what was added in 2014. paste the two on top of each other to get the cubase output of the track.
created over august and september, 2014 to augment track written late in the summer of 2001.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/overdub-mix
created over august and september, 2014 to augment track written late in the summer of 2001.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/overdub-mix
i'm actually going to skip the part altogether...
it's a neat riff, don't get me wrong, but it works in contrast to the cracked out white zombie riff - if it's played once. maybe twice. but over a four bar repeat, playing them off against each other ruins both.
i can't put it at the front or the middle as that would be anti-climatic. and it doesn't work at the end, either.
there's enough pizzicato bass in the world. the song doesn't need it.
that means i'm done the first part. amazingly.
well, let me sleep on it...
it's a neat riff, don't get me wrong, but it works in contrast to the cracked out white zombie riff - if it's played once. maybe twice. but over a four bar repeat, playing them off against each other ruins both.
i can't put it at the front or the middle as that would be anti-climatic. and it doesn't work at the end, either.
there's enough pizzicato bass in the world. the song doesn't need it.
that means i'm done the first part. amazingly.
well, let me sleep on it...
uploading to spin inside dull aberrations to the scratchpad
finally. give it some volume. final bass part should be quick to do...
http://googledrive.com/host/0B5JfVE9XTZikMS1zek9ER0xSU1E/scratchpad/
http://googledrive.com/host/0B5JfVE9XTZikMS1zek9ER0xSU1E/scratchpad/
Thursday, September 18, 2014
so, i lost two days due to shows. i was hoping i wouldn't lose all of yesterday, but those drinks at the andy stott show last night were really very unexpectedly strong. like, i think i got something like three-four shots in a six dollar drink - of which i only had two. it's the kind of drunk that usually sets in around 2:00 after you've been drinking mixed drinks since 8:00, and yet hit me immediately after one drink. i don't think the "bartenders" were licensed, they were just eyeballing it, and it resulted in the kind of 40% vodka drink that your already-drunk friend mixes you at midnight. i'll have to be aware of that in the future.
i really hope to be done the mix by the morning and am almost certainly going to start throwing myself into the walls and flapping around in the corner if i don't.
i really hope to be done the mix by the morning and am almost certainly going to start throwing myself into the walls and flapping around in the corner if i don't.
experiencing some manchester in detroit
"you're in the wrong washroom, sweetheart."
as incredibly complex and slightly patronizing as that statement is, it actually means i'm in a cool place. i've been over this a few times, but allow me to reiterate why i usually (not always.) use the dude's room.
1) the primary reason is that i can use the urinals and will choose to in most circumstances. i find something disrespectful about forcing women to listen to it fall in the toilet, cause it's just obvious. the reality is that public washrooms are gross. if you did a random survey of women, you'd learn that something like 98% of them would urinate while standing if they could, because it avoids the ickiness of squatting. it would be irrational of me to not take advantage of my biology in this sense, considering virtually any woman would do the same thing if given the opportunity.
2) i transitioned late. it's generally clear that i'm trans, but few people are going to confuse me for a cis. i completely grasp why the idea of me walking into the women's washroom would be a little unsettling. if i were cis, would i want the actual me waltzing in there? the truth is that i probably wouldn't. i know there's going to be a spectrum of reactions, but i feel obligated to be respectful of this concern and aware of how other people feel about it. the converse is that the worst that's going to happen from using the men's room is a funny stare or a concerned reaction. in the end, it's not really important enough of a concern to me to start pissing people off.
i mean, i support the whole bathroom rights thing. but, personally? i don't really care if the bathroom door has an M or an F on it and i'm willing to compromise pretty dramatically to keep the peace on the issue.
it's not absolute. if i'm wearing a dress, or some other particularly effeminate clothing, and i feel safe in doing so, then i'll probably use the women's washroom. it's pretty rare, though. i really default to standing when i pee....
i actually had a good time tonight at the detroit museum of contemporary art. the drinks were exceedingly strong, it got me a little drunker than i planned to be and i ended up dancing a little. i actually kind of needed that, it'd been a while. reviews in the comments...
got distracted there...
so, the opening dj was actually mildly interesting. he was playing with max or audiomulch or something in real-time, which, yes, tends to unfold somewhat predictably. but it's not clear to me why people will knock some software for this, while not bothering with others. any software system is going to colour the output in a roughly equal manner.
he had some syncing going on with the background films. as one example - bucephalus or not - he had some kids bouncing balls synced to some beats bouncing.
http://shop.overlap.org/album/chris-mcnamara-vague-cities
this is what i pulled myself out to see, and it was quite enjoyable. there's a lot of process in their approach to deep bass music, which tends be very dark ambient and integrate a lot of glitchy noise. you can't dance to this, but it's nice to get as a blast of sound. it was plenty loud, but i do kind of wish it was just a bit louder.
there's an improv inherent in the design, but they did something quite similar to this.
here's a full set:
so, reading up a little on the show, it became apparent that what was driving it was an attempt to pull a little manchester into detroit house. true or not, detroit gets a lot of credit as being an epicentre of electronic music that has sort of lost it's way. so, from detroit's perspective, the idea is to try and bring a little bit of that british artistic genius in (a british invasion, if you will) to kickstart a more interesting electronic music scene in detroit.
but, i can only assume that the opposite perspective is of a sort of a pilgrimage to mecca - detroit being where it all came from. these are a bunch of lanky brits that have never been near to the city, remember.
so, you have to think that andy stott was maybe a bit nervous about playing detroit, and that the overly minimalist start to his set had something to do with playing to the audience - who was visibly a little restless, apparently looking for a drop. whether by design or reaction, he seemed to become very british all of a sudden and morphed into some solid danceable idm - we're talking amen breaks, autechre melodies and rdj basslines. in fact, it seemed like it was just about to break into some kind of totally mental squarepusher chiptune freakout before the clock turned to midnight and we all turned into pumpkins on the floor.
it really wasn't what i was expecting. andy stott is known for morphing minimalist house beats into these sort of impressionist soundscapes, which is something he leaned towards in the first half of the set but didn't really give enough time to develop as it's meant to. i've never heard of him being associated with that warp sound the way that demdike stare is often compared to autechre. unexpected or not, it sure was a lot of fun, though.....
i doubt i'll find much like what i heard out there. this is more the kind of thing he's known for - and did play around with a bit at the beginning of the set, although it was more stripped down.
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/shows/2014/09/17.html
as incredibly complex and slightly patronizing as that statement is, it actually means i'm in a cool place. i've been over this a few times, but allow me to reiterate why i usually (not always.) use the dude's room.
1) the primary reason is that i can use the urinals and will choose to in most circumstances. i find something disrespectful about forcing women to listen to it fall in the toilet, cause it's just obvious. the reality is that public washrooms are gross. if you did a random survey of women, you'd learn that something like 98% of them would urinate while standing if they could, because it avoids the ickiness of squatting. it would be irrational of me to not take advantage of my biology in this sense, considering virtually any woman would do the same thing if given the opportunity.
2) i transitioned late. it's generally clear that i'm trans, but few people are going to confuse me for a cis. i completely grasp why the idea of me walking into the women's washroom would be a little unsettling. if i were cis, would i want the actual me waltzing in there? the truth is that i probably wouldn't. i know there's going to be a spectrum of reactions, but i feel obligated to be respectful of this concern and aware of how other people feel about it. the converse is that the worst that's going to happen from using the men's room is a funny stare or a concerned reaction. in the end, it's not really important enough of a concern to me to start pissing people off.
i mean, i support the whole bathroom rights thing. but, personally? i don't really care if the bathroom door has an M or an F on it and i'm willing to compromise pretty dramatically to keep the peace on the issue.
it's not absolute. if i'm wearing a dress, or some other particularly effeminate clothing, and i feel safe in doing so, then i'll probably use the women's washroom. it's pretty rare, though. i really default to standing when i pee....
i actually had a good time tonight at the detroit museum of contemporary art. the drinks were exceedingly strong, it got me a little drunker than i planned to be and i ended up dancing a little. i actually kind of needed that, it'd been a while. reviews in the comments...
got distracted there...
so, the opening dj was actually mildly interesting. he was playing with max or audiomulch or something in real-time, which, yes, tends to unfold somewhat predictably. but it's not clear to me why people will knock some software for this, while not bothering with others. any software system is going to colour the output in a roughly equal manner.
he had some syncing going on with the background films. as one example - bucephalus or not - he had some kids bouncing balls synced to some beats bouncing.
http://shop.overlap.org/album/chris-mcnamara-vague-cities
this is what i pulled myself out to see, and it was quite enjoyable. there's a lot of process in their approach to deep bass music, which tends be very dark ambient and integrate a lot of glitchy noise. you can't dance to this, but it's nice to get as a blast of sound. it was plenty loud, but i do kind of wish it was just a bit louder.
there's an improv inherent in the design, but they did something quite similar to this.
here's a full set:
so, reading up a little on the show, it became apparent that what was driving it was an attempt to pull a little manchester into detroit house. true or not, detroit gets a lot of credit as being an epicentre of electronic music that has sort of lost it's way. so, from detroit's perspective, the idea is to try and bring a little bit of that british artistic genius in (a british invasion, if you will) to kickstart a more interesting electronic music scene in detroit.
but, i can only assume that the opposite perspective is of a sort of a pilgrimage to mecca - detroit being where it all came from. these are a bunch of lanky brits that have never been near to the city, remember.
so, you have to think that andy stott was maybe a bit nervous about playing detroit, and that the overly minimalist start to his set had something to do with playing to the audience - who was visibly a little restless, apparently looking for a drop. whether by design or reaction, he seemed to become very british all of a sudden and morphed into some solid danceable idm - we're talking amen breaks, autechre melodies and rdj basslines. in fact, it seemed like it was just about to break into some kind of totally mental squarepusher chiptune freakout before the clock turned to midnight and we all turned into pumpkins on the floor.
it really wasn't what i was expecting. andy stott is known for morphing minimalist house beats into these sort of impressionist soundscapes, which is something he leaned towards in the first half of the set but didn't really give enough time to develop as it's meant to. i've never heard of him being associated with that warp sound the way that demdike stare is often compared to autechre. unexpected or not, it sure was a lot of fun, though.....
i doubt i'll find much like what i heard out there. this is more the kind of thing he's known for - and did play around with a bit at the beginning of the set, although it was more stripped down.
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/shows/2014/09/17.html
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
cymbals eating stale, mouldy guitars in detroit
so, i've come to the conclusion that it's going to be a while before i get used to the fact that the magic stick really shakes when a band gets going. it's on the second level of a structure that looks like it was built a very long time ago and has been redone repeatedly since the 30s. the additions are quite obvious, and there's been a lot of them. there's this nagging fear that somebody fixed something with duct tape and it's just waiting to give...
on the one hand, an upper floor structure built to handle large standing audiences (that may get a little rowdy) and loud bass music should either be solid concrete or built to give a little in response. it's clearly not concrete. so that little bit of elasticity is hopefully actually a safety mechanism. a rigid structure is going to develop cracks and fall apart.
i don't know that it was engineered that way, though. nor would i have much faith in the architecture if i knew that it was, to be honest. all i know is it sways a little and it's unnerving and that i'm not likely to get over it quickly.
the show tonight was a little lacklustre. allow me to explain...
i knew it was an early show, likely to make space for a long set by bob mould, but i slept in a little late and missed the first few songs. so i need to be careful in the review of cymbals eat guitars' new disc, which i have yet to hear in it's entirety. i didn't hear the opening tracks...
...but this video is a decent representation of what i did see, and what you'll notice is that it's a little bit unadventurous relative to past efforts. the edges have been smoothed over a little, the excesses have been pared down, etc. now, the band seems to be being praised for this by the indie press, but that's what the indie press wants - predictability. what attracted me to the band was that they were a little different, a little rough, kind of coming apart at the seams...
it's not that it seemed dramatically different, it just seemed as though they cast out the parts that made them different and interesting and all that was left was the now ubiquitous generic indie formula. that's not something i'm going to be interested in or connect to.
so, i'm not going to comment on the disc, yet. i'm giving it a first listen right now. and i'm willing to accept that the kinds of things that make their records interesting may be difficult to transfer to a live setting. but i found the set underwhelming in it's move towards a more predictable sound.
this is a full set from a few days later:
i wouldn't have gone just to see bob mould, but i'd hardly skip out on him without giving him a few songs, either. i planned to give him a beer to win me over.
that may seem a little disrespectful, given his status in rock music history, but the truth is he's never really clicked with me and i'm really not familiar with or all that interested in exploring anything he's released as a solo artist. as for husker du itself, i put them on the fence in terms of holding up. i've spoken before of the 80s rock canon and the need to pare it down. i'm not going to forcefully argue against husker du's inclusion, but they're far from a lock within it the way that sonic youth or rem are. there's that one album, and not much else, really.
so, i wasn't sure what i was going to get or how i'd react. the bulk of the set was in the power pop variety, with minimal gazey excursions and really nothing approaching any kind of noise. it was a bit of a nice groove at first, but something became very apparent a few songs in: all his songs sound the same. a few more songs in and it just started getting monotonous. i got bored about an hour in and went downstairs to try the magic stick pizza.
i know his output is more varied than what he provided, and i'm not sure what kind of age-related crisis has got him playing power pop at this stage in his life, but i'd advise avoiding him until he goes back to acting his age.
here's an older tune...
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/shows/2014/09/16.html
on the one hand, an upper floor structure built to handle large standing audiences (that may get a little rowdy) and loud bass music should either be solid concrete or built to give a little in response. it's clearly not concrete. so that little bit of elasticity is hopefully actually a safety mechanism. a rigid structure is going to develop cracks and fall apart.
i don't know that it was engineered that way, though. nor would i have much faith in the architecture if i knew that it was, to be honest. all i know is it sways a little and it's unnerving and that i'm not likely to get over it quickly.
the show tonight was a little lacklustre. allow me to explain...
i knew it was an early show, likely to make space for a long set by bob mould, but i slept in a little late and missed the first few songs. so i need to be careful in the review of cymbals eat guitars' new disc, which i have yet to hear in it's entirety. i didn't hear the opening tracks...
...but this video is a decent representation of what i did see, and what you'll notice is that it's a little bit unadventurous relative to past efforts. the edges have been smoothed over a little, the excesses have been pared down, etc. now, the band seems to be being praised for this by the indie press, but that's what the indie press wants - predictability. what attracted me to the band was that they were a little different, a little rough, kind of coming apart at the seams...
it's not that it seemed dramatically different, it just seemed as though they cast out the parts that made them different and interesting and all that was left was the now ubiquitous generic indie formula. that's not something i'm going to be interested in or connect to.
so, i'm not going to comment on the disc, yet. i'm giving it a first listen right now. and i'm willing to accept that the kinds of things that make their records interesting may be difficult to transfer to a live setting. but i found the set underwhelming in it's move towards a more predictable sound.
this is a full set from a few days later:
i wouldn't have gone just to see bob mould, but i'd hardly skip out on him without giving him a few songs, either. i planned to give him a beer to win me over.
that may seem a little disrespectful, given his status in rock music history, but the truth is he's never really clicked with me and i'm really not familiar with or all that interested in exploring anything he's released as a solo artist. as for husker du itself, i put them on the fence in terms of holding up. i've spoken before of the 80s rock canon and the need to pare it down. i'm not going to forcefully argue against husker du's inclusion, but they're far from a lock within it the way that sonic youth or rem are. there's that one album, and not much else, really.
so, i wasn't sure what i was going to get or how i'd react. the bulk of the set was in the power pop variety, with minimal gazey excursions and really nothing approaching any kind of noise. it was a bit of a nice groove at first, but something became very apparent a few songs in: all his songs sound the same. a few more songs in and it just started getting monotonous. i got bored about an hour in and went downstairs to try the magic stick pizza.
i know his output is more varied than what he provided, and i'm not sure what kind of age-related crisis has got him playing power pop at this stage in his life, but i'd advise avoiding him until he goes back to acting his age.
here's an older tune...
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/shows/2014/09/16.html
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
so,i've been spending a large amount of time mixing the section between 3:30-4:00. i've got over a dozen string parts (two contrabass, two cellos, electric bass, electric guitar, several violas, several violins) ranging across seven octaves, all distorted and compressed slightly differently, and running three countermelodies simultaneously. finding that sweet spot where i'm able to get the overtones to blur just a little, particularly on the bottom, but can still hear all the different parts at the right proportion, has been challenging. that's a complex problem. every time i alter one channel, it puts something else out of balance. but i'm almost there.
i wanted this done this morning, but i'm hitting cymbals eat guitars tonight and don't want to be falling over so i need to get a few hours of rest.
it's very close...
i wanted this done this morning, but i'm hitting cymbals eat guitars tonight and don't want to be falling over so i need to get a few hours of rest.
it's very close...
Sunday, September 14, 2014
Saturday, September 13, 2014
feeling kind of floaty and brain dead. if coffee doesn't help, i'm going to have to do something else tonight....
i don't have the ending pizzicato in. everything else is in and should hopefully be mixed down by the morning. if it's fast enough, i might get the pizzicato in by the morning. otherwise, probably tomorrow.
i'm often slow with bass, but this is intense even by my own standards...
i don't have the ending pizzicato in. everything else is in and should hopefully be mixed down by the morning. if it's fast enough, i might get the pizzicato in by the morning. otherwise, probably tomorrow.
i'm often slow with bass, but this is intense even by my own standards...
Friday, September 12, 2014
so, the grocery store is getting propertarian about it's shopping carts. it's kind of hard to blame them, because people in the neighbourhood aren't being good anarchists.
i was thinking about it on the way home, and it's actually a great topic to use in an introductory discourse. there might be this misperception that it's unruly hooligan anarchists stealing the shopping carts. the actual reality is that it's the anarchists that bring them back, because they understand them as socially owned property. but, the fact that people take them in the first place indicates a level of intuition towards the idea of social ownership.
and isn't it obvious that people ought to be able to take the carts home? i'm just not quite sure why it isn't so obvious that they should bring them back. laziness only gets you so far, here. i mean, i've walked by houses with four or five on their yard, indicating they're not even bringing them back when they get more food.
i might suggest it lies in the perception of property. that intuition towards social ownership may be overpowered by the enforced hierarchical guilt that keeps propertarianism in place. that is, they may be "stealing" the carts because they figure they ought to be able to use them, but then they can't rationalize it, and figure once they've stolen it it becomes theirs. then they just "steal" more. there could even be fear of consequence regarding being caught "stealing" them when they bring them back. but i'm just making wild guesses, and i'd really like to get a better understanding of this.
me? i'm a good anarchist, so i always return the public property as soon as i'm done using it, so other people can use it. that's the basis of a system of social ownership.
there's been a few times where i've been halfway home, realized my neck was sore, pulled a cart off somebody's lawn and then brought it back to their lawn when i was done. that's taking temporary control of a public good and returning it how i found it.
there's also been a few times where somebody has asked me for the cart on the way back to the store and i've given it to them - although i make sure they promise to bring it back to the store. it wasn't even for groceries a few times. one woman had a broken stroller and used it to get her kid home. another guy had a bag of soil. that's the way this ought to work.
the thing is that the level of social responsibility to make it work doesn't seem to be absent. people are taking the carts home, indicating they get it. but what's suppressing the responsibility to bring them back?
the answer to this isn't locking carts down or whatever other silly approach the store might come up with, it's talking to people and trying to understand why they're not being good anarchists.
i was thinking about it on the way home, and it's actually a great topic to use in an introductory discourse. there might be this misperception that it's unruly hooligan anarchists stealing the shopping carts. the actual reality is that it's the anarchists that bring them back, because they understand them as socially owned property. but, the fact that people take them in the first place indicates a level of intuition towards the idea of social ownership.
and isn't it obvious that people ought to be able to take the carts home? i'm just not quite sure why it isn't so obvious that they should bring them back. laziness only gets you so far, here. i mean, i've walked by houses with four or five on their yard, indicating they're not even bringing them back when they get more food.
i might suggest it lies in the perception of property. that intuition towards social ownership may be overpowered by the enforced hierarchical guilt that keeps propertarianism in place. that is, they may be "stealing" the carts because they figure they ought to be able to use them, but then they can't rationalize it, and figure once they've stolen it it becomes theirs. then they just "steal" more. there could even be fear of consequence regarding being caught "stealing" them when they bring them back. but i'm just making wild guesses, and i'd really like to get a better understanding of this.
me? i'm a good anarchist, so i always return the public property as soon as i'm done using it, so other people can use it. that's the basis of a system of social ownership.
there's been a few times where i've been halfway home, realized my neck was sore, pulled a cart off somebody's lawn and then brought it back to their lawn when i was done. that's taking temporary control of a public good and returning it how i found it.
there's also been a few times where somebody has asked me for the cart on the way back to the store and i've given it to them - although i make sure they promise to bring it back to the store. it wasn't even for groceries a few times. one woman had a broken stroller and used it to get her kid home. another guy had a bag of soil. that's the way this ought to work.
the thing is that the level of social responsibility to make it work doesn't seem to be absent. people are taking the carts home, indicating they get it. but what's suppressing the responsibility to bring them back?
the answer to this isn't locking carts down or whatever other silly approach the store might come up with, it's talking to people and trying to understand why they're not being good anarchists.
good news is i got the bass in the ambient section to sound perfect.
frustrating part is that i need to play it like a robot to do it. guitarists - even very good guitarists that are much better than i am - are actually sort of notorious for not being able to do this well. we don't spend hours of our childhood doing this like violin or cello players do because the instrument cycles around bits of syncopation. we even tend to put down guitarists that play perfectly in time by telling them they lack feel and have no soul. but this needs to be perfectly, mechanically precise.
i've done this before. it's something i'm capable of. you've just gotta give me 50 takes to do it...
specifically, it's because we don't count in our heads like orchestra players do, we just feel the timings. it's really the wrong way to play from a classical perspective, but it's a blues instrument, and if you're sitting around counting you're going to sound really dull. i mean, there's counter-examples. i bet fripp counts. but that's kind of my point - fripp sounds like a robot most of the time.
but i have a math degree, so i'm certified to count to 8.
i'll get this....
frustrating part is that i need to play it like a robot to do it. guitarists - even very good guitarists that are much better than i am - are actually sort of notorious for not being able to do this well. we don't spend hours of our childhood doing this like violin or cello players do because the instrument cycles around bits of syncopation. we even tend to put down guitarists that play perfectly in time by telling them they lack feel and have no soul. but this needs to be perfectly, mechanically precise.
i've done this before. it's something i'm capable of. you've just gotta give me 50 takes to do it...
specifically, it's because we don't count in our heads like orchestra players do, we just feel the timings. it's really the wrong way to play from a classical perspective, but it's a blues instrument, and if you're sitting around counting you're going to sound really dull. i mean, there's counter-examples. i bet fripp counts. but that's kind of my point - fripp sounds like a robot most of the time.
but i have a math degree, so i'm certified to count to 8.
i'll get this....
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
uploading to spin inside dull aberrations to the scratchpad
ok, so i think i've got the bass for the first two minutes done. i know, i know - but i'm neurotic, i'm sorry. i actually ended up neutralizing the headphone buzzing by swapping the earpieces out. right-brain/left-brain discussions are not science, but my right ear is definitely stronger, so i notice the buzz less by placing it on my left ear...
i'm still apprehensive about it, though. so, i'm going to ask a favour of the 36 of you. if you could head here and download the track (it's just a file) and play it through as many systems as you can looking for a buzz or rattle in the bass, and then post the system you used to find or not find the buzz or rattle, that would help me chill out a bit.
http://googledrive.com/host/0B5JfVE9XTZikMS1zek9ER0xSU1E/scratchpad/
i'm still apprehensive about it, though. so, i'm going to ask a favour of the 36 of you. if you could head here and download the track (it's just a file) and play it through as many systems as you can looking for a buzz or rattle in the bass, and then post the system you used to find or not find the buzz or rattle, that would help me chill out a bit.
http://googledrive.com/host/0B5JfVE9XTZikMS1zek9ER0xSU1E/scratchpad/
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
on second thought, it's not going to be a double :P
it's going to be volume 1 and volume 2, with volume 1 sequenced at the end of 2001 and volume 2 sequenced at the end of 2002. the writing period for volume 1 will be jan-nov 2001, whereas the writing period for vol 2 will be aug 2001 to nov 2002 (roughly). this will also allow me to continue with a "one record per year" output formula until '03, where the writing focus shifts to larger works for a few years.
official full lengths are therefore:
1) inri005 (1997-1998)
2) inri007 (1998-1999)
3) inri016 (1999)
4) inri023 (2000)
*5) inri033 (2001)
*6) inri0xx (2002)
the *s are the two jjjjjjjjjjjjj releases, although i may rename the second as it is going to mostly consist of instrumental outtakes and remixes coming from the cynicide/rabit period and the mostly unnamed and uncategorized outtakes that were left unfinished directly after it.
i could see releasing it one day as a double (i could see releasing inri005 and 007 together, too), if i can convince somebody to distribute it. but the conceptual differences are actually quite large and not worth maintaining for the chronological value. vol 1 is mostly "classical" music in the modern context of being infused with jazz, techno and noise. it really only has fragmented, vestigial bits of rock structuring. vol 2 retreats back to a more fully modern leftfield industrial combination of rock, techno and noise and is transitional into the splicing of industrial and post-rock that followed afterwards.
that means the song i've been working on is going to be on volume 2 and the last piece of volume 1 will be the atonal choral piece i'll be working on two further pieces from now. the tracklisting on volume one will remain; the 14 minute choir will just be added to the end, which conveniently takes it right up to almost exactly 80 minutes.
it's going to be volume 1 and volume 2, with volume 1 sequenced at the end of 2001 and volume 2 sequenced at the end of 2002. the writing period for volume 1 will be jan-nov 2001, whereas the writing period for vol 2 will be aug 2001 to nov 2002 (roughly). this will also allow me to continue with a "one record per year" output formula until '03, where the writing focus shifts to larger works for a few years.
official full lengths are therefore:
1) inri005 (1997-1998)
2) inri007 (1998-1999)
3) inri016 (1999)
4) inri023 (2000)
*5) inri033 (2001)
*6) inri0xx (2002)
the *s are the two jjjjjjjjjjjjj releases, although i may rename the second as it is going to mostly consist of instrumental outtakes and remixes coming from the cynicide/rabit period and the mostly unnamed and uncategorized outtakes that were left unfinished directly after it.
i could see releasing it one day as a double (i could see releasing inri005 and 007 together, too), if i can convince somebody to distribute it. but the conceptual differences are actually quite large and not worth maintaining for the chronological value. vol 1 is mostly "classical" music in the modern context of being infused with jazz, techno and noise. it really only has fragmented, vestigial bits of rock structuring. vol 2 retreats back to a more fully modern leftfield industrial combination of rock, techno and noise and is transitional into the splicing of industrial and post-rock that followed afterwards.
that means the song i've been working on is going to be on volume 2 and the last piece of volume 1 will be the atonal choral piece i'll be working on two further pieces from now. the tracklisting on volume one will remain; the 14 minute choir will just be added to the end, which conveniently takes it right up to almost exactly 80 minutes.
sequencing the fifth record (inri052)
so, the main aim of what i've been doing since february is completing
what works out to be my fifth full length record, out of material that
was written over the course of 2001 but never completed to my liking due
to deficits in the technology that was available to me at the time. i
had suspected from the beginning that this would probably be a double
and have come to the conclusion this morning that it absolutely must be.
that means i've expanded the scope a little to make the project more encompassing. 85 minute doubles piss me off. if you're going to do a double, fill up both discs! not with filler!
i kind of wanted to do this anyways. the guitar project is now officially aborted, and it really leaves the two remaining tracks as conceptually and musically similar to the other ones. there's also the 9-minute vocal epic, stress, which, while a little different, fits the overall theme of the larger works. it would be incomplete of me to compile this material without including it.
the first half of this is now completed. this is final, in relation to the first disc. the cut-off point is july, 2001 which is only coincidentally the halfway point; what's more important is that it splits the year in half over the summer (with school on either end) and separates a very solo period from a more collaborative one.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
1) written late 2000 & early 2001. minor instrumentation changes to facilitate a small wind section were implemented in late april, 2014. live guitars were layered into the final version over may 2014. completed on june 6, 2014. sequenced on sept 9, 2014.
2) recorded in the first part of 2001. final editing on september 9, 2014.
4) written and recorded, 1999-2001. this file has not been altered from the original.
5) recorded in the first part of 2001. final editing on september 9, 2014.
that means i've expanded the scope a little to make the project more encompassing. 85 minute doubles piss me off. if you're going to do a double, fill up both discs! not with filler!
i kind of wanted to do this anyways. the guitar project is now officially aborted, and it really leaves the two remaining tracks as conceptually and musically similar to the other ones. there's also the 9-minute vocal epic, stress, which, while a little different, fits the overall theme of the larger works. it would be incomplete of me to compile this material without including it.
the first half of this is now completed. this is final, in relation to the first disc. the cut-off point is july, 2001 which is only coincidentally the halfway point; what's more important is that it splits the year in half over the summer (with school on either end) and separates a very solo period from a more collaborative one.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
1) written late 2000 & early 2001. minor instrumentation changes to facilitate a small wind section were implemented in late april, 2014. live guitars were layered into the final version over may 2014. completed on june 6, 2014. sequenced on sept 9, 2014.
2) recorded in the first part of 2001. final editing on september 9, 2014.
4) written and recorded, 1999-2001. this file has not been altered from the original.
5) recorded in the first part of 2001. final editing on september 9, 2014.
yeah, it's going to be a double and more comprehensive over the scope of the 2001 material. i'm going to try and avoid redundancies, but a lot of what i've split off is split off for conceptual reasons.
i just won't be able to fit this on a single lp.
and, you know, looking at the material, it's going to be a hell of double, at that. the average track length is going to be something like nine minutes. one of those kinds of doubles...
i just won't be able to fit this on a single lp.
and, you know, looking at the material, it's going to be a hell of double, at that. the average track length is going to be something like nine minutes. one of those kinds of doubles...
Monday, September 8, 2014
actually, no. there's a lot more to do than i thought. i'm going to have reconstruct some of the tracks from source. there's a few where the vocals are integral, but there's a few where the vocals are just overdubs, and i'd like to reclaim those. i should stick to the sequence. but i'm more clear on the chronology, now, anyways and how i want things to come out.
so, back to inri029...
in particular, i'd really like to reconstruct an instrumental version of "clarity", which wasn't initially created as a rabit track. the vocal version is interesting in it's own way, but in some ways the vocals are kind of getting in the way.
i think the others are mostly set, but they weren't really started until 2002.
so, back to inri029...
in particular, i'd really like to reconstruct an instrumental version of "clarity", which wasn't initially created as a rabit track. the vocal version is interesting in it's own way, but in some ways the vocals are kind of getting in the way.
i think the others are mostly set, but they weren't really started until 2002.
Sunday, September 7, 2014
publishing give ‘em hell, harry / strung out (inri051)
i'm jumping ahead just a wee bit, so i can get a better handle on the shape of things to come. this was an idea i was working out in the fall of 2001. inri032...
--
credits:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/give-em-hell-harry-strung-out
1) this one was built up out of the sequencer/sampler in cool edit, which allows a user to create a melodic passage out of harsh noise. if the sample is particularly harsh (as this is) the sequencing can get a little messy, which is a bonus.....
the spoken word part at the end is some free trade protester on cbc. created in the fall of 2001
2) so, the pun here is that it's a lot of guitars going off out of tune, representing how the government is stringing us to dry by taking away our rights in the (not so) chaotic aftermath of 9/11. one of the samples is william de la hunt; i did not record who the other person is. created in the fall of 2001
--
i don't
have an exact date for these files, so i'm picking november 11th. as
others were, i was concerned about the president abolishing the magna
carta after 9/11 and congress doing little more than helping him do it.
however, this was meant to be a more encompassing project that combined
harsh noise with political sampling that was pushing an anarchist
agenda. the name of the project (ftaa) was chosen as a pun - it could
either be the free trade agreement of the americas or about fueling true
anarchy in the americas. i ended up dropping the sampling aspect and
just focusing on the noise for the project's completion (which is the
ftaa release in mid 2004: jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/ftaa
), so i'm going to upload these two pilot tracks (with the sampling in
tact) as an introductory single and place them in this more topical
chronological space.
in hindsight, i think there's something profound about juxtaposing the fair trade movement with the 9/11 attacks as, looking back, it really sucked the life out of the movement.
created in the fall of 2001. resequenced and rereleased on sept 7, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
in hindsight, i think there's something profound about juxtaposing the fair trade movement with the 9/11 attacks as, looking back, it really sucked the life out of the movement.
created in the fall of 2001. resequenced and rereleased on sept 7, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
credits:
j - noise generators, cool edit, sequencers, guitars
(electric, nylon, acoustic), mandolin, effects & processing,
digital wave editing, sampling, production
released november 11, 2001
released november 11, 2001
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/give-em-hell-harry-strung-out
1) this one was built up out of the sequencer/sampler in cool edit, which allows a user to create a melodic passage out of harsh noise. if the sample is particularly harsh (as this is) the sequencing can get a little messy, which is a bonus.....
the spoken word part at the end is some free trade protester on cbc. created in the fall of 2001
2) so, the pun here is that it's a lot of guitars going off out of tune, representing how the government is stringing us to dry by taking away our rights in the (not so) chaotic aftermath of 9/11. one of the samples is william de la hunt; i did not record who the other person is. created in the fall of 2001
re-uploading most of thru (inri070)
1) written late 2000 & early 2001. initial instrumentation and render completed mar 7, 2014. minor instrumentation changes to facilitate a small wind section were implemented in late april, 2014. final render completed on april 27, 2014.
2) written early 2001. drastically rearranged in june, 2014. final render completed on july 4, 2014.
3) written early 2001. this render is actually from may 13, 2001.
4) written june, 1998. reimagined june, 2001; the render is from june 18, 2001.
5) written late 2001. this render is actually from sept 22, 2001; it was very mildly edited for continuity on october 1, 2014. note that it was put through some reverb at that time.
so, i'm going to run through the rabit stuff this morning fairly quickly. inri029 is still in progress, but there are some reasons why i want to jump ahead a little, to get a better handle on how things are going to end up presenting themselves. i think this is likely going to be a relatively quick push through to about early 2003, with a few loose ends for me to get through over the next few months. so, it's going to flood a little...
Saturday, September 6, 2014
1
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/me-myself-and-the-time-i-thought-this-was-a-good-idea-2
the cynicide is running longer but it won't be more than another week - i just need to add bass parts that are already written, mix (that's the length) and write a fade out. i'm not going to add much further commentary (which is the reason i'm sending these links out, as an opportunity to allow you to request changes) to what's already here, so i'll be taking jon out for the remaining rabit updates.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/to-spin-inside-dull-aberrations-2
j
the cynicide is running longer but it won't be more than another week - i just need to add bass parts that are already written, mix (that's the length) and write a fade out. i'm not going to add much further commentary (which is the reason i'm sending these links out, as an opportunity to allow you to request changes) to what's already here, so i'll be taking jon out for the remaining rabit updates.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/to-spin-inside-dull-aberrations-2
j
publishing me, myself and the time i thought this was a good idea (inri049)
i've been hard at work on a very vertically complex piece for over a month now and am taking a bit of a break this morning to jump ahead just a little. this is next in the list. it's the first track to come out of a project i shared with a singer through the end of 2001 and the first part of 2002.
none of the versions here are final, it's just a lot of demos, but i find all of them worthwhile in their own ways.
----
credits:
j - bass, guitars, synths, writing
sean - vocals, writing
jon - guitar performance (6)
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/me-myself-and-the-time-i-thought-this-was-a-good-idea
1) sean suggested the bass line ought to sound like this, from which the track was built. sept 1, 2001.
2) this is the first bass & vocal demo, recorded the day the track was written. sept 1, 2001.
3) i built this up on my own the friday night following the sunday it was written, in preparation for the next sunday jam session. sept 7, 2001.
4) as our guitarist was a no show two weeks in a row, we decided to do a joy division cover rather than write new material. i've left the track without drums to better fit the feel of the recording, as none of the renditions on this single contain drums by a very conscious choice to not include them. sept 9, 2001.
5) the song is thematically about somebody launching themselves off a bridge, so i thought it would be an interesting idea to produce a walk passage. this idea was never well received, as there were concerns that the synthesizer sounds too synthetic. but, i mean, it's a synthesizer, what the fuck do you expect it to sound like? sept 22, 2001.
6) the initial demo was a temporary mix to get some ideas across; it was realized from the start that the guitarist would want to do the guitars and the synths would need to be less rough. i didn't expect him to play the part i wrote, though, which was just a weird thing. in the end, this reconstruction did not end up being a final mix (i took most of the end out, which was only ever there on the insistence of the guitarist in the first place, and added an extra guitar part). oct 13, 2001.
none of the versions here are final, it's just a lot of demos, but i find all of them worthwhile in their own ways.
----
rabit is wolf arose accidentally from the cynicide project (jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/to-spin-inside-dull-aberrations)
but produced far more material in the end. what happened was sean and i
showed up to a few jam sessions and the guitarist (jon - it was his
band) didn't, so we started writing some material without him...
initially, the intent was to include rather than exclude jon but he quickly developed a disinterest due to a variety of obvious if never fully articulated reasons. i was playing guitar parts on the demos, which he couldn't deal with. we were doing joy division songs, which were outside of his sphere of interest. we were writing without him, which made him feel unimportant. we were talking about songs without drums, which he wasn't interested in at all. etc. however, he did record a guitar part (that i wrote) that was never replaced.
this is a collection of demos from the first month of rabit is wolf, which includes multiple versions of the title track and a joy division cover. in the end, none of this would be released in the form it's in here (which is only available for download), but it creates a cohesive (if short) introduction to what follows that is self-contained in a historical context. stated differently, this is the first (post-punk) incarnation of rabit is wolf.
written and recorded in the fall of 2001. compiled on sept 6, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
initially, the intent was to include rather than exclude jon but he quickly developed a disinterest due to a variety of obvious if never fully articulated reasons. i was playing guitar parts on the demos, which he couldn't deal with. we were doing joy division songs, which were outside of his sphere of interest. we were writing without him, which made him feel unimportant. we were talking about songs without drums, which he wasn't interested in at all. etc. however, he did record a guitar part (that i wrote) that was never replaced.
this is a collection of demos from the first month of rabit is wolf, which includes multiple versions of the title track and a joy division cover. in the end, none of this would be released in the form it's in here (which is only available for download), but it creates a cohesive (if short) introduction to what follows that is self-contained in a historical context. stated differently, this is the first (post-punk) incarnation of rabit is wolf.
written and recorded in the fall of 2001. compiled on sept 6, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
credits:
j - bass, guitars, synths, writing
sean - vocals, writing
jon - guitar performance (6)
released october 15, 2001
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/me-myself-and-the-time-i-thought-this-was-a-good-idea
1) sean suggested the bass line ought to sound like this, from which the track was built. sept 1, 2001.
2) this is the first bass & vocal demo, recorded the day the track was written. sept 1, 2001.
3) i built this up on my own the friday night following the sunday it was written, in preparation for the next sunday jam session. sept 7, 2001.
4) as our guitarist was a no show two weeks in a row, we decided to do a joy division cover rather than write new material. i've left the track without drums to better fit the feel of the recording, as none of the renditions on this single contain drums by a very conscious choice to not include them. sept 9, 2001.
5) the song is thematically about somebody launching themselves off a bridge, so i thought it would be an interesting idea to produce a walk passage. this idea was never well received, as there were concerns that the synthesizer sounds too synthetic. but, i mean, it's a synthesizer, what the fuck do you expect it to sound like? sept 22, 2001.
6) the initial demo was a temporary mix to get some ideas across; it was realized from the start that the guitarist would want to do the guitars and the synths would need to be less rough. i didn't expect him to play the part i wrote, though, which was just a weird thing. in the end, this reconstruction did not end up being a final mix (i took most of the end out, which was only ever there on the insistence of the guitarist in the first place, and added an extra guitar part). oct 13, 2001.
Friday, September 5, 2014
the vacuum didn't work either. it's really stuck in there. i've got it on deep bass therapy, and am going to let it boom overnight. if that's not successful, i'll have to mix the bass down with the cheaper phones.
i'm going to lose most of the day tomorrow as well, as i have much running around to do.
i'm going to lose most of the day tomorrow as well, as i have much running around to do.
sennheiser talk pt 3
jessica
hi sennheiser. me again..
i've got this stubborn hair stuck in there, giving me a buzz on the lower frequencies, as stubborn hairs stuck in headphones tend to do.
now, it's been happening for years, and it's never been much of a problem - quick tweezer run over over a quick vacuum gets the dirt out. it's just something that happens to headphones and that headphones people have to deal with.
but this one is deep in the drivers and all attempts to get it out have failed. i'd probably need to use a tool that is something like a surgeon uses to get in there to pull it out, and it's too stuck for the vacuum (or loud bass music) to get it out.
now, i know you can usually take newer phones apart to do this but the way these ones are made suggests to me that the only way this would be possible is by twisting the top and, again, i don't really want to do that until i'm sure they can actually be disassembled. so, can i get in there without breaking them or do i need to call a surgeon?
those are the out of production 440-IIs, to jog your memory.
sennheiser
Hello Jessica,
It is possible to take the 440 apart.
I used to do it all the time. Use caution, however, since there are no more spares for this model, and if an accident happens, you're SOL! Twisting is not necessary. The baffle is held by a series of claws. Slip a fingernail between and pry gently. Easy does it.
To get the capsule driver out, gently pry up on the black tabs, and be careful not to disturb the connecting wires. They are exceedingly fragile and will not respond well to attempts to reconnect. Use both hands.
If you're talking hair, you might need tweezers, but for dust or other particles, a squirrel hair paintbrush will usually do. DO NOT brush hard!
Any wrinkles put on the diaphragm will be permanent.
Note orientation of the capsule driver to the baffle. It goes in one way only!
You mentioned using a vacuum...be careful with that! It's possible to suck the voice coil right out of the gap with force like that.
jessica
thanks again.
hi sennheiser. me again..
i've got this stubborn hair stuck in there, giving me a buzz on the lower frequencies, as stubborn hairs stuck in headphones tend to do.
now, it's been happening for years, and it's never been much of a problem - quick tweezer run over over a quick vacuum gets the dirt out. it's just something that happens to headphones and that headphones people have to deal with.
but this one is deep in the drivers and all attempts to get it out have failed. i'd probably need to use a tool that is something like a surgeon uses to get in there to pull it out, and it's too stuck for the vacuum (or loud bass music) to get it out.
now, i know you can usually take newer phones apart to do this but the way these ones are made suggests to me that the only way this would be possible is by twisting the top and, again, i don't really want to do that until i'm sure they can actually be disassembled. so, can i get in there without breaking them or do i need to call a surgeon?
those are the out of production 440-IIs, to jog your memory.
sennheiser
Hello Jessica,
It is possible to take the 440 apart.
I used to do it all the time. Use caution, however, since there are no more spares for this model, and if an accident happens, you're SOL! Twisting is not necessary. The baffle is held by a series of claws. Slip a fingernail between and pry gently. Easy does it.
To get the capsule driver out, gently pry up on the black tabs, and be careful not to disturb the connecting wires. They are exceedingly fragile and will not respond well to attempts to reconnect. Use both hands.
If you're talking hair, you might need tweezers, but for dust or other particles, a squirrel hair paintbrush will usually do. DO NOT brush hard!
Any wrinkles put on the diaphragm will be permanent.
Note orientation of the capsule driver to the baffle. It goes in one way only!
You mentioned using a vacuum...be careful with that! It's possible to suck the voice coil right out of the gap with force like that.
jessica
thanks again.
i got my $1 guitar fix and put it all together and got nothing but hum out of it.
strangely, there's no ground on the input. so, the circuit isn't completing. but, it completed in the store.
i made an error: i took a walk down the street, and then didn't plug it back in when i came back. who knows what they did. i think they may have ripped the ground out. it would have taken two seconds.
see, the thing is that it shouldn't have worked in the store without the ground - the ground was there when i plugged it in, and it wasn't when i took it home.
it's not expensive to fix, i need a soldering iron anyways, but why do that? it's just upsetting that some people can be that disrespectful.
like, it's not that the ground is loose.
the ground is gone. no guitar can work without a ground. but, it did work.
somebody ripped it out....
either way, that's that for the day, let me take a look at those headphones.
it sounds crazy to think somebody would do that.
but the only other explanation is that somebody was sitting around the corner mimicking my open strings, tricking me into thinking it worked. that's even crazier.
it's just impossible that it could have worked without the ground. but it did. and it was entirely gone when i went back.
ripping a cord off a board like that could create other problems, as well.
but i have a circuit diagram, and it will be very east to fix if there's further damage.
so, you'll have to add $1 worth of solder and $1 worth of wires to the fix price. a soldering iron is going to be around $20, but it's not fair to work it into the price because it's something i need to get anyways.
strangely, there's no ground on the input. so, the circuit isn't completing. but, it completed in the store.
i made an error: i took a walk down the street, and then didn't plug it back in when i came back. who knows what they did. i think they may have ripped the ground out. it would have taken two seconds.
see, the thing is that it shouldn't have worked in the store without the ground - the ground was there when i plugged it in, and it wasn't when i took it home.
it's not expensive to fix, i need a soldering iron anyways, but why do that? it's just upsetting that some people can be that disrespectful.
like, it's not that the ground is loose.
the ground is gone. no guitar can work without a ground. but, it did work.
somebody ripped it out....
either way, that's that for the day, let me take a look at those headphones.
it sounds crazy to think somebody would do that.
but the only other explanation is that somebody was sitting around the corner mimicking my open strings, tricking me into thinking it worked. that's even crazier.
it's just impossible that it could have worked without the ground. but it did. and it was entirely gone when i went back.
ripping a cord off a board like that could create other problems, as well.
but i have a circuit diagram, and it will be very east to fix if there's further damage.
so, you'll have to add $1 worth of solder and $1 worth of wires to the fix price. a soldering iron is going to be around $20, but it's not fair to work it into the price because it's something i need to get anyways.
Thursday, September 4, 2014
deathtokoalas
the rx40 is the absolute bottom of the line ibanez strat copy; i picked one up in a pawn shop today for $40 (including a case and a strap). i got a deal because the pawn shop owners didn't realize how simple putting a nut on a loose input jack is, and felt the need to mark it down due to it being "broken". however, they're generally going to sell for under $150 nowadays.
looking into it, it strikes me as a sort of ponzi scheme set up by ibanez. $100 is probably what they're worth - so you can get the 40s at a bit more than cost. ibanez then increases the price dramatically by slapping on different models while changing the guitar rather minimally. the upper end rxs sold for around $800. i can't find any real difference between them and the 40s that isn't merely cosmetic. and how much is that strat actually worth when you strip out the bullshit? a whole lot less than you paid for it...
the guitar is solidly constructed. smooth neck. that's more than can be said for a lot of newer strats; vintage strats are incomparable, but the difference in build quality between a modern strat and an ibanez copy is pretty much negligible. in some cases, they may have been made in the same factory.
the electronics are built to sound like a strat, and they do. that's my next point. for now, note that if you want a good strat body to put your own pickups in, you want to be thinking about the ibanez copies.
what this video really demonstrates, though, is how meaningless the guitar input is in the face of modern processing. that's a beginner guitar for people with a budget, but do you think a $3000 strat is going to sound better through the same amp simulator and the same dozens of effects? it's not.
when you break it down to the physics nowadays, you're combining sounds out of a type of pickup. the pickups will have defined properties. that's all you're really looking for: body shape and pickup type.
the rx40 is the absolute bottom of the line ibanez strat copy; i picked one up in a pawn shop today for $40 (including a case and a strap). i got a deal because the pawn shop owners didn't realize how simple putting a nut on a loose input jack is, and felt the need to mark it down due to it being "broken". however, they're generally going to sell for under $150 nowadays.
looking into it, it strikes me as a sort of ponzi scheme set up by ibanez. $100 is probably what they're worth - so you can get the 40s at a bit more than cost. ibanez then increases the price dramatically by slapping on different models while changing the guitar rather minimally. the upper end rxs sold for around $800. i can't find any real difference between them and the 40s that isn't merely cosmetic. and how much is that strat actually worth when you strip out the bullshit? a whole lot less than you paid for it...
the guitar is solidly constructed. smooth neck. that's more than can be said for a lot of newer strats; vintage strats are incomparable, but the difference in build quality between a modern strat and an ibanez copy is pretty much negligible. in some cases, they may have been made in the same factory.
the electronics are built to sound like a strat, and they do. that's my next point. for now, note that if you want a good strat body to put your own pickups in, you want to be thinking about the ibanez copies.
what this video really demonstrates, though, is how meaningless the guitar input is in the face of modern processing. that's a beginner guitar for people with a budget, but do you think a $3000 strat is going to sound better through the same amp simulator and the same dozens of effects? it's not.
when you break it down to the physics nowadays, you're combining sounds out of a type of pickup. the pickups will have defined properties. that's all you're really looking for: body shape and pickup type.
José González
basswood body?
deathtokoalas
you're not going to hear a difference on a double blind a/b between maple, alder and basswood through an amp simulator, and you're going to destroy the guitar's characteristics at the equalization stage of the mixdown, anyways. you'll hear a difference in pickup combinations.
José González
set dimarzio andy timmons on the rx40 and a tube amp?
deathtokoalas
that's not the tone i'm looking for, i'm an experimental guitarist that's looking for a way to get some single coils through a long effects chain on the way into a firewire computing interface, mostly to get a "skinnier" flanged and chorused sound. i use humbuckers through preamps for lead parts.
but i would argue that this model is a good base to start from if you want to put your own pickups in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)