this was constructed purposefully as a slice of absolute absurdity, and it's really the only way to make sense of it.
the core of the mix was created mid december, 2001. it was slightly remixed on october 5, 2014.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/zen
Sunday, October 5, 2014
clarity (redone original demo) (initial upload)
i'm actually temporarily stopping with clarity, because i didn't finish it until a little later.
the next thing up will be that #9 monstrosity. it's likely that i'll upload without modifying it, but i want to listen with a nonsleepy set of ears to determine if there's any way to finish it.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/redone-original-demo
the next thing up will be that #9 monstrosity. it's likely that i'll upload without modifying it, but i want to listen with a nonsleepy set of ears to determine if there's any way to finish it.
http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/redone-original-demo
actually, this isn't going to require cutting after all, that's not how i
did it - i went along and pasted the sample a dozen times in a way that
just mildly overlaps with the end of itself. so i don't have to worry
about finding the perfect cut, i can just go along and find the place
for the next sample by ear.
this should be fairly simple to construct very similarly, minus the improved sound quality.
and, in fact, i'm going to use cool edit for this part, as i think the blurry sound of the mix is an artefact of it. the song needs to be blurry.
i downsampled too, lol. i remember now that the noise was too intense, otherwise. it was a trade off between losing some of the subbass and softening some of the mid-high noise generators.
i may be able to mix the subbass back in, but one thing at a time....
i mean, now that the thing is downsampled, it will sound like 16bits if upsampled back to 32. so, i could then take the original file at 32, lowpass it and mix it in to bring some of the kick back.
that's a mixing stage thing, right now i'm reconstructing....
the fadeover happens to coincide with a bass beat. i'm almost certain that's what i did in the first place. so the syncing issues i was concerned about for this part are really non-existent.
the eyeing it out part has more to do with comparing the level in the waveform of the mp3 with the level in the reconstruct. how much did i amplify the fade? what percentage did i use for the paste over? i'm lucky that the possibilities are binary, as it allows for a finite number of possible choices. i can be confident it's extremely close to the original.
this should be fairly simple to construct very similarly, minus the improved sound quality.
and, in fact, i'm going to use cool edit for this part, as i think the blurry sound of the mix is an artefact of it. the song needs to be blurry.
i downsampled too, lol. i remember now that the noise was too intense, otherwise. it was a trade off between losing some of the subbass and softening some of the mid-high noise generators.
i may be able to mix the subbass back in, but one thing at a time....
i mean, now that the thing is downsampled, it will sound like 16bits if upsampled back to 32. so, i could then take the original file at 32, lowpass it and mix it in to bring some of the kick back.
that's a mixing stage thing, right now i'm reconstructing....
the fadeover happens to coincide with a bass beat. i'm almost certain that's what i did in the first place. so the syncing issues i was concerned about for this part are really non-existent.
the eyeing it out part has more to do with comparing the level in the waveform of the mp3 with the level in the reconstruct. how much did i amplify the fade? what percentage did i use for the paste over? i'm lucky that the possibilities are binary, as it allows for a finite number of possible choices. i can be confident it's extremely close to the original.
uploading clarity loops to the scratch pad
i'm tired of sorting through the page and finding the sketchpad link, then going through a captcha every time i post the sketchpad link, so i've put the link in the about section and will refer you there when i speak of the sketchpad.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jessica-Murray/41134747113?sk=info
so, i've uploaded a sample of the drums in 32 (i think it's 24, but it reads everywhere as 32) bit audio, and if you can play it without downsampling you can hear how thick they are. that got lost in the mix. my abilities to upsample are now much greater, so i should be able to convert this into a much better sounding mix.
going from scratch is consequently the best way to do it.
even if it's going to require some crucial dicing skillz.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jessica-Murray/41134747113?sk=info
so, i've uploaded a sample of the drums in 32 (i think it's 24, but it reads everywhere as 32) bit audio, and if you can play it without downsampling you can hear how thick they are. that got lost in the mix. my abilities to upsample are now much greater, so i should be able to convert this into a much better sounding mix.
going from scratch is consequently the best way to do it.
even if it's going to require some crucial dicing skillz.
so, i have an early instrumental mix of clarity to build on, but it's in mp3 and i'm not entirely happy about the mix - partly because the samples were in 32-bit and it's lost. depending on how different the result ends up, i may upload it but i think something would be missing from the source if i were to rebuild around that source. unfortunately.
so, i'm going to rebuild clarity from scratch, which means relooping. i have all the loops, but some of them are going to need to be re cut which is going to create something asymmetric. i'm ok with this, as it may improve the piece slightly to process the files more separately. the initial mix was done in cool edit, which is an intriguing but messy tool; i'm going to be remixing in a proper multitrack interface in cubase.
if it's a disaster, i'll have to rebuild from the mp3. i'm hoping i surprise myself with the accuracy of the recuts...
so, i'm going to rebuild clarity from scratch, which means relooping. i have all the loops, but some of them are going to need to be re cut which is going to create something asymmetric. i'm ok with this, as it may improve the piece slightly to process the files more separately. the initial mix was done in cool edit, which is an intriguing but messy tool; i'm going to be remixing in a proper multitrack interface in cubase.
if it's a disaster, i'll have to rebuild from the mp3. i'm hoping i surprise myself with the accuracy of the recuts...
Saturday, October 4, 2014
uploading the wave to youtube
regarding symphony 3....
i seem to have run the file through some reverb or something around the year 2007. however, i also have a rip of the file from a cd-r i made back in 2001. this is a long piece and the a/b is going to take some effort, but i'm currently leaning towards leaving the 2001 mix here just out of principle.
this is absolutely the next inri number, but there's some other things in the chronology before it, which gives me time to a/b it a few times.
this is the youtube upload, which is the 2007 mix:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQdW5_lKtUY
i seem to have run the file through some reverb or something around the year 2007. however, i also have a rip of the file from a cd-r i made back in 2001. this is a long piece and the a/b is going to take some effort, but i'm currently leaning towards leaving the 2001 mix here just out of principle.
this is absolutely the next inri number, but there's some other things in the chronology before it, which gives me time to a/b it a few times.
this is the youtube upload, which is the 2007 mix:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQdW5_lKtUY
i know $50 is a lot for one disc, but it's 7 hours and has six records on it - including one that's not for sale. so, you could look at it as getting a free record, considering the five that are for sale separately are $10 each. the shift in technology doesn't devalue the price of the music, it just makes media filing more convenient.
really, it's more about being realistic about the model. purchasing these records is an act of solidarity, to keep me going. it's not like purchasing a commodity over a market. the mp3 downloads can be thought of that way, but nobody is going to buy a cd-r from me unless it's explicitly to support me. so, it's more like setting a pledge amount.
but i'm honestly of the opinion that 6 full length records for $50 is really a fair price.
really, it's more about being realistic about the model. purchasing these records is an act of solidarity, to keep me going. it's not like purchasing a commodity over a market. the mp3 downloads can be thought of that way, but nobody is going to buy a cd-r from me unless it's explicitly to support me. so, it's more like setting a pledge amount.
but i'm honestly of the opinion that 6 full length records for $50 is really a fair price.
i've decided that there are two rabit songs i'm going to rip up: clarity and 9:46. these are both lengthy, epic pieces that i feel i have total (musical) writing credit over. but i'm going to finish two more that do have vocals, too (#9, wave). also, the vocal versions will continue to exist on the rabit demo, while i place the instrumental versions on j^2. it's not that the vocals aren't important to the songs - they are, in that form. however, they could and i think should both exist in alternate form without vocals. i just consider them pieces worth placing in my proper discography (all rabit releases will be treated as eps or singles, regardless of length). they share a thematic unity with what i was doing before and after rabit, whereas the other tracks mainly do not. i may also finish some acoustic demos, but that's less certain. the rabit material that's been previously released will be only minimally altered.
i'm hoping i don't have to rerecord any parts for those two, but i'm not going to let the idea act as a disincentive. while i want the pieces to sound as close as possible to how i intended them to sound, that isn't necessarily going to mean complete conformity to what already exists. that is to say that they're likely not going to be identical, which gives them their own flavour as alternate versions, rather than karaoke versions.
so, that's going to be the opening sequence of disc #6, whatever i call it, which is going to largely contain material that came out of the cynicide/rabit sessions:
1) to spin inside dull aberrations - 18 minute version. cynicide outtake.
2) clarity (instrumental reconstruction). rabit outtake. ~12 minutes.
3) breaking free of boxes (instrumental reconstruction). rabit outttake. ~10 minutes.
the wave is the next release, i just have to figure out how i'm going to get around the 291 mb upload max, or how i'm going to split it in two.
the clarity single will follow, with instrumental and vocal mixes as well as #9 (probably titled 'zen'), a sped up vocal version of the wave and some other things from nov-feb, 2002.
the demo itself will follow right after. there were two demos released - a 5 track and an 8 track. i'm going to attempt to merge them into one demo. so, the demo will have an extra epic appended to it, but otherwise be unchanged.
i'm also going to release the tour ep i was contemplating. logistics would have made it difficult for the two of us to perform the material, as sean did not play an instrument and it was not written in a way that makes it easy to teach to a musical beginner. so, i derived an evil plan to perform the material as an acoustic duo. there are numerous demos of acoustic material written for that purpose that were meant to be packaged in a tour ep. of course, like everything else in my musical career, that never actually happened. but, it's an idea worth completing, i think. the shape it forms is going to depend on an analysis of the actual material, but i could see myself adding synth parts to a lot of it.
the next thing up is the trepanation symphony, which exists in a dozen different forms that may require two or three discs to explore comprehensively. i do not know exactly how i will scatter this material around, but it dominates the output for the spring of 2002.
there are some scattered pieces in the second half of 2002 that were explorations of ideas developed in rabit that never went anywhere there and will be directed towards j^2. untitled will get it's own single and inclusion. there's another piece with working title 'ostrich' that will get similar treatment. j^2 will be sequenced for release near the end of 2002.
the very end of 2002 sees the beginning of work on the first trivial group symphony, and is a definite shift in period.
my workflow...
- clarity*
- #9 [zen]
- the wave (both)
- clarity single
- time, psi
- 9:46 [instrumental]*
- rabit demo
- rabit live acoustic demos
- trepanation
- untitled*
- atom's*
- taught to twist the affected so low*
- ostrich*
=============
- trivial group
* - j^2
(18 + 12 + 10 + 14 + 5 + 5 + 15 = 79)
i'm hoping i don't have to rerecord any parts for those two, but i'm not going to let the idea act as a disincentive. while i want the pieces to sound as close as possible to how i intended them to sound, that isn't necessarily going to mean complete conformity to what already exists. that is to say that they're likely not going to be identical, which gives them their own flavour as alternate versions, rather than karaoke versions.
so, that's going to be the opening sequence of disc #6, whatever i call it, which is going to largely contain material that came out of the cynicide/rabit sessions:
1) to spin inside dull aberrations - 18 minute version. cynicide outtake.
2) clarity (instrumental reconstruction). rabit outtake. ~12 minutes.
3) breaking free of boxes (instrumental reconstruction). rabit outttake. ~10 minutes.
the wave is the next release, i just have to figure out how i'm going to get around the 291 mb upload max, or how i'm going to split it in two.
the clarity single will follow, with instrumental and vocal mixes as well as #9 (probably titled 'zen'), a sped up vocal version of the wave and some other things from nov-feb, 2002.
the demo itself will follow right after. there were two demos released - a 5 track and an 8 track. i'm going to attempt to merge them into one demo. so, the demo will have an extra epic appended to it, but otherwise be unchanged.
i'm also going to release the tour ep i was contemplating. logistics would have made it difficult for the two of us to perform the material, as sean did not play an instrument and it was not written in a way that makes it easy to teach to a musical beginner. so, i derived an evil plan to perform the material as an acoustic duo. there are numerous demos of acoustic material written for that purpose that were meant to be packaged in a tour ep. of course, like everything else in my musical career, that never actually happened. but, it's an idea worth completing, i think. the shape it forms is going to depend on an analysis of the actual material, but i could see myself adding synth parts to a lot of it.
the next thing up is the trepanation symphony, which exists in a dozen different forms that may require two or three discs to explore comprehensively. i do not know exactly how i will scatter this material around, but it dominates the output for the spring of 2002.
there are some scattered pieces in the second half of 2002 that were explorations of ideas developed in rabit that never went anywhere there and will be directed towards j^2. untitled will get it's own single and inclusion. there's another piece with working title 'ostrich' that will get similar treatment. j^2 will be sequenced for release near the end of 2002.
the very end of 2002 sees the beginning of work on the first trivial group symphony, and is a definite shift in period.
my workflow...
- clarity*
- #9 [zen]
- the wave (both)
- clarity single
- time, psi
- 9:46 [instrumental]*
- rabit demo
- rabit live acoustic demos
- trepanation
- untitled*
- atom's*
- taught to twist the affected so low*
- ostrich*
=============
- trivial group
* - j^2
(18 + 12 + 10 + 14 + 5 + 5 + 15 = 79)
Friday, October 3, 2014
i think we all overhyped the new aphex twin record, a little bit
this is a subtle disc that will no doubt grow on listeners that give it the chance to grow, but it's also a big step sideways in terms of the experimental techno movement that rdj was once such an important part of.
i think we're robbed of the context that's necessary to make full sense of his development over the last decade. i'll be blunt: this seems like it completely missed the shift in paradigm that autechre, squarepusher, plaid and others have passed through since the turn of the century. but, we really just simply don't know where his head has been, or the shape his upcoming series of releases are going to take as they unfold.
i have a suspicion that the right way to interpret this particular release is that it's purposefully a collection of somewhat retro sounding pieces that are meant to lay a foundation for future shifts. that is to say that these pieces were isolated and released together because they sound like they could have been released ten or fifteen years ago. it's a reintroduction, if you will. he's picking up where he left off...
what that means is that you need to put it into the context of an incomplete discography to fully make sense of it - and that's extremely difficult to do right now, when the upcoming material is not yet released. in ten years, it will make more sense.
i wouldn't expect him to follow the same path of development as his peers. however, i do expect that there are going to be further signs of artistic evolution in the next few releases.
for now, i'd take it for what i think it is - a gentle introduction.
i think we're robbed of the context that's necessary to make full sense of his development over the last decade. i'll be blunt: this seems like it completely missed the shift in paradigm that autechre, squarepusher, plaid and others have passed through since the turn of the century. but, we really just simply don't know where his head has been, or the shape his upcoming series of releases are going to take as they unfold.
i have a suspicion that the right way to interpret this particular release is that it's purposefully a collection of somewhat retro sounding pieces that are meant to lay a foundation for future shifts. that is to say that these pieces were isolated and released together because they sound like they could have been released ten or fifteen years ago. it's a reintroduction, if you will. he's picking up where he left off...
what that means is that you need to put it into the context of an incomplete discography to fully make sense of it - and that's extremely difficult to do right now, when the upcoming material is not yet released. in ten years, it will make more sense.
i wouldn't expect him to follow the same path of development as his peers. however, i do expect that there are going to be further signs of artistic evolution in the next few releases.
for now, i'd take it for what i think it is - a gentle introduction.
clarity (rabit is wolf version)
right now, i need some rest. but i'm going to be working on stripping clarity down to an instrumental when i wake up.
that is this clarity...
recorded in late 2001 and early 2002. track completed on march 2, 2002.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/clarity
that is this clarity...
recorded in late 2001 and early 2002. track completed on march 2, 2002.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/clarity
that also completes aleph-3.
so, this is a productive day.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri023-inri033
so, this is a productive day.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri023-inri033
5
jessica
i've been getting a lot of work done over the last few months. i had some problems to start off. i had to order a set of headphone cables from sennheiser, which set me back a month. a hard drive died. i had a bad bios flash which shut my computer off for two months. &etc. but i've got a few hours of mixes done, now, and i've pulled a proper record out of it.
i've been going through chronologically and completing old projects. this is actually the first record i've completed since november, 2000 - and it's all material that was written and left incomplete over the course of 2001. it would be record number 5 if placed in the proper chronological order, which is dec 2001. there's roughly a record's worth of unfinished material per year up to about 2011, but i should be able to move faster through the rest of it.
this is the public bandcamp page with information and writeups:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
but i'm going to send you a link to a free download. that being said, please direct people to the bandcamp page if you want to share.
free dl:
(deleted)
it's just a zip file with mp3s in it. if the mac is funny with the %s try this:
(deleted)
and navigate to 33.
sister
sorry it took me so long to reply, i wanted to actually LISTEN to all this stuff, a few times, before responding.
some of it i really enjoyed. some of it i found to be plain noise. i imagine that is consistent with other feedback you must be receiving.
we listened to it through the stereo, and anything that had a steady beat, your nephew danced to. fun. the italian cereal commercial was his favourite. your nephew is getting big, almost a year. seven teeth.
hope all is well. i like getting an update now and then.
jessica
noise is one of the genres i work in, but it's generally pretty ordered - unless it's conceptually chaotic, which is true of a few pieces but is generally not the case. i do find that people often can't hear the compositional aspect underneath the aesthetics, but it has to do with not knowing what they're listening to. it's kind of like how a lot of people listen to jazz and just hear random notes, regardless of how written the parts may or may not be. or how people can't get their heads around the idea of a tone row, and just hear chaotic dissonance. i can't expect random people to hear structure in noise compositions any more than jazz artists or serialists can expect an untrained ear to understand what they're doing; i generally just have to point out that it's there, and it's up to them to spend the time unravelling it or not. that's not frustrating to me. what IS frustrating to me is when much less developed examples of noise are held up as something paradigmatic. but this happens in jazz, too, and is the inevitable result of taking something that requires a trained ear to understand and distributing it to untrained ears for analysis.
i'm expecting another major update some time in december. i'm still hoping to get the sixth record done by the end of the year, but it may be early next year. i'm then going to get stuck in finishing a matlab experiment in converting raw data to sound that i expect may be time consuming.
i've been getting a lot of work done over the last few months. i had some problems to start off. i had to order a set of headphone cables from sennheiser, which set me back a month. a hard drive died. i had a bad bios flash which shut my computer off for two months. &etc. but i've got a few hours of mixes done, now, and i've pulled a proper record out of it.
i've been going through chronologically and completing old projects. this is actually the first record i've completed since november, 2000 - and it's all material that was written and left incomplete over the course of 2001. it would be record number 5 if placed in the proper chronological order, which is dec 2001. there's roughly a record's worth of unfinished material per year up to about 2011, but i should be able to move faster through the rest of it.
this is the public bandcamp page with information and writeups:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
but i'm going to send you a link to a free download. that being said, please direct people to the bandcamp page if you want to share.
free dl:
(deleted)
it's just a zip file with mp3s in it. if the mac is funny with the %s try this:
(deleted)
and navigate to 33.
sister
sorry it took me so long to reply, i wanted to actually LISTEN to all this stuff, a few times, before responding.
some of it i really enjoyed. some of it i found to be plain noise. i imagine that is consistent with other feedback you must be receiving.
we listened to it through the stereo, and anything that had a steady beat, your nephew danced to. fun. the italian cereal commercial was his favourite. your nephew is getting big, almost a year. seven teeth.
hope all is well. i like getting an update now and then.
jessica
noise is one of the genres i work in, but it's generally pretty ordered - unless it's conceptually chaotic, which is true of a few pieces but is generally not the case. i do find that people often can't hear the compositional aspect underneath the aesthetics, but it has to do with not knowing what they're listening to. it's kind of like how a lot of people listen to jazz and just hear random notes, regardless of how written the parts may or may not be. or how people can't get their heads around the idea of a tone row, and just hear chaotic dissonance. i can't expect random people to hear structure in noise compositions any more than jazz artists or serialists can expect an untrained ear to understand what they're doing; i generally just have to point out that it's there, and it's up to them to spend the time unravelling it or not. that's not frustrating to me. what IS frustrating to me is when much less developed examples of noise are held up as something paradigmatic. but this happens in jazz, too, and is the inevitable result of taking something that requires a trained ear to understand and distributing it to untrained ears for analysis.
i'm expecting another major update some time in december. i'm still hoping to get the sixth record done by the end of the year, but it may be early next year. i'm then going to get stuck in finishing a matlab experiment in converting raw data to sound that i expect may be time consuming.
publishing jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj (inri052)
with that piece, i also finally finish off my fifth record, which happens to be inri033 (i posted inri032 a few weeks ago). it's been a long time since i've finished a full record; i've been recording fragments and compiling unfinished ideas for a full fourteen years. i came out here to get some work done, and i'm proud to say i've accomplished something. i'm dating the disc to december, 2001 because that's when the ideas were completed.
my fourth record (deny everything, late 2000) was a giant jump forward for me, in moving beyond the synth pop i was recording as a teenager. if somebody ever goes through this stuff and sorts it all out, they're going to draw a pretty big line in the sand there. the third record (inridiculous, 1999) was moving beyond it, but it somewhat purposefully lacked any kind of cohesion. it was, after all, *ridiculous*. deny everything is still fundamentally electronic music, but it's leaning towards something bigger.
this fifth disc jumps head first into modern classical music, while utilizing a lot of electronic textures. there's really very little that ties this into any kind of "rock" or "pop" tradition. i'd have to argue it's a fairly difficult listen, but i like it that way.
it's the full 80 minutes, shy a few seconds of it.
it won't be fourteen years until the sixth disc. in fact, it should require a lot less effort because the pieces are in a more complete state. it will be retreating substantially from the kind of formal pieces that are present here; it's more of a "rock" record. i'm hoping to get it up by the end of the year.
--
this is a full record of material documenting tracks written in 2001 that were in a more "serious" style and completed from 2001-2014.
the intent with the core of the material (1,3,6,7,8) was for it to be performed by live musicians one day. in early 2014, i came to the conclusion that this was not going to ever happen and was pleasantly surprised to learn that the technology had improved enough for a realistic presentation of the material using sequencers. these versions of (1,3,6) also include live guitars.
tracks 2 and 5 were salvaged from an aborted project meant to reinterpret classical guitar music as modern noise. the project was permanently aborted due to the loss of the sheet music that was necessary to finish it. more information here:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/js-adventures-in-guitarland
track 4 is an electric folk tune with heavy counterpoint that i was playing live as a party trick at the time.
the ordering is roughly chronological, based on the date the track took the form it exists in. tracks 1, 3 and 8 were written in 2001 and reinterpreted and completed in 2014. tracks 2 and 5 were interpreted and completed in 2001. track 4 was written in 2000 and reinterpreted and recorded in 2001. track 6 was written in 2001 and completed in 2006. track 7 was written in 1998, reinterpreted in 2001 and rendered in 2014. tracks 1-7 were sequenced on sept 9, 2014. final completion date is oct 3, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
credits:
j - electric piano, programming, classical & acoustic & electric guitars, ebow, digital & analog effects & treatments, organ, synthesizers, sound design, sampling, vocals, digital wave editing, loops, production, composition.
the various rendered electronic orchestras include acoustic bass, electric bass, synth bass, distorted electric guitar, clean electric guitar, steel string acoustic guitar, nylon guitar, trumpet, trombone, brass ensemble, orchestra hit, violin, cello, viola, contrabass, piano, synthesizers, mellotron, organ, bamboo flute, clarinet, flute, voice, music box, bells, clavinet, kalimba, drum kit, hand drums, drum machines and electronic drums.
released december 1, 2001
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
my fourth record (deny everything, late 2000) was a giant jump forward for me, in moving beyond the synth pop i was recording as a teenager. if somebody ever goes through this stuff and sorts it all out, they're going to draw a pretty big line in the sand there. the third record (inridiculous, 1999) was moving beyond it, but it somewhat purposefully lacked any kind of cohesion. it was, after all, *ridiculous*. deny everything is still fundamentally electronic music, but it's leaning towards something bigger.
this fifth disc jumps head first into modern classical music, while utilizing a lot of electronic textures. there's really very little that ties this into any kind of "rock" or "pop" tradition. i'd have to argue it's a fairly difficult listen, but i like it that way.
it's the full 80 minutes, shy a few seconds of it.
it won't be fourteen years until the sixth disc. in fact, it should require a lot less effort because the pieces are in a more complete state. it will be retreating substantially from the kind of formal pieces that are present here; it's more of a "rock" record. i'm hoping to get it up by the end of the year.
--
this is a full record of material documenting tracks written in 2001 that were in a more "serious" style and completed from 2001-2014.
the intent with the core of the material (1,3,6,7,8) was for it to be performed by live musicians one day. in early 2014, i came to the conclusion that this was not going to ever happen and was pleasantly surprised to learn that the technology had improved enough for a realistic presentation of the material using sequencers. these versions of (1,3,6) also include live guitars.
tracks 2 and 5 were salvaged from an aborted project meant to reinterpret classical guitar music as modern noise. the project was permanently aborted due to the loss of the sheet music that was necessary to finish it. more information here:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/js-adventures-in-guitarland
track 4 is an electric folk tune with heavy counterpoint that i was playing live as a party trick at the time.
the ordering is roughly chronological, based on the date the track took the form it exists in. tracks 1, 3 and 8 were written in 2001 and reinterpreted and completed in 2014. tracks 2 and 5 were interpreted and completed in 2001. track 4 was written in 2000 and reinterpreted and recorded in 2001. track 6 was written in 2001 and completed in 2006. track 7 was written in 1998, reinterpreted in 2001 and rendered in 2014. tracks 1-7 were sequenced on sept 9, 2014. final completion date is oct 3, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
credits:
j - electric piano, programming, classical & acoustic & electric guitars, ebow, digital & analog effects & treatments, organ, synthesizers, sound design, sampling, vocals, digital wave editing, loops, production, composition.
the various rendered electronic orchestras include acoustic bass, electric bass, synth bass, distorted electric guitar, clean electric guitar, steel string acoustic guitar, nylon guitar, trumpet, trombone, brass ensemble, orchestra hit, violin, cello, viola, contrabass, piano, synthesizers, mellotron, organ, bamboo flute, clarinet, flute, voice, music box, bells, clavinet, kalimba, drum kit, hand drums, drum machines and electronic drums.
released december 1, 2001
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
publishing existence (inri050)
that completes inri031.
i was going to do a sped up version, but it just sounded goofy. that leaves five versions of this. it's a heavy piece - is 70 minutes of this too much? that's your decision...
==
1) so, the root of the track comes out of a voice leading assignment for choir, but i do remember why i split it into multiple voices, now - i was writing way outside the range for voice. the result is that the higher pitches aren't really realistic, and more or less can't be. this is something close to what i wanted it to sound like, before i realized that. considering it's electronic, there's not really any good reason to conform to reality in this respect. written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. this render is from october 3, 2014.
2) this version merely connects the 9 voices to the proper string instrument, based on register. i suppose it's a chamber piece. this simplicity and homogeneity of tone allows for a clearer exploration of the voice leading. written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. this render is from october 3, 2014.
3) this is the arrangement i developed in 2001 after i determined the choir was infeasible, but upgraded from the soundblaster to vst instruments. written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. this render is from october 3, 2014.
4) the final version of this track is a mix of tracks 2, 3 and 4 on this record. written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. this render is from october 3, 2014.
i was going to do a sped up version, but it just sounded goofy. that leaves five versions of this. it's a heavy piece - is 70 minutes of this too much? that's your decision...
==
this was a
piece i wrote up in the fall of 2001. i can't remember exactly what the
root of it was, but it had something to do with a voice-leading
assignment for what was the equivalent of a course in music theory 101.
the root of the piece may consequently come from what was presented to
me. i can't recall exactly - but i believe the assignment was to build
the different voices up.
my negative relationship with music theory is stated throughout this page and was well established well before the end of 2001. i had an interest in the music theory course for the purposes of deconstructing the theory - in the context of writing, specifically, and not performing. i actually have one of those classic stories - i failed this course. it is actually the only course i have ever legitimately received an F in. hey, if einstein can fail math, i can fail music theory.
the story actually revolves around sight-reading aspect of the course, and specifically it's vocal content. there were three aspects of the course (theory, vocal sight-reading and african drumming which i'm thinking was meant to be a rhythmic component but was really just a ridiculous waste of time). i really wish they would have let me sight read on a guitar, or even a piano, because i'm just simply not a talented singer; i've never had aspirations to become one, and i had a lot of problems controlling my vocals. even with that being said, the reality is that i had a very low level of interest in this. i probably could have passed the course if i spent less time on abstract algebra and more time singing in the mirror, but i just couldn't be bothered...
i really disapprove of the way the course was designed. i was interested in learning about music theory, and needed the course as a pre-req for more advanced courses, which i never ended up taking. i still don't fully understand why i had to pass a singing exam to take further composition courses. the best answer i got was that the school didn't want graduates who couldn't pass a singing exam, but i was at no point enrolled in a b. music so it's a pretty weak response.
anyways, this was a voice-leading assignment that i perverted into something mildly atonal and then built up into something else. you can hear it if you listen, except that it's all "wrong". i'd have to sit down and analyze it to come to a more detailed exposition on it's "wrongness", and i'm not going to, but it's not hard to hear how "wrong" it is, either.
i was clearly listening to a lot of glass at the time, but this goes beyond his medievalism. i'm using so many "wrong" notes that it's ultimately just chromatic - although there's no tone rows or anything that's formally serialist about it. it's not meant to abolish the structure so much as it's meant to just flaunt the rules. that gives it an almost satanic feel, in the context of a vocal piece using "forbidden" intervals.
but, looking back, i think that what the piece really explores is existential anguish. i was in the second year of a math degree (after switching from physics after switching from software engineering) and really had little idea where i was going with it. i was considering switching into music and probably would have had i not failed the singing exam. the thing is i actually knew i was going to fail the course at that point, and was just feeling lost as a result of it. i ended up in math as this sort of default choice, vaguely thinking i might end up teaching somewhere but not having any real interest in it...
so much choice, so few options. i suppose that this is how i expressed what i was feeling about this reality at the time.
i can't remember the exact way this happened, but i believe the piece was initially written for voice (as a voice-leading assignment) and then expanded into further voices and then converted into a composition for nine instruments. i believe the primary reason i converted it from a vocal piece is that i ended up writing well outside a realistic vocal range, but i've kept the electronic choir parts as they are because i'm not really restricted to reality in this way. i've picked halloween as the date, but that's symbolic - it was around then, anyway. it would have been around december that it was put aside, because i don't remember working on it after i moved.
i've included the midi files of the original composition, if you'd like to mess with it on your own.
written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
my negative relationship with music theory is stated throughout this page and was well established well before the end of 2001. i had an interest in the music theory course for the purposes of deconstructing the theory - in the context of writing, specifically, and not performing. i actually have one of those classic stories - i failed this course. it is actually the only course i have ever legitimately received an F in. hey, if einstein can fail math, i can fail music theory.
the story actually revolves around sight-reading aspect of the course, and specifically it's vocal content. there were three aspects of the course (theory, vocal sight-reading and african drumming which i'm thinking was meant to be a rhythmic component but was really just a ridiculous waste of time). i really wish they would have let me sight read on a guitar, or even a piano, because i'm just simply not a talented singer; i've never had aspirations to become one, and i had a lot of problems controlling my vocals. even with that being said, the reality is that i had a very low level of interest in this. i probably could have passed the course if i spent less time on abstract algebra and more time singing in the mirror, but i just couldn't be bothered...
i really disapprove of the way the course was designed. i was interested in learning about music theory, and needed the course as a pre-req for more advanced courses, which i never ended up taking. i still don't fully understand why i had to pass a singing exam to take further composition courses. the best answer i got was that the school didn't want graduates who couldn't pass a singing exam, but i was at no point enrolled in a b. music so it's a pretty weak response.
anyways, this was a voice-leading assignment that i perverted into something mildly atonal and then built up into something else. you can hear it if you listen, except that it's all "wrong". i'd have to sit down and analyze it to come to a more detailed exposition on it's "wrongness", and i'm not going to, but it's not hard to hear how "wrong" it is, either.
i was clearly listening to a lot of glass at the time, but this goes beyond his medievalism. i'm using so many "wrong" notes that it's ultimately just chromatic - although there's no tone rows or anything that's formally serialist about it. it's not meant to abolish the structure so much as it's meant to just flaunt the rules. that gives it an almost satanic feel, in the context of a vocal piece using "forbidden" intervals.
but, looking back, i think that what the piece really explores is existential anguish. i was in the second year of a math degree (after switching from physics after switching from software engineering) and really had little idea where i was going with it. i was considering switching into music and probably would have had i not failed the singing exam. the thing is i actually knew i was going to fail the course at that point, and was just feeling lost as a result of it. i ended up in math as this sort of default choice, vaguely thinking i might end up teaching somewhere but not having any real interest in it...
so much choice, so few options. i suppose that this is how i expressed what i was feeling about this reality at the time.
i can't remember the exact way this happened, but i believe the piece was initially written for voice (as a voice-leading assignment) and then expanded into further voices and then converted into a composition for nine instruments. i believe the primary reason i converted it from a vocal piece is that i ended up writing well outside a realistic vocal range, but i've kept the electronic choir parts as they are because i'm not really restricted to reality in this way. i've picked halloween as the date, but that's symbolic - it was around then, anyway. it would have been around december that it was put aside, because i don't remember working on it after i moved.
i've included the midi files of the original composition, if you'd like to mess with it on your own.
written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. as always, please use headphones.
credits
j - programming, effects, mixing, production, composition.
the various rendered electronic orchestras include voice, piano, bells, synthesizer, violin, viola, cello, contrabass, electric bass and guitar.
released october 31, 2001
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/existence
the various rendered electronic orchestras include voice, piano, bells, synthesizer, violin, viola, cello, contrabass, electric bass and guitar.
released october 31, 2001
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/existence
1) so, the root of the track comes out of a voice leading assignment for choir, but i do remember why i split it into multiple voices, now - i was writing way outside the range for voice. the result is that the higher pitches aren't really realistic, and more or less can't be. this is something close to what i wanted it to sound like, before i realized that. considering it's electronic, there's not really any good reason to conform to reality in this respect. written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. this render is from october 3, 2014.
2) this version merely connects the 9 voices to the proper string instrument, based on register. i suppose it's a chamber piece. this simplicity and homogeneity of tone allows for a clearer exploration of the voice leading. written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. this render is from october 3, 2014.
3) this is the arrangement i developed in 2001 after i determined the choir was infeasible, but upgraded from the soundblaster to vst instruments. written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. this render is from october 3, 2014.
4) the final version of this track is a mix of tracks 2, 3 and 4 on this record. written in the fall of 2001. rendered, remastered and remixed in late september and early october, 2014. this render is from october 3, 2014.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)